Women & Beauty

[Charles Anthony]

But the argument is that beauty standards constitute an objective "truth", which makes efforts like the Dove campaign futile.

Why do you think that is the purpose of the Dove campaign?

[JerrySeinfeld]

Twenty years ago, the average model weighed 8 per cent less than the average woman. Today, they weigh 23 per cent less. By your logic, then, the standards of what we find attractive must have shifted considerably in that time. My questions are: why and how? If, as you claim, the media plays no part in setting beauty standards, what does? And why would a multi-billion dollar corporation like Dove spend millions on an ad campaign that is, again by your logic, destined to fail miserably due to its flouting of the rigid beauty standards of its audience?

Maybe women are just getting fatter. In fact I think I read that our society is getting fatter in general.

Maybe it's Mc donald's advertising - or KFC or Hooters. Wait! What is hooters promoting, being fat greasy food) or being thin (the slim busty waitresses)???? I'm confused? Which media should I believe...

Oh wait a minute - here's a concept - how about ACCOUNTABILITY FOR MY OWN DECISIONS?!?!?!?

I don't see a problem with any media that promotes the idea of being fit.

But somehow, as in the same lefty idea that hates good news, doggy has found a way to be angry about it

[M.Dancer]

But the argument is that beauty standards constitute an objective "truth", which makes efforts like the Dove campaign futile.

Why do you think that is the purpose of the Dove campaign?

The purpose of the Dove campaign is to reach across demographics and establish themselves and their brand as a healthy product that will be with the consumer from when they are in their teens to when they are in their 60s. To understand the radicalness of the campaign you have to understand how cosmetics are normally marketed. MAC doesn't target rural middle age women, Nivea doesn't target young club goers. Elizabeth Arden doesbn't target stay at home moms....and so and so on. Big players like P&G and Lever have multiple brands (like Dove) and they segment the market and attack each group seperately. Dove is trying to imprint its identity as a whole, not just dove soap, or Dove lotion....the correlation would be if Molson stoppped marketing individual labels and concentrated on a core message identifying the Molson Brand and trying to cross the the wide segment of all beer drinkers with one common unifying message.

Now ask me about advertisers inserting messages into Corner Gas.

[Black Dog]

Why do you think that is the purpose of the Dove campaign?

Why I think what is the purpose of the Dove campaign?

I think he purpos eof the Dove campaign is to sell products. But, if the "media reflects social standards of beauty and no more" theory is correct, it will fail because, well, do you see people buying a soap sold by ugly (by whichever standard you want to define) people?

Maybe women are just getting fatter. In fact I think I read that our society is getting fatter in general.

Maybe it's Mc donald's advertising - or KFC or Hooters. Wait! What is hooters promoting, being fat greasy food) or being thin (the slim busty waitresses)???? I'm confused? Which media should I believe...

Oh wait a minute - here's a concept - how about ACCOUNTABILITY FOR MY OWN DECISIONS?!?!?!?

Nice rant, but, once again, it lands miles away from the point of this discussion without even getting within visual range.

I don't see a problem with any media that promotes the idea of being fit.

Red-herring.

But somehow, as in the same lefty idea that hates good news, doggy has found a way to be angry about it

"Look how many schools we've painted in Iraq!"

[Figleaf]

Actually, I would say that the consumer only has an appetite for that message. The media just delivers.

And I would respons by saying your understanding of the media is pretty shallow and naive.

Okay, an ad hominem.

By putting people of a certain type on their covers, Cosmo et al help to establish the ideas of what constitutes ugly and beautiful.

That's a theory. But it lacks tangible verifiability. And it's not inherently plausible.

Again: the media beauty standard differs greatly from what people actually find attractive (from an evolutionary standpoint),...

Really? How so?

But the argument is that beauty standards constitute an objective "truth",...

They aren't 'objective'. They're ingrained, perhaps inherited.

Of course. Advertisers want our attention. And golly gee look! Darned if homosapien's attention isn't engaged by the sight of attractive homosapiens. So?

Circular logic. You haven't addressed how what constitutes an "attractive homosapiens" is deterimed and by what.

By homosapiens, obviously.

But you're essentially arguing ... that media depictions of beauty have no bearing on social perceptions of beauty.

No, I'm saying they are the very same thing.

Why would advertisers spend millions to convince people to buy products if they were already forced through some oppressive system to buy those products?

... people wouldn't buy the products if the media didn't first tell them there was something wrong with them that thier product could fix.

And I'm saying it's up to people whether they want to choose to believe the media about that or not. I'm saying that the function of media in promulgating standards is both obvious and irrelevant.

Maybe because the standard changes? Face facts though, the standards don't change very much. Healthy, fit, and within a certain range of proportions have been overarching standards for a long time.

Twenty years ago, the average model weighed 8 per cent less than the average woman. Today, they weigh 23 per cent less.

Of course -- obesity is at an all time high, models haven't changed. The number of fat women competing in the flesh markets has changed.

[Charles Anthony]

I think he purpos eof the Dove campaign is to sell products.

But, if the "media reflects social standards of beauty and no more" theory is correct, it will fail because, well, do you see people buying a soap sold by ugly (by whichever standard you want to define) people?

Let me get this straight.

You assume: Dove campaign is based on theoryA -- which nobody can ascertain.

You say: TheoryA is incorrect.

You conclude: Dove campaign must fail.

Maybe the Dove campaign is NOT based on theoryA (media reflecting social yadda yadda yadda)?

[JerrySeinfeld]

Nice rant, but, once again, it lands miles away from the point of this discussion without even getting within visual range.

No it's not - you just didn't understand it.

You are the one who brought up models weighing 8% less than "regular" women. I merely pointed out that could be because we're all getting fatter and the models aren't changing.

Also, you seem convinced that the media is hell bent on creating images of beauty which cause' "8 year old girls to vomit". I merely pointed out some examples of media which do the polar opposite.

As most lefties, your convoluted idea that "big business" or "the media" (vague, undefined terms) is to blame for most of society's ills and I'm merely pointing out how incorrect you actually are.

I don't see a problem with any media that promotes the idea of being fit.

Red-herring.

Haha - only if you're living with tunnel vision unable to see the simple idea that encouraging women to get fit isn't a capitalist conspiracy.

[M.Dancer]

Actually, I would say that the consumer only has an appetite for that message. The media just delivers.

And I would respons by saying your understanding of the media is pretty shallow and naive.

Okay, an ad hominem.

Just because it is an Ad H. doesn't mean it isn't true. If anything, you done nothing to show you know what you'ree talking about.

[JerrySeinfeld]

But the argument is that beauty standards constitute an objective "truth", which makes efforts like the Dove campaign futile.

Why do you think that is the purpose of the Dove campaign?

The purpose of the Dove campaign is to reach across demographics and establish themselves and their brand as a healthy product that will be with the consumer from when they are in their teens to when they are in their 60s. To understand the radicalness of the campaign you have to understand how cosmetics are normally marketed. MAC doesn't target rural middle age women, Nivea doesn't target young club goers. Elizabeth Arden doesbn't target stay at home moms....and so and so on. Big players like P&G and Lever have multiple brands (like Dove) and they segment the market and attack each group seperately. Dove is trying to imprint its identity as a whole, not just dove soap, or Dove lotion....the correlation would be if Molson stoppped marketing individual labels and concentrated on a core message identifying the Molson Brand and trying to cross the the wide segment of all beer drinkers with one common unifying message.

Now ask me about advertisers inserting messages into Corner Gas.

Good post.

And you've also inadvertantly revealed something else:

Maybe young girls aren't easily influenced by the media - but DOGGY sure is.

He watches one "Dove" video and he's got himself all up in a lather about media beauty standards

[Black Dog]

Okay, an ad hominem.

Hang on: there's another one coming:

That's a theory. But it lacks tangible verifiability. And it's not inherently plausible.

Hey, you found a thesaurus! Zing!

But to the point: why is it "not inherently plausible?"

Really? How so?

Well for one thing, as I've made clear before, the "standard" portrayed by the media represents 0.01 per cent of the population, which raises the question of how a particular look can become "standard" in a population where no actually conforms to it.

They aren't 'objective'. They're ingrained, perhaps inherited.

Which would leads one to believe that changing them would be very difficult. And to be fair, you are saying that standards haven't changed all that much. But I think that's bullshit too.

By homosapiens, obviously.

And how? How would these "ingrained" standards change?

No, I'm saying they are the very same thing.

Let me rephrase, then: you're saying media depictions of beauty have no effect on social perceptions of beauty. IOW, the media does not influence us: the process only works the other way, with the media acting as a mirror.

Correct?

And I'm saying it's up to people whether they want to choose to believe the media about that or not.

Ah yes: the old "rational actors" myth.

Of course -- obesity is at an all time high, models haven't changed. The number of fat women competing in the flesh markets has changed.

And not the concept of what constitutes "fat"?

[JerrySeinfeld]

And I'm saying it's up to people whether they want to choose to believe the media about that or not.

Exactly. As far as "rational actors" being a myth hmmm: let's follow DOGGY's logic here:

The "media standard" (sic) represents only about "0.01%" of the populatino of women.

So since people - under the "myth" of rational actors - can't make choices for themselves, then 99.99% of the population of women will be irreparably damaged by the Cover of Cosmo Magazine.

[Black Dog]

Let me get this straight.

You assume: Dove campaign is based on theoryA -- which nobody can ascertain.

You say: TheoryA is incorrect.

You conclude: Dove campaign must fail.

Maybe the Dove campaign is NOT based on theoryA (media reflecting social yadda yadda yadda)?

Huh? I wasn't the one saying the dove campaign would fail. That was Figleaf:

The point that it's all good and well to say that the 'beauty' industry is effective at profiteering from people's emphasis on superficial characteristics, but that doesn't make that emphasis less a fact and no amount of tut-tutting will ever succeed in making those interested in the superficial accept 'real' beauty as a substitute.

No it's not - you just didn't understand it.

You are the one who brought up models weighing 8% less than "regular" women. I merely pointed out that could be because we're all getting fatter and the models aren't changing.

People are getting fatter. But models are also getting skinnier. It's not an either/or.

Also, you seem convinced that the media is hell bent on creating images of beauty which cause' "8 year old girls to vomit". I merely pointed out some examples of media which do the polar opposite.

What examples? The skinny black woman or the skinny Asian woman?

As most lefties, your convoluted idea that "big business" or "the media" (vague, undefined terms) is to blame for most of society's ills and I'm merely pointing out how incorrect you actually are.

...in a sample of Stanford undergraduate and graduate students, 68% felt worse about their own appearance after looking through women's magazines.19 Many health professionals are also concerned by the prevalence of distorted body image among women, which may be fostered by their constant self-comparison to extremely thin figures promoted in the media. Seventy-five percent (75%) of "normal" weight women think they are overweight20 and 90% of women overestimate their body size.21

Dissatisfaction with their bodies causes many women and girls to strive for the thin ideal. The number one wish for girls ages 11 to 17 is to be thinner,22 and girls as young as five have expressed fears of getting fat.23 Eighty percent (80%) of 10-year-old girls have dieted,24 and at any one time, 50% of American women are currently dieting.25 Some researchers suggest depicting thin models may lead girls into unhealthy weight-control habits,26 because the ideal they seek to emulate is unattainable for many and unhealthy for most. One study found that 47% of the girls were influenced by magazine pictures to want to lose weight, but only 29% were actually overweight.27 Research has also found that stringent dieting to achieve an ideal figure can play a key role in triggering eating disorders.28 Other researchers believe depicting thin models appears not to have long-term negative effects on most adolescent women, but they do agree it affects girls who already have body-image problems.29 Girls who were already dissatisfied with their bodies showed more dieting, anxiety, and bulimic symptoms after prolonged exposure to fashion and advertising images in a teen girl magazine.30 Studies also show that a third of American women in their teens and twenties begin smoking cigarettes in order to help control their appetite.31

link

Good post.

And you've also inadvertantly revealed something else:

Maybe young girls aren't easily influenced by the media - but DOGGY sure is.

He watches one "Dove" video and he's got himself all up in a lather about media beauty standards

The handle is Black Dog. Get it right.

[JerrySeinfeld]

So when girls see magazines of thin women they wanna diet or lose wieght? Gee - there's a shocker. OH MY GOD!!! CALL THE SOCIAL ENGINEERING POLICE!!!

Other researchers believe depicting thin models appears not to have long-term negative effects on most adolescent women, but they do agree it affects girls who already have body-image problems.

that about sums it up. But then again, when I see pictures of "The Terminator" it makes me wanna hit the gym

Meantime I'm still waiting for the "marginalized 99.9%" to jump off a bridge or starve themselves to death. Till then you haven't really said much.

[Black Dog]

Hmmm.

Re-reading this thread, I've uncovered what appears to be a Tale of Two Figleafs.

The first appeared earlier in this thread and said:

Let's be precise: I think it is unreasonable to con people into believing that the arbitrary, culturally promulagated standards of beauty can be over-ridden successfully by merely pretending they don't exist.

Yet later on, someone else calling himself Figleaf turns up and states:

(Beauty standards) aren't 'objective'. They're ingrained, perhaps inherited.

So they are subjective, arbitrary and "culturally promulagated". Yet at the same time, they are ingrained, possibly inherited. I smell a contradiction.

Funnily enough, I find the first point reasonable, even though I think it misses the point of the Dove ad, which is not to ignore the narrow, "arbitrary, culturally promulagated" standards of beauty, but to supplant them with a version that is more representative. If social beauty standards are arbitrary, and culturally (not biologically) determined, then such a thing is possible. If social beauty standards are ingrained (or perhaps inherited) than it is not. Perhaps a Figleaf can clear that up....

[M.Dancer]

As I have already said in another pointless thread, the beauty industry spends each and every year billions on creating demand and in creating brand awareness. I will wager that 150 years ago the average women did nothing more to enhance her appearance that to pinch her cheeks and strap on a corset. Women didn't shave their legs or pits and certainly didn't worry about putting on a few pounds if the high art of the period can be believed.

The industry is ruthless. A single marketshare point can mean 100s of millions. The pressure to capture the minds of consumers is increadible so they are always trying to tickle the imagination, to appeal to a lifestyle that is elusive, sophisticated, glamouress.....

Marketers therefore are constantly trying to stay ahead of the curve, trying to be edgier, more avant garde and seem more exclusive..(whats more exclusive that being thin?) ....Dove is trying to go beyond that narrow psychographic and reach out to women who are tired of trying to be what they and the majority of women will never be.

[Slavik44]

As I have already said in another pointless thread, the beauty industry spends each and every year billions on creating demand and in creating brand awareness. I will wager that 150 years ago the average women did nothing more to enhance her appearance that to pinch her cheeks and strap on a corset.

Women didn't shave their legs or pits and certainly didn't worry about putting on a few pounds if the high art of the period can be believed.

The industry is ruthless. A single marketshare point can mean 100s of millions. The pressure to capture the minds of consumers is increadible so they are always trying to tickle the imagination, to appeal to a lifestyle that is elusive, sophisticated, glamouress.....

Marketers therefore are constantly trying to stay ahead of the curve, trying to be edgier, more avant garde and seem more exclusive..(whats more exclusive that being thin?) ....Dove is trying to go beyond that narrow psychographic and reach out to women who are tired of trying to be what they and the majority of women will never be.

Nothing more then strap on a corset? Whats it designed to do again? Oh yeah make you waist look smaller and your chest bigger. Gee, those people 150 years ago sure had different conceptualizations of how to be more beautiful. I mean the Ideal tightlaced corset is supposed to reduce your waist to a 17 inch circumference. Chances are your average 12 year old anorexic school girl probabley has a larger waist then that.

What about Early South American Cultures? Where the Idea of an elongated head was seen as beautifull, so elite children walked around with boards strapped to their heads. Or how about being more cat like in appearence that was supposed to be beautiful. So dental surgery and filing peoples teeth down so they were more pointy was practiced. Or what about the belief that being cross eyed was beautiful. So women went around getting surgery to change the muscles around their eyes to allow them to be cross eyed. Or what about the chinese tradition of foot binding?

Now we are bitching and complaining about shaving? Well, yeah...go take a personal poll walk around and ask women wether they would prefer having their feet bound so tight they can't walk or would they prefer to shave their legs.

As far as adding a few pounds, people should care. People should notice. The majority of both Canadians and Americans are overweight. And that is a definite health risk. It is something people should take notice of, obesity is an anethama to beauty. Yes not only is it ugly, but it is the ultimate demonstration of how little you value your own body, how little you respect yourself.

now the issue may be raised that models are often dangerously skinny. Which may be the case. But infact most studies on what Men find beautifulll indicate that a walking skeleton is not high on the list. But that is no reason to flip to an even more unhealthy extreme, where the majority of the population is obese and at risk for heart disease.

[JerrySeinfeld]

As I have already said in another pointless thread, the beauty industry spends each and every year billions on creating demand and in creating brand awareness. I will wager that 150 years ago the average women did nothing more to enhance her appearance that to pinch her cheeks and strap on a corset.

Women didn't shave their legs or pits and certainly didn't worry about putting on a few pounds if the high art of the period can be believed.

The industry is ruthless. A single marketshare point can mean 100s of millions. The pressure to capture the minds of consumers is increadible so they are always trying to tickle the imagination, to appeal to a lifestyle that is elusive, sophisticated, glamouress.....

Marketers therefore are constantly trying to stay ahead of the curve, trying to be edgier, more avant garde and seem more exclusive..(whats more exclusive that being thin?) ....Dove is trying to go beyond that narrow psychographic and reach out to women who are tired of trying to be what they and the majority of women will never be.

Nothing more then strap on a corset? Whats it designed to do again? Oh yeah make you waist look smaller and your chest bigger. Gee, those people 150 years ago sure had different conceptualizations of how to be more beautiful. I mean the Ideal tightlaced corset is supposed to reduce your waist to a 17 inch circumference. Chances are your average 12 year old anorexic school girl probabley has a larger waist then that.

What about Early South American Cultures? Where the Idea of an elongated head was seen as beautifull, so elite children walked around with boards strapped to their heads. Or how about being more cat like in appearence that was supposed to be beautiful. So dental surgery and filing peoples teeth down so they were more pointy was practiced. Or what about the belief that being cross eyed was beautiful. So women went around getting surgery to change the muscles around their eyes to allow them to be cross eyed. Or what about the chinese tradition of foot binding?

Now we are bitching and complaining about shaving? Well, yeah...go take a personal poll walk around and ask women wether they would prefer having their feet bound so tight they can't walk or would they prefer to shave their legs.

As far as adding a few pounds, people should care. People should notice. The majority of both Canadians and Americans are overweight. And that is a definite health risk. It is something people should take notice of, obesity is an anethama to beauty. Yes not only is it ugly, but it is the ultimate demonstration of how little you value your own body, how little you respect yourself.

now the issue may be raised that models are often dangerously skinny. Which may be the case. But infact most studies on what Men find beautifulll indicate that a walking skeleton is not high on the list. But that is no reason to flip to an even more unhealthy extreme, where the majority of the population is obese and at risk for heart disease.

Great post. It encapsulates all that I've tried to say over the past 3 pages.

In other words:

1. Slim is generally healthy, with a few outlier exceptions.

2. Fat is generally not healthy.

3. What is wrong with encouraging people to be healthy?

4. Many media marketing techniques are mere reflections of values we already hold.

In addition: this constant mindset that women are sooooo hard done by in this world is both inaccurate and quite boring.

[Black Dog]

1. Slim is generally healthy, with a few outlier exceptions.

2. Fat is generally not healthy.

3. What is wrong with encouraging people to be healthy?

4. Many media marketing techniques are mere reflections of values we already hold.

I'll put in language you can understand:

talking "beauty" not "healthy". no mean same thing.

[JerrySeinfeld]

1. Slim is generally healthy, with a few outlier exceptions.

2. Fat is generally not healthy.

3. What is wrong with encouraging people to be healthy?

4. Many media marketing techniques are mere reflections of values we already hold.

I'll put in language you can understand:

talking "beauty" not "healthy". no mean same thing.

For me health is a big part of beauty.

Slim is generally more attractive, or "beautiful" if you will.

Fat, not so much. Not too healthy eaither

[August1991]

I feel like a cleaner arriving at my 8 am shift at the hip-hop club. (In fact, let me be more graphic and honest. Bars in Moscow never closed and one place offered a $1 (rouble equivalent) breakfast from 7 am to 8 am. I used to show up, briefcase in hand, only to see the leftovers from the night before - stupefied, starkly physical couples still trying to figure out whose place to crash. I digress.)

Flipping through this thread, I saw only two posts of interest.

As I have already said in another pointless thread, the beauty industry spends each and every year billions on creating demand and in creating brand awareness. I will wager that 150 years ago the average women did nothing more to enhance her appearance that to pinch her cheeks and strap on a corset. Women didn't shave their legs or pits and certainly didn't worry about putting on a few pounds if the high art of the period can be believed.

The industry is ruthless. A single marketshare point can mean 100s of millions. The pressure to capture the minds of consumers is increadible so they are always trying to tickle the imagination, to appeal to a lifestyle that is elusive, sophisticated, glamouress.....

Marketers therefore are constantly trying to stay ahead of the curve, trying to be edgier, more avant garde and seem more exclusive..(whats more exclusive that being thin?) ....Dove is trying to go beyond that narrow psychographic and reach out to women who are tired of trying to be what they and the majority of women will never be.

Creating brand awareness is extremely hard. Creating demand is impossible.

No advertising campaign will ever get people to leave their cars at home and use a horse instead. No advertising campaign can get us to use typewriters instead of computers.

Advertising works, but not in the way you suggest. I offered at the start of this thread (I believe) an idea of how advertising works. Anyone from Canada, walking in a poor country, advertises their status when they smile. People from rich countries have the money to have straight teeth. (I also asked whether Canadian Leftists would leave their children with crooked teeth out of solidarity with people from Third World countries. I think Stephen Lewis didn't.)

Here's a hint, guys, it's not the "campaign against physical beauty." It's the "campaign for real beuty." IOW its an attempt to broaden beauty standards from the current, narrow definition promoted by society and the media and reclaim the term beauty. And sell cleanser.

BD, I think the point of the ad - at least in a female mind - is that women portrayed in ads simply don't exist in real life.

I found the photoshopping the most blatant evidence but others have noticed the removal of skin blemishes.

Let me put translate this ad campaign into "guy speak". The Hummer drivers with the latest on-board GPS whatzzits? They're all mortgaged to where their balls are floating. Their credits cards maxed out a year ago and now they're kiting - paying one with advances from the other. None of these guys have what they claim to have. They're all frauds.

IOW, they're like JerrySeinfeld who comes on this forum pretending to be a rich, jet-setting Hugh Hefner ver 2.3 when in fact he's just a guy in his pyjamas in his Mom's basement.

[blueblood]

Creating brand awareness is extremely hard. Creating demand is impossible.

Hah WRONG!!! I only need to point out the diamond industry. De Beers started mining in South Africa 100 plus years ago, diamonds as you know are hard and good for cutting, plus they disperse/refract light very well. Anyhoo with the large surplus of diamonds in South Africa there was a need to market them, and some genius at De Beers said why not make diamonds the symbol of love, of course women as they are caught onto this like wild fire and the rest they say is history. This is straight out of a university course to boot.

Let me put translate this ad campaign into "guy speak". The Hummer drivers with the latest on-board GPS whatzzits? They're all mortgaged to where their balls are floating. Their credits cards maxed out a year ago and now they're kiting - paying one with advances from the other. None of these guys have what they claim to have. They're all frauds.

I wouldn't say All of them are frauds, i'd say 95%. For example there is a 22 year old driller from town. He has a jacked up 06 F-150 with 33" Mickey Thompsons with Rims, that's a 60 grand truck and from what i've seen from his bank statements he's in no financial trouble. Every time I buy some machinery it's a 5 year loan for around 100 large. Paid off every time, mind you my truck is 10 years old.

BD, I think the point of the ad - at least in a female mind - is that women portrayed in ads simply don't exist in real life.

Go to a night club and you will see women that compete with women in ads, that I can assure you of.

[August1991]

Go to a night club and you will see women that compete with women in ads, that I can assure you of.

I notice you refer to night club. Not daylight club.

[DarkAngel_]

lets see, how can i add to this.......

i've hade 3 crushes in my life, including a current. i felt 'taken' or 'bewitched' by their outward appearance, i think it is like 1 theory of attraction i have been looking into, reflective narcissism, or the wish to be as beautiful as that person, or as to have that beauty by you, i do not think it can be broadened with a skin care product, but every bit helps.

if you ask me, love is true beauty, because you must love it for it to be truly beautiful.

[blueblood]

Go to a night club and you will see women that compete with women in ads, that I can assure you of.

I notice you refer to night club. Not daylight club.

you know what I mean, the night club was arbitrary, you can go to a beach, or a university campus, they can compete with women in ads too.

[DarkAngel_]

Go to a night club and you will see women that compete with women in ads, that I can assure you of.

I notice you refer to night club. Not daylight club.

you know what I mean, the night club was arbitrary, you can go to a beach, or a university campus, they can compete with women in ads too.

you want beauty? am i allowed to give names? ROFL