[sjtindell]

To me, using women to sell a product reeks of a bygone era and a certain mentality we’re working to get away from. I think that alone is a perfectly acceptable reason to think a company sucks and not use their product. Voting for behaviors with your dollars is important.

[DocTomoe]

I wonder if it is more dehumanizing to the affected woman to show an attractive woman, or to not show women at all.

I think to be consistent with the 'don't use women for ads' approach, you need to be opposed to use human-based or non-product-related human interest advertisement at all, which includes, but is probably not limited to men [1], children [2], the elderly [3], people of a certain demographic and/or sexual orientation and/or gender identity [4], or national rivalries [5][6] or stereotypes [7] or even the concepts of such. You would also have to have a stern look at the art scene, because sex also sells as sculpture, on canvas, as a particularly suggestive voice or on the screen - it may be part of the work, but it also has an advertising effect.

And what a bleak world would that be.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7C-vYY3SBDE [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqgSO8_cRio [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qG4IaHgqH00 [4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mw_gHMNs5iE [5] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWvKVE6rLI0 [6] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g72KE8dmjc [7] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMQnPWjK5pE

[samatman]

While this is of course reductive, my counterexample is cosmetics and women's fashion generally, I'm happy to agree where internet services are concerned.

[Rychard]

This.

So many companies run marketing campaigns that largely pay lip-service to whatever is trending lately, without actually changing their internal strategies to reflect this stance. I would much rather the companies put that money towards actions that might actually benefit the cause, rather than spending 99% of the budget trying to prove they're committed to solving $PROBLEM by donating the remaining 1% to some non-profit.

I totally recognize the counter-point; they didn't have to donate anything at all, and any amount is more than nothing. To me, the issue stems from the fact that companies are basically making money on the back of things that are actual issues. It's exploitation, plain and simple.

[NoSorryCannot]

[flagged]