Stars Give Up Clothes for Good - Comments

  • discoveringclouds

    discoveringclouds (200)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    27
    Location:
    Canada
    @ January Rose
    Totally agree! Especially because children are a vulnerable population that are due all the protections of the law and moral society this ad campaign plays with the idea that children are not safe. No one is safe from ever seeing an ad that isn't sexualized in some way. Even clothing companies-which makes little no sense- advertise with nakedness.

    @ chum
    Yes! Totally am so glad so many people this way. Celebrities can use their fame so much better than this. They are not animals we need to see naked, they are people with a lot of attention that they can steer towards a good cause once in a while!
    October 21st, 2014 at 04:26pm
  • January Rose

    January Rose (100)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    20
    Location:
    Canada
    I thought this was a campaign to raise awareness about child being exploited for sex, since the woman in the picture was naked. I can see that is not the case. Why couldn't the woman be dressed?! I hate the fact that they are adding sex to a child awareness campaign. It makes me less interested and less likely to participate....
    Great idea, horrible way to get attention.
    October 10th, 2014 at 05:03am
  • chum

    chum (100)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    23
    Location:
    United States
    I'm glad that the other commenters feel the same way I do. There's no reason for sexualized pictures when it's a campaign for childhood cancer! Great cause, but terrible marketing in my opinion.
    October 7th, 2014 at 11:15pm
  • HikiiChii

    HikiiChii (250)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    24
    Location:
    United States
    I agree with the previous comments. The marketing for this charity is very misleading even if in Europe it is a societal norm for them to be able to show their bodies publicly unlike in America where for women (in some states) it's seen as inferior to show a bare chest. I think they should have advertised the message visually through more of photographs of poverty than trying to use the whole sex appeal (feminists don't get on me about how it's not women's fault that the female body is appealing...etc).
    October 6th, 2014 at 04:57am
  • Auticorn

    Auticorn (100)

    :
    Bibliophile
    Gender:
    Age:
    30
    Location:
    United States
    I have to agree with others. This is for childhood cancer. If it was something geared more towards breast cancer or something more mature, I could totally understand. However, you have to realize that children are involved here, and a charity like this seems like someone on the perverted side came up with it.
    October 5th, 2014 at 10:26pm
  • Subject A-5

    Subject A-5 (250)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    26
    Location:
    New Zealand
    What bothers me is that they show a naked person...for something that's supposed to be a benefit for children....

    Great idea, but their marketing team is horrible.
    September 30th, 2014 at 06:09am
  • based

    based (200)

    :
    Member
    Gender:
    Age:
    22
    Location:
    Italy
    Why do they need to use a sexual, sexist campaign in order to make money for charity?
    September 30th, 2014 at 03:19am