Ford Pride

In Europe, car companies have tailored advertising to gays for years now.  With the practice fairly new to the States, however, the American Family Association -- led by the grossly over entitled Donald Wildmon -- has been motivated to launch boycottFord.com. 

The AFA is inflamed over the fact Ford offers donations to gay and lesbian organizations as a sales incentive. They also take issue with Ford over corporate policies and programs that support gay couples and families.  If you go through their site, they also protest the support of events, promotions, websites and promotional material that supports "the gay lifestyle." 

In targeting promotional material and, particularly, magazine advertising, these "pro-straight" activists cast a wide net over what they deem visually offensive.  Their home page, for example, features a prominent graphic link displaying a rotating series of auto ads.  (One thing they don't mention is that most of the advertisements are several years old and/or developed exclusively for foreign markets.)

By including this Jaguar piece in their rotating link, the AFA is lumping together ads they call "pro-homosexual" with others they categorize as "sexually explicit."  (If you look at what they call "explicit," by the way, it really seems no more than suggestive.)

With all the aspersion, I thought it worthwhile to take a closer look at this Jaguar ad.  (Full size here.)  Of course, the "Pride" title and the text is clearly targeted to gay concerns.  Graphically though, I have trouble understanding how this rather elegant layout might be interpreted as "homosexual."

Therefore, my question for you is:  Does this visual actually contain a gay theme?

Is this a gay image because the hood ornament is facing the car?  Is the depiction of the Jaguar "going the other way" a visual hook for a gay audience?

Is this a gay image because the large shiny silver object is supposed to suggest an anatomical feature?

Or, is this a gay image because the American Family Council deems it so, or because they packaged it with other ads that are suggestive?

(image: commercialcloset.org)

Comments

[lytom]

American Family Association has been zeroed paranoically on images that to me do not seem to be spreading “gayness”. AFA are taking a religious fundamentalist view of different life styles they do not approve of and use their dirty minds to interpret and label adds so they can convince readers, in this case, of the “evil intent of Ford”.
This follows a lead from the government administration which is labeling any kind of dissension as not in the interest of US, and in extreme, terorist label works best!

[dotcom]

Given enough time, and enough text/images, any extremist can find anything they want to support their wacked-out theology.
Now if only Ford produced a decent, reasonably-priced car...I would buy one in a heartbeat.

[PTate in MN]

I'm not gay, but I wanted to lick that jaguar. Naughty, naughty Ford.

Or maybe it is "gay", as you say, because the American Family Council deems it so. How is this ad suggestive of a gay lifestyle? How is this ad more offensive than some of the beer commercials out there, the ones with the naked babes?

Or consider the status and accomplishment images: A shiny Jaguar, symbol of the Rolls-Royce, against a gleaming black background. And Pride. The word "Pride" has been co-opted by gays? Maybe Ford was using imagery to appeal to wealthy African-Americans? Would the American Family Council object to that? Could they tell the difference?

[Kitty]

Best part of the ad: "INTIMIDATING..."

[Johanna]

Before I read your commmentary Bag, I first took in the visual. This is what came to me:

False pride.

And then...

The Republican party - the right winged fundamentalists - political arm of the Republican party.

And then (I think it is from the Bible?)

"...you shall know them from their deeds."

It seems to me that the deeds of the American Family Association have to do with hate and bigotry for those whose lifestyles they disagree with.

Peace. Johanna

[Gary]

Well I'm gay and that advert just rushes pure sexual irresponsibility into the core of my depraved soul. All that style and grace coupled with their--gulp!--logo?

It's making me masterbate, which we all know makes God kill kittens.

A Note to Donald Wildmon: Thank you for helping me find this resource for further indoctrinating the homosexual lifestyle for myself and the children. Without your perverse sense of what it is like to be gay I would've never been made aware of how sexy a gas guzzling car could be. Would you like to go out with me to a gay bar or perhaps one of our gay recruitment meetings? We hold them every day, so whenever you're up for the task let me know.

[mugatea]

Anything can be gay if you imagine.

I try not to think about it that much. It's none of my business what others do with thier hood ornaments.

If I was gay I'd be upset with Ford for focusing thier marketing towards me because you have to be an idiot to by a Ford, or especially a Jag.

[Kelly]

How about the dials behind the word pride; the engine is on, but the car isn't moving, and there is a full tank of gas. hmm

The logo in the upper right is correct, with the cat facing left. But the hood ornament is definitely facing backwards on the hood. This is jarring visually. Since the bag assumes its not a mistake I feel its safe to assume Its a gay/left-leaning cue. which would fit with 'Pride' and the mention of donation to glaad.

Phallic? Yes. But if you think about it, it has been that way for a long time, way before there was a 'gay demographic'. I mean it's a leaping, vicious cat on the hood of your sports car. I would think that was more of a guy thing than a gay thing.

[Annoying Old Guy]

I have trouble understanding how this rather elegant layout might be interpreted as "homosexual."

Given the rather stretched meanings pulled out of haphazard photographs on a regular basis on this website, that statement is more than a bit ironic. If Johnana can pull an anti-Republican political message out of this, why not a pro-gay cultural message?

[Johanna]

Well said AOG.

Perception is in the eye (and mind) of the beholder, so to speak.

That's why I like coming here. I like to see what I am perceiving and how it is being interpreted in my own mind, as well as others.

Peace. Johanna

[Philoking]

I followed the link to boycottford, then click on the advertising and went to a web site called The Commercial Closet, subtitled "improving LGBT perceptions through better advertising." The Jag Pride ad appears on that site without comment. Apparently AFC & Co. are taking this on faith, as it were, that this ad is attractive to gays.

As for the ad: sort of phallic, pride in bold type. Should be attractive to someone with more money than brains, without regard to sexual orientation.

[babs]

I don't think it's a coincidence that the ad looks like a famous Mapplethorpe photo: http://www.mapplethorpe.org/malenudes3.html (NSFW?). But if you weren't already familiar with the photo, then the ad would appear phallic, sexual, sleek, etc...but not necessarily gay.

[babs]

I don't think it's a coincidence that the ad looks like a famous Mapplethorpe photo: http://www.mapplethorpe.org/malenudes3.html (NSFW?). But if you weren't already familiar with the photo, then the ad would appear phallic, sexual, sleek, etc...but not necessarily gay.

[bob crane]

no, it does not contain a gay theme. it contains elements and composition which convey a sexuality/power/grace. the sexuality comes from the form (the phallic implications) and surface of the object (masculine yes, but nothing of a homosexual overtone.) power deriving largely from the placement, the force of the figure is centered, the object is off center. and the grace largely being in the pose, it's aggresive yet graceful; a feminine attribute. the color of the photograph also would offer no clues to a 'gay' theme.

i don't agree with babs, though the lighting is very similar to mapplethorpe's and alot of other fashion photographers.

it would be easy to make a large slew of images 'homosexual' by recognizing phallic conotations. maybe for the afa folks any recognition of the phallic is homosexual? how about 'yonic' as being lesbian?

i really don't like seeing these people patronized as having any legitamacy really. they're paranoid and obsessive (and it seems infectious, doesn't it?)

Oy Vey

[ali]

I think the religious folk may have taken exception to the donation to GLAAD associated with the lease. Of couse the add is sensual and I believe the moral police have come out against that as well but this seems to be more about straight forward support (financial) to a homosexual organization.

I don't agree with the bias but I see their point.

[Diane]

To quote the scholar/musician/wit, Tom Lehrer: "when correctly viewed, everything is lewd." I had to stretch to see the phallic image, but I guess when gay sex is on your mind a lot (like it is with those objecting to it) it is more easily apparent.

[Molly]

Gary, you need to go here.

http://www.manbottle.com/kitty.htm

[Swangelok]

What would they make of the new seat leon commercial?

http://dealer.seat.co.uk/downloads/video/WMV/Altea_lungeWinL.html

[Clint]

Love this site....

I think they'd be maddest about the GLAAD logo (at the bottom left).

Justy a note: I'm a designer and some of the coolest jobs
I've had a chance to do were for our State LGRL.
(The Lesbian and Gay Rights Lobby of Texas)