Is this for real?

[_trib expatriate]

Saucy ads for lingerie upset the mom of teenage boys
http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_5348667

JcPenney=porno

no mention of religion in this article.
I would think that I was sent back in time except for the fact that I have a PC in front of me...

[_Bond...James Bond]

Saucy ads for lingerie upset the mom of teenage boys
http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_5348667

JcPenney=porno

no mention of religion in this article.
I would think that I was sent back in time except for the fact that I have a PC in front of me...

Those mommies are afraid their boys' little factories will be working overtime.

[_Sethbag]

"Why do retailers have to use sex to sell their products? Isn't their merchandise good enough without resorting to such base and immoral tactics?"

ROFLMAO. Lady, the ads are for LINGERIE. How do you think they would advertise lingerie? I just have to laugh at people who have their heads lodged so firmly up their rear ends that they just get all uptight about anything and everything. So her teenage boys would see an ad with a woman modeling some lingerie. What exactly is wrong with that? She needs to realize that there's this place called the "real world" out there beyond the threshold of her house, and since her boys are teenagers, that means there only just a few years from being firmly in it, and on their own, without their mother waking up extra early on Sunday morning (!!) to pull out the underwear ads from their newspapers. She does realize, doesn't she, that she's making a mountain out of a molehill, and pretty soon her boys will be out on their own and being confronted with all this stuff they've never seen before? And how does she expect them to react when the time comes?

[_Bond...James Bond]

ROFLMAO. Lady, the ads are for LINGERIE. How do you think they would advertise lingerie?

Well there's lingerie and then there's LINGERIE. What normal people consider lingerie isn't what an LDS person considers Lingerie. We want lingerie as slim, sexy, and revealing as possible. Mormons want their lingerie to be baggy, unattractive with an appearance suggesting Stevie Wonder made it out of a parachute.

[_Jersey Girl]

So they're offended by lingerie inserts in their newspaper but the reports of suicide bombers don't bother them?

Here's Ambrielle:

link

Bras and panties! How horrible!

Now, I'd like to know if there's a Victoria's Secret in the SLC Mall. Anyone?

Jersey Girl

[_Jersey Girl]

Yup, Gateway Mall...

http://utah.citysearch.com/profile/11613357/

[_Jersey Girl]

Here's the full text of the letter:


Saucy ads for lingerie upset the mom of teenage boys
The Salt Lake Tribune
Article Last Updated: 03/03/2007 10:06:37 AM MST

Click photo to enlarge
Connie Coyne

* «
* 1
* »

"In Sunday's Salt Lake Tribune a number of readers found a troubling advertisement among the comics and Parade magazine: The JC Penney glossy insert featuring its new line of lingerie.
Typical of more than three dozen complaints I got were these comments from a concerned mother:
"I would like to continue to receive the newspaper, as I enjoy it very much, but I will most definitely stop my service if I am going to have to continue to put up with the pornography that comes along with it.

(Women in underwear is pornography?)

"Every Sunday I get up extra early to screen the paper and take out all of the smutty underwear ads before my teenage boys are exposed to them. Every week there is something offensive, but the JC Penney's ad yesterday for their new Ambrielle line of underwear was the worst I have ever seen. I was outraged and disgusted and I won't put up with it any more. Either the 'soft porn' advertising goes or I stop taking your paper!

Women in underwear is "smutty" and "soft porn".

"Why do retailers have to use sex to sell their products? Isn't their merchandise good enough without resorting to such base and immoral tactics? Surely underwear sales can't be the main source of income for these stores, so why is it given so much ad space?

Uh, the ad was apparently given "so much" space because they're presenting a new line of merchandize. Women in underwear is "using sex" to sell lingerie.

"I'm sure that you as a newspaper can't dictate to the stores what they put in their ads, but you can tell them that they must make them more family friendly or you won't be doing business with
Advertisement

them."

Women in underwear is not "family friendly". This speaks volumes.

I could be flippant and say, "Sex sells." But I won't.
When I looked at the ad I thought: "If these gals had wings, this would look like a Victoria's Secret ad."

What's wrong with Victoria's Secret?

While this kind of advertisement certainly is disturbing to many parents, I would point out that Dillard's and Macy's regularly run black and white ads in the A section of the paper that have women in bras and panties.
I would not say the Penney's ad is pornographic, but I can understand the concerns of a mother with teenage sons.

Are they concerned that their teenage sons will find out that women wear underwear?

Actually, letters from angry parents to an advertiser would do more to change the advertiser's message than anything I might say."

Dear JC Penney, please stop sending the message that women wear underwear.

[_Roger Morrison]

Bond, i think yer into something here ;-) "Parachute Panties" by Stevie! One size fits all LOL... However the columist stated a fact too often over looked

Actually, letters from angry parents to an advertiser would do more to change the advertiser's message than anything I might say.

Would the "ENSIGN" be susceptible to the same type of a campaign? You can't get to Church Office in any meaningful way, maybe the "E" is a side-door?

Poor Mom. Must not have a lot of confidence in her kids, or herself... Chastity belts didn't work... Neither will blindfolds...

[_Julie]

Here's the full text of the letter:


Saucy ads for lingerie upset the mom of teenage boys
The Salt Lake Tribune
Article Last Updated: 03/03/2007 10:06:37 AM MST

Click photo to enlarge
Connie Coyne

* «
* 1
* »

"In Sunday's Salt Lake Tribune a number of readers found a troubling advertisement among the comics and Parade magazine: The JC Penney glossy insert featuring its new line of lingerie.
Typical of more than three dozen complaints I got were these comments from a concerned mother:
"I would like to continue to receive the newspaper, as I enjoy it very much, but I will most definitely stop my service if I am going to have to continue to put up with the pornography that comes along with it.

(Women in underwear is pornography?)

"Every Sunday I get up extra early to screen the paper and take out all of the smutty underwear ads before my teenage boys are exposed to them. Every week there is something offensive, but the JC Penney's ad yesterday for their new Ambrielle line of underwear was the worst I have ever seen. I was outraged and disgusted and I won't put up with it any more. Either the 'soft porn' advertising goes or I stop taking your paper!

Women in underwear is "smutty" and "soft porn".

"Why do retailers have to use sex to sell their products? Isn't their merchandise good enough without resorting to such base and immoral tactics? Surely underwear sales can't be the main source of income for these stores, so why is it given so much ad space?

Uh, the ad was apparently given "so much" space because they're presenting a new line of merchandize. Women in underwear is "using sex" to sell lingerie.

"I'm sure that you as a newspaper can't dictate to the stores what they put in their ads, but you can tell them that they must make them more family friendly or you won't be doing business with
Advertisement

them."

Women in underwear is not "family friendly". This speaks volumes.

I could be flippant and say, "Sex sells." But I won't.
When I looked at the ad I thought: "If these gals had wings, this would look like a Victoria's Secret ad."

What's wrong with Victoria's Secret?

While this kind of advertisement certainly is disturbing to many parents, I would point out that Dillard's and Macy's regularly run black and white ads in the A section of the paper that have women in bras and panties.
I would not say the Penney's ad is pornographic, but I can understand the concerns of a mother with teenage sons.

Are they concerned that their teenage sons will find out that women wear underwear?

Actually, letters from angry parents to an advertiser would do more to change the advertiser's message than anything I might say."

Dear JC Penney, please stop sending the message that women wear underwear.

Just when I think I've read it all OMG!!! It's no wonder so many nomo guys seem to have total distain for the church. This is simply pathetic. The saddest part is when she writes" I get up extra early to screen the paper...." what a twit, doesn't she know that kids aren't stupid and this will make them even more curious? I usually laugh at this sorta thing, but it really is too pathetic to laugh about. Thank goodness I was raised by normal parents (I owe them an extra hug)! Thanks Jersey Girl :)

[_Jersey Girl]

And again, does she screen it for murders and suicide bombers?

Come ON!

Jersey Girl