The End of the World as seen in a TV ad . . .

[vison]

A little boy, I guess he's about 1 and a half? Wearing a denim-looking diaper? Walking along, the voice-over saying he looks Number One with Number 2 in his pants? Saying, "You'll never look this good while pooping your pants"?

Words fail me. I saw this ad the other night because I had an American TV station on and believe me, I won't be having that station on again. Whatever it was, I don't remember which one out of the vile assortment it was.

I guess I'm going to have to write a letter to the Huggies people. Either that, or smite them.

The word "disgusting" doesn't even start to describe this atrocity.

[Primula Baggins]

I saw that. Unbelievable.

Of course, the demographic they're aiming at may think differently; people diapering toddlers now are mostly a generation younger than you and me.

[N.E. Brigand]

Summer program at the local zoo: The Scoop on Poop. I was surprised when I heard it advertised on the radio!

I remember reading that in one of Luis Buñuel's films, the characters retire to private rooms to eat, but defecate/urinate communally. The reviewer complained that, as the main subject of the film was hypocrisy, Buñuel was confusing matters by spending time on this distinction we make, which is merely amusing idiosyncrasy.

[Frelga]

I didn't see the ad, so can't tell how distressing it would have been. Doesn't sound like something an unsuspecting person would like to see while dining, that's for sure.

People diapering toddlers live in a world of poop, however. So much effort and attention goes into the whole diapering/toilet training that squeamishness soon gets flushed out, so to speak. When I think back to what passed for dinner conversation in my family in those days, I greatly fear that an ad like that would have barely phased me.

[Primula Baggins]

Good point, Frelga: anyone seriously put off is probably not in the target market anyway.

Although people who don't have children yet might not care for the ad, either, and might even remember the brand.

[yovargas]

I didn't think the part was causing distress was the "while pooping" part but the "look this good" part. But maybe that's just me.

[Ellienor]

Well, being the parent of a preschooler who almost inevitably says "Mom, I gotta poop" (meaning, I have to go perform wipe duties) JUST as we are sitting down for dinner, or have tucked in already....

I think I would find it pretty funny.

But, that's because poop is pretty much part of my life, so, might as well get a giggle out of it.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I've never had kids, or had to change a diaper, and I certainly don't find the idea of the ad particularly appealing (I haven't seen it), but at the same time I don't see it as something to be terribly concerned or upset about.

[River]

Honestly, I'm twisted enough to find it amusing...but I am also part of the generation that ad is targeted towards.

[Maria]

I've been so sucessful at avoiding TV advertising that I haven't seen a commercial in months. The thought of a diaper commercial that hints at the actual function of a diaper isn't that repulsive, though. It's what the diapers are *for*.

[vison]

Watch the ad.

I've changed my share of diapers. It's a necessity of life. It's the sexualization of the baby that bothers me.

[Frelga]

Ah. That's a whole different bucket of squick.

[Griffon64]

Here's a link for those who'd like to watch the ad to form an opinion of it:

http://racked.com/archives/2010/05/26/v ... -in-bl.php

I watched it ( with the sound off ) and I guess I processed it as more of a kind of send-up of fashion style ads taking themselves so seriously, where people are suddenly so cool because of what they wear / their aftershave / whatnot. Maybe the sound makes a big difference.

I guess they didn't thinking pooping in your pants should be taken seriously?

[JewelSong]

I thought the ad was clever. I didn't think it was "sexualizing the baby" - it was a send-up and mockery of those stupid runway shows. And the line about "my pants are full of chic" was really funny.

That being said, I used cloth diapers most of the time when my kids were pooping their pants.

[Primula Baggins]

Me, too, except when we were traveling. Not ecological virtue (even then the consensus was that they were about the same in impact, what with the energy for washing the cloth ones). The disposables were just too expensive.

I did eventually use disposables at night, when they were sleeping straight through for 10 or 12 hours. Less rash.

[Inanna]

Am sorry, I thought the ad was hilarious.

[Holbytla]

Weird. That was my take on it.
Just mismatched and odd.

And I have changed oodles of diapers in my time.
The last thing I cared about was how chic they were.
My concern was how much change or how many gum wrappers were mixed in there with the "chic poo".

[yovargas]

I didn't think the part was causing distress was the "while pooping" part but the "look this good" part. But maybe that's just me.

As I'd figured.

After watching it, it's clear it's a parody of fashion stuff, not an endorsement of it.

[axordil]

After watching it, it's clear it's a parody of fashion stuff, not an endorsement of it.

I think you're right. I *hope* you're right. Then again, the line between parody and endorsement is thinner for some. See: Stephen Colbert at the White House Correspondent's Dinner.

[Cerin]

The ad did strike me as sexualizing the baby. It starts off with the two women staring, as if at some hot male passerby, so I think it's hard to take it any other way, except that in reality it would be a pedophile reacting that way. And I wonder how long it took them to teach the baby to strut in that very unnatural way. Very distasteful and reckless, imo. If they'd had a group of babies reacting, rather than grown-ups, it would have been less offensive.