KISS rebreather advert: your views

Which answer most strongly describes your views?

  • I think the advert is good, and introduced/reinforced the KISS brand to me

    Votes: 30 36.1%
  • I think the advert is good, and made me think about my views on technical diving

    Votes: 3 3.6%
  • I think the advert is bad as it is objectifying women as sex objects

    Votes: 15 18.1%
  • I think the advert is bad as it is portraying an attractive lady as stupid

    Votes: 4 4.8%
  • I have no strong opinions on the advert

    Votes: 31 37.3%

  • Total voters
    83

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Kim:
Blox - unfortunately I can't realistically address your post as I would almost certainly be accused of betraying back-room confidences from the time I was a moderator, and thus involved in discussions as to what exactly is "of a sexual nature". I even had a post pulled yesterday which was nothing but common knowledge, but which I was accused of betraying confidences with. Absolutely not true - I can easily cite examples from outside of the period I had any kind of privileged access to these type of discussions - but very telling as to the real sensitivity of this topic.

I'd love to go deeper into this, as I also believe that it's stuff like this that will dictate the future of SB in the long run. Still....I don't think that anyone needs to have been part of any privileged conversations/discussions to see the contradictions.

Any time you try to limit content (which I think IS appropriate for this board) it gets blury and drawing the line in one instance to the next is anything but straight forward.

It's hard enough when you only have to look out after posts but adding advertaisers makes it that much more complicated.

When I was in the back room there was plenty of debate (it's not against the rules to say that is it?). The board has gotten much bigger since then and I'd expect that keeping a handle on all this stuff has only gotten harder along with it.
 
Hi Mike,

MikeFerrara:
I don't know how many children you've raised but I'll tell you. Limiting the junk your children are exposed to and trying to teach them how to dress is a full time job. We don't watch TV here. I find all the "grow a bigger penis" commercials especially distastful. We don't hang out at public beaches and we do/don't do lots of other things to avoid having to look at all the junk that we don't want to see. Limiting exposure to the constant bombardment is not easy. There just isn't much "G" rated content in the media anymore.

I have read a lot of your posts on Scubaboard, and many of them were good food for thought for me as a much less experienced diver, however, I think that the above misses the point.
We're not talking about an ad for a penis enlargement - we are talking about a rebreather ad with a woman in a bikini that people may or may not find attractive, based on her physical attributes). That's it. Your comparing it with an ad for a penis enlargement is IMHO exaggerated and unfair.

If you find the ad offensive, or demeaning to women, or trash that you don't want your kids to see, that's entirely your choice. I find nothing wrong with the ad (although it may be arguable whether it isn't a bit cheap to use a Bikini-clad woman as an eye catcher, but that's how advertising works).

I agree with you, that the stance on the issue is largely depending on "where you come from". So is the classification of what constitutes "trash" or "filth" and what doesn't. Putting it in an extreme way: people grown up in a rural community, brought up in a very traditional way, and without TV, who have never left their home town, would have a different view on the issue than people who've grown up in a big city with a cosmopolitan population, with lots of media exposure, and are well travelled.
I suspect that we may not reach a consensus.

On the education issue (although that's IMHO off-topic, and the only thing I'll say on the issue):
I'm nearly your age, and I've got 2 daughters, both teenagers. You bet that we are filtering, what they are exposed to. However, isolating them from everything that we may consider "dirty", "ugly" or "undesirable" is, IMHO, not the the right way to go about it (and won't work anyway, unless you lock them up in their rooms at home). Isolating them from everything "bad" and "ugly" will not prepare them for a life on their own, will not open their minds, will not make them ready to stand on their own,and to make reasoned, considered choices and to decide on their own, what's good and what's bad, what's right and what's wrong for them, once they venture out on their own. Feeding them a controlled dose of "real world" and helping them to ask the right questions, and to think about things and make a considered judgment, is IMHO the better way to go.
I'm sure that there are about as many opinions about the "right" way to educate kids, as there are parents.
If mine isn't yours as well - let's just agree to disagree, and get on to something else.

brgds
 
I agree Mike. It's always been tricky I expect. Given the public confusion so often resulting from various Mod actions/decisions over the years - I personally don't think that it's that easy to see why one thing is OK, while another often isn't. (I too hope I'm not breaking any rules to say that).

Anyway - the ad doesn't bother me, but I can fully understand that it will bother many people. It also seems a contradiction to me to past practices - but then again....things can change. Sometimes I just think that some changes might be easier if there was less denial, and more honesty involved. Changes are ALWAYS going to cause a "win some, lose some" situation.

How does it go?

"You can please all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time -
You can't please all of the people all of the time."

Trying to do so just makes one look foolish and even dishonest.
 
Whether it's sexual in nature vs. a portrayal of a rebreather being used in a typical fashion is a subjective judgement call. A rule like "no women in bikinis" is simply irrelevant. This is a question of first impressions, not logical rules of what constitutes indecency.

As for me, I've wanted a KISS rebreather for a long time. Since seeing that ad, I really am not so sure that I want to be associated with a product that's marketed in that way. It's not a rebreather ad, its a boobs-in-your-face ad, and frankly it insults me that someone would try to influence me into buying their product with that. And to buy a KISS would just make me look like a perv, IMO.


Blox:
The ad in question, as it is, IMHO isn't "anything of a sexual nature".

If it was, the logical consequence would be to ban anything showing women in bikinis from this board (regardless of cup size of the depicted woman -- this IS an equal opportunity board, isn't it? :wink: ) Might as well ban pictures of people in swim wear altogether, ...
 
Kim:
Blox - unfortunately I can't realistically address your post as I would almost certainly be accused of betraying back-room confidences from the time I was a moderator, and thus involved in discussions as to what exactly is "of a sexual nature". I even had a post pulled yesterday which was nothing but common knowledge, but which I was accused of betraying confidences with. Absolutely not true - I can easily cite examples from outside of the period I had any kind of privileged access to these type of discussions - but very telling as to the real sensitivity of this topic.

I'd love to go deeper into this, as I also believe that it's stuff like this that will dictate the future of SB in the long run. Still....I don't think that anyone needs to have been part of any privileged conversations/discussions to see the contradictions.

I wouldn't want you to get into trouble. Let's just leave it at that.


Kim:
FWIW, I also just showed the ad to my wife (without telling her what it was about). She saw the chest (mostly), didn't think the guys face was very attractive, and thought (when pushed) it was about "breathers". She didn't really have a clue what a "breather" was, except it was something to do with a tank.

:rofl3:

Let me make a guess: Your wife's not a diver, right? :)

Could have been my wife's reaction as well. A diving wife's reaction may have been different.

What I'd be more interested in, out of pure curiosity: did you wife think the ad is "sexist"/objectifying a woman as a sex object?

Cheers,
 
Blox:
Let me make a guess: Your wife's not a diver, right? :)
Actually she is....although a bit lapsed since the kids were born.

PADI O/W, IANTD Eanx Overhead Environment. 80 dives or so....

She doesn't do boards though - so she only knows what she's been exposed too, and she probably thinks a rebreather is something you use in space! :D
(also - being Japanese, big boobies aren't too common here - so she probably thought the girl was showing off! :wink: )
Blox:
What I'd be more interested in, out of pure curiosity: did you wife think the ad is "sexist"/objectifying a woman as a sex object?
Yes....but that's not really unusual in Japan - they're pretty used to it! :eyebrow: Maybe just a little more honest about it! :D
 
I hadn´t seen the add before all these threads started popping up (I´m a supporting member so I don´t have to see the adds)...

I am actually in the process of choosing a MCCR...

I have to say that this add won´t have any influence on my purchasing decision. I kinda like the name KISS as it is what I would hope any RB-manufacturer would strive to do (these things are complicated enough anyway)...

The add doesen´t offend me and I don´t think it´s any different than most of the other adds for dive-gear out there so I don´t see why everyone is getting on jetsams case about it unless it has to do with peoples perception of RBs as being for "smarter/sophisticated divers" in which case the add is a good wake-up call (I´m certainly neither)...

If you dislike these kinds of adds, pay to be a supporting member and "opt out"...

ymmv
 
DeepBound:
Whether it's sexual in nature vs. a portrayal of a rebreather being used in a typical fashion is a subjective judgement call. A rule like "no women in bikinis" is simply irrelevant. This is a question of first impressions, not logical rules of what constitutes indecency.

As for me, I've wanted a KISS rebreather for a long time. Since seeing that ad, I really am not so sure that I want to be associated with a product that's marketed in that way. It's not a rebreather ad, its a boobs-in-your-face ad, and frankly it insults me that someone would try to influence me into buying their product with that. And to buy a KISS would just make me look like a perv, IMO.

Maybe if you paint it in neon green and dive it naked :wink:

You are entitled to your opinion, as am I. If you don't like the ad, the ad's strategy has failed on you, because you did not get the message, that the KISS makers wanted you to get, and have not reacted the way they hoped for. If you don't want to buy a KISS, just don't. You have every right to take that decision, but I wonder whether you'd drop the idea of buying a particular car, that you were previously interested in, because it's displayed on a motorshow surrounded by sexy models, too.
This advertising strategy doesn't rely on you to buy the product, only because your hormones take over at the sight of a woman in a bikini or sexy dress - they want to get your attention, and that you take the time to look at the product. No professional in his right mind - and I'm sure that the makers of the KISS rebreathers are not exception - will expect anybody to buy a 5000 Dollar piece of gear, because you're hormones have taken over. I think their intelligence deserves more credit than that.

Your opinion about the question of what should or shouldn't be kept off the board begs the question, however: If filtering content is not a matter of logical rules, or clearly defined parameters, such as a "no bikinis anywhere on the board" (and I am not trolling; nor do I support such a rule), but of "first impressions", then whose first impression will decide what is and what isn't appropriate?

I don't envy the admins, mods, and other staff of this board for having to deal with that job. No matter what they do, there'll always be people who think it should have been done differently, and aren't shy to say so.
 
grazie42:
I hadn´t seen the add before all these threads started popping up (I´m a supporting member so I don´t have to see the adds)...

I am actually in the process of choosing a MCCR...

I have to say that this add won´t have any influence on my purchasing decision. I kinda like the name KISS as it is what I would hope any RB-manufacturer would strive to do (these things are complicated enough anyway)...

The add doesen´t offend me and I don´t think it´s any different than most of the other adds for dive-gear out there so I don´t see why everyone is getting on jetsams case about it unless it has to do with peoples perception of RBs as being for "smarter/sophisticated divers" in which case the add is a good wake-up call (I´m certainly neither)...

If you dislike these kinds of adds, pay to be a supporting member and "opt out"...

ymmv

Exactly - bravo.
 
grazie42:
If you dislike these kinds of adds, pay to be a supporting member and "opt out"...

ymmv

I hope there isn't a fee for everything in the world that I don't like. If there is, I won't ever be able to work my way out of debt.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/perdix-ai/

Back
Top Bottom