- #HGWORLD
- #HGCREATORS
- #HGEXPLORE
- #HGVOICES
- #HGSHOP
- CAREERS
- ABOUT US
- CONTACT US
Modern India is becoming known for an annoying, stick-up-the-behind, ultra conservative morality, where skirts equal obscenity and sexuality doesn’t exist. But of course it wasn’t always this way, after all we’re the country that claims the kama sutra and the carvings at Khajurao. But clearly as time has passed the notion that we must repress any inkling of sexual liberty has crept into the fabric of our society.
One area though that seems to have happily ignored this sentiment has been the advertising industry, where sex is still used to sell...everything. From body sprays to home appliances provocative content seemed to be the need of the hour. Though of course sometimes even advertisers push the limits of so-called ‘decency’. Who can forget the iconic Milind Soman/ Madhu Sapre incident of 1995 where their ad for Tuff shoes sparked a court case that dragged on for 14 years. This apparently crossed the line while scantily clad women fawning over men on a yacht is perfectly normal. So where do we draw the line?
On of the best examples of this dichotomy is the 1993 ad written by Chris Rosario for Trikaya’s client Johnson & Johnson. The copy of the ad reads
NUDE MODELS WANTED
“Figure: Chubby; Hair: Preferably; Chin: Double; Eyes: Brown; Skin: Peachy; Age: 8-12 months. Candidates should be carried to Trikaya Advertising on Sunday, 12th September, 10 am to 2 pm.”
This ad for baby models was hailed as one of the advertising triumphs of the decade, it managed to capture lascivious minds without promoting ‘indecency’. In this case the motive ends in innocence but it goes to show that despite pretending to have the moral high ground, the Indian public can be so easily swayed by the faintest hint of a scandal. An underlying hypocrisy dictates the country, where you can leer at item girls on screen but off screen condemn ‘indecent’ clothing.
We suggest you read:
