I just saw a new ad (on British TV) for Pepsi Max, which you can see here:
A guy hits on a woman in a bar, she makes it clear she’s not interested. Then a news item comes on the bar TV saying that an asteroid is about to hit earth. The woman is seen to panic, she and the guy make eye contact, and as everyone else in the bar screams and runs away, she jumps on him in a passionate embrace and they (presumably) have sex on the sticky and beer-soaked floor. Then we see the same guy go behind the scenes to where his mates are standing in what turns out to be a fake TV newsroom, they do high fives and he drinks a Pepsi Max.
I am not lacking a sense of humour. I am not known for political correctness. But hello? If you make a woman think she is about to die in order to have sex with her, that is a bit rapey. Would she have had sex with you otherwise? No – we clearly see her turn the guy down. Was she under extreme emotional duress? Yes – she thinks she and everyone she loves are about to die horribly. Does this make me want to buy Pepsi Max? No, it makes me want to pretend to kidnap the children of the ad execs who came up with this ad in order to get them to do things they wouldn’t otherwise do (like show some semblance of intelligence). Disclaimer: it makes me want to do it, but I wouldn’t, because I am not a jerk, unlike the Pepsi Max-drinking jerk in the ad.
Perhaps they think that any controversy is clever guerilla marketing, and so the ad is win-win. Banned adverts can often help promote a brand, so if this one causes a stink then they get more column inches than they would otherwise have done. Or maybe they’re just clueless. One really really hopes that it’s the former, because if those responsible for this ad think it’s OK to be a bit rapey, I am saddened. I’ll contact Pepsi UK for a comment and let you know what they say.
ETA: @mjrobbins on Twitter just pointed out the dance they do at the end, which we have now dubbed the pack hunt Dance of Rape.
ETA2: This post is getting a lot of geek love on Twitter, I’m commenting there as well as here – if you want to join in I’m @tkingdoll.
Man, I completely had the exact same reaction the first time I saw this ad and I’m so glad you brought it up. I can’t wait to hear what Pepsi has to say about it . . . my hypothesis is “clueless,” since the ad doesn’t have the feel of an intentionally edgy spot.
I have to agree with Rebecca that they’re just clueless. Typically, the intentionally-controversial adverts get immediately thrown up on the internets with a big “BANNED COMMERCIAL” label in the title, and they’d usually be a bit racier, too. (The woman would probably open her shirt and flash some bra or something.)
I think the meme of guys “tricking” a woman into sex is, sadly, far too mainstream for it to be used in an intentionally-controversial ad.
This ad is full of sh*t.
Why didn’t she run out with the others?
Why would she want to have sex with someone she didn’t find attractive just because it was the end of the world?
How did his friends plug into the TV in the bar?
—
And you must feel really cool if a girl picked you if you were the only one around.
@Rebecca: Yeah there’s no sort of winking/knowingness about it, particularly given the Dance of Rape at the end.
In a dramatic display of Taking Things Seriously, I’d be interested to know what the legal position would be if this really happened. Presumably the Pepsi legal dept approved this, but if I was that woman, I’d be talking to a lawyer if not the police. I’m going to hazard a guess that because she ‘jumped’ him rather than the reverse, that (in the minds of Pepsi) makes it OK – she not only consented, she instigated!
I will also complain to the ASA but I want to get Pepsi’s response first.
That was vile. I have no other comment.
Really? All this angst over a commercial? You’ve got nothing better to do today? And, yes, it’s sunny, breezy and 70 outside my keyboard.
@Tracy King:
Why would you take it to the police? It’s the girl that threw herself at the guy.
Anyway as I pointed out in my previous post this ad doesn’t make much sense anyway.
Pepsi Max – when you’re too gentlemanly to threaten her with a weapon.
@turbomike: Yeah, ‘angst’. Say something constructive or go away.
@turbomike:
I know right? I mean, Tracy makes it sound like ALL women don’t like being raped. And that’s simply not the case… especially when the weather’s great where turbomike lives.
Wow, gross. Also, it just wouldn’t be complete without the bad hip hop tune at the end. What is that? Surely not music. [Before anyone jumps on me, I DO like hip hop, but more Pharcyde and Tribe Called Quest than the shit that’s produced nowadays.]
@turbomike: For what it’s worth, 2 of the people you’re talking to are in London, where it’s 55 degrees out. That may be warm in, say, December, but it probably isn’t the best “leave the computer inside and go play” weather.
@Elyse: I reckon the woman in the advert found out, then went and bought the guy a Pepsi and they had a good laugh over how she totally wouldn’t have had sex with him if she hadn’t thought she was going to die, but how she doesn’t feel upset about that because he has a massive dong and his teeth are really good thanks to his preference for sugar-free drinks.
I’ve been getting comments like @turbomike‘s on YouTube, too: “LOL GET A LIFE LOOSER” etc. They seem to miss all irony, not to mention any kind of intellectual curiosity.
Up to now, I’ve only bothered banning/suspending spammers and people who purposely start throwing shit around, but I have considered that at some point I might start deleting people who aren’t able to contribute to a discussion in any meaningful way.
@Tracy King:
And she was like “Call me!” and he said okay then threw her number out because he would never date a girl stupid enough to give it up on the first death threat.
But the important thing to remember here is that no one got fat.
@Tracy King & @Elyse: It’s a great story to tell the grandchildren, I think you’ll agree.
@Chelsea: Actually it’s pissing down in London and I have food poisoning, but his comment is still sad and useless. The idea that we shouldn’t criticise, progress or scrutinise commercials is sickening. Whether they’re claims of quackery or bad science or borderline rape, things presented to millions on television require critical thinking as much as things presented elsewhere, if not more so.
Although I freely admit that men’s sense of humor freezes at age 13, in my opinion this one crosses the line. It’s a good thing I don’t like Pepsi anyway.
I get so bothered by all of the commercials like this one.
As a single, heterosexual, middle-class, 20-something white dude, I seem to be the target market for such a commercial and, as such, I should identify with the wee-bit rapey guy in the ad. But I don’t, and I don’t like the implication of the assumption that I should.
See, I recognize that I’m a bit weird about the whole sex thing. I don’t go hitting on women hoping to hook up, and certainly don’t hold getting laid to be the highest goal when it comes to ladies. It’s certainly not some sort of prize attainable by any Machiavellian means necessary. But I’m weird, over-sensitive, and probably not like most men, so maybe others DO identify with the guy in this ad. And that’s a LITTLE scary to me.
I feel as though ads like this one help to create an expectation in younger guys that THIS IS THE WAY MEN THINK, and if you DON’T think like this, well, you’re no man! It’s like a self-perpetuating trope that’s damaging to men and women alike.
I mean, I understand the origins of the ideas in this ad… it’s been a long standing cultural trope to treat women as “Keepers of the Sex” and I get WHY that trope persists. I just wish it weren’t constantly being brought up by ads like this.
But I guess an ad that says: “Gentlemen: Men and women BOTH like sex. Sooner or later, perhaps a woman with whom you would like to have sex will also want to have sex with you, and MAY even make this clear without you having to lie, cheat, or steal your way into her pants. But if she doesn’t, then you should leave her alone, go home, and have a wank. Oh, and drink Pepsi Max!” wouldn’t be as successful
I’d hate to be banned. I really don’t contribute much but I really like this site. the folks that work here do a great job of tracking down the woo and getting things right. But I really hate to see that talent get bogged down on a discussion about the lowest form of video/audio input us humans have – commercials. really, you’re all better than that.
This post made me go “Ooh, I want to see the rapey dance” before pressing play on the video. That’s not something it’s ever entirely comfortable to hear yourself say.
That aside, you’re right, this is pretty messed up. Maybe Pepsi just decided that not a big enough share of their current market base consists of douchebags who high-five each other after tricking women into sex, and so they decided to target that demographic specifically.
@Tracy King: That was a better response than his comment deserved. But well said. We encourage ourselves and others to critically about everything.
@turbomike: See comment 16.
@turbomike: Er…you know I run a marketing and PR company, right?
This is just a reaction to the ad where the guy uses Coke Zero to make a puddle in the hallway. When the hot girl slips and falls, he puts the cuffs and ball gag on her. (“Coke Zero: We make them bitches squirm, one way or another.”)
(I don’t know much psychology at all, and certainly not any about how people react is stressful or near-death situations, but… is Fear Fucking a real thing? Is that why my voice goes up when someone in front of me in traffic changes three lanes without a signal?)
You guys are right – the ad is repugnant. This looks like an unfortunate attempt to step beyond the “drink this and your sex appeal will skyrocket and sweaty supermodels will put their tongues on you” theme that has worked so well for beer ads over the years. But the message here is “you’re a tool for drinking this oversweetened battery acid, so there’s only one way to meet women.”
@turbomike: Because . . . commercials don’t have any impact in our society? No one sees them? They don’t shape the way that people see the world?
@turbomike: OMFG you guyz. Get a life intertardz! Why u worying abot some stupid comerxial?Q!??
@phlebas:
I don’t know if fear fucking is a real thing. It’s certainly a real meme. And sending the message that it’s pretty awesome to go to any lengths to convince a chick that she’s about to be killed to increase your chances with her… that’s… ewwww…. ewwww….
@ Expatria – The world needs more men like yourself!
Funny (sad?) thing is I doubt you are particularly alone or unusual; it’s just culture like this ad presents that makes a lot of men feel they have to pretend they’re idiots to fit in.
The ad is disturbing, tricking people into sex isn’t a laughing matter at all, and all the people going ‘omfg ppl it’s just a shitty commercial, lighten up bitchez’ – commercials are one of the main reasons so many people have distorted self-image and esteem issues, they tend to exert a lot of subliminal influence on people’s behaviour, and the very fact you feel this kind of ad should be accepted is indicative of problems inherent in our culture.
If this doesn’t bother you, you may have some attitude problems. This kind of think should be challenged otherwise how, exactly, are we supposed to advance?
@Elyse: Wasn’t “fear fucking before an asteroid impact” one of the little vignettes that Phil wrote about in Death From the Skies!?
At first I thought rape might be too strong a word for this ad, but seeing as they’re tricking the woman into thinking that’s she’s about to die, I now think it is borderline.
Now pretending that your messy studio apartment was trashed, in order to impress a girl, that’s another matter. It’s still a deceptive and sleazy thing to do.
Interesting marketing ploy, though…’Guys this pathetic and awful drink Pepsi!’
(BTW…my vote is clueless rather than intentionally controversial.)
Well, I guess I’ll jump in as the first commentor to not really be bothered by this ad. There are, I think, three primary reasons that this doesn’t seem very “rapey” to me.
First the definition of rape that I am familiar with requires force (ingnoring age of consent stuff). I have heard quite often that rape is more about power and control than it is about sex. That’s not really what I see here.
The second is really just another way of looking at my first point but I thought it different enough to merit a distinction. That is, I really don’t see why the girl would want to have sex with him all of a sudden. The about to die = have sex meme is one that has never really made sense to me except in the losing-your-virginity sense; but then again I have been fortunate enough to never have been about to die (or if I was, I wasn’t aware of it).
My final point is that I’m not comfortable with your ability to distinguish between this lie with any of the other lies people often tell to get someone into bed, or increase their chances at least. I am a really honest person, if only because lying makes me uncomfortable, but I don’t think that guys exaggerating their incomes or women lying about their age (to use two blatantly stereotypical examples) to get someone into bed is “a bit rapey” and I’m not confident that there is a real distinction here. I won’t say all lies are okay. The lie “No I don’t have AIDS” is one I’m all for classifying as quite “rapey,” but I don’t hunk this case was so distinct (danger to the partner’s wellbeing would be the distinction I make).
Anyway, it really sucks typing these out in a phone, I apologize for any typos or inconsistencies in this post, but I don’t feel like editing it.
@Expatria – you are indeed the target market, Pepsi Max is Diet Pepsi for men who want to cut their calorie intake without looking fey. Coke Zero , or “Bloke Coke”, was launched for the same reason.
Good to have a male perspective on this. You’re definitely not alone here even if this advert implies that you are by suggesting that all other men are predatory sex-obsessed cavemen. This advert is saying women are dumb and men have one thing on their minds- no-one comes out of this in a good light.
Sexist adverts are designed to appeal to whichever sex is not being insulted but usually end up insulting both. Perhaps the most offensive thing about this tired old marketing strategy is its smugness.
@briandgregory: Same here…no sacred cows when it comes to, say, jokes in the pub, or what other people should or shouldn’t do. I am the last person to take offense at anything, and I wouldn’t even describe my reaction to this ad as ‘offended’, because that’s a word I associate with knee-jerk righteous indignation or a word reserved for those with a personal reason for a reaction, such as a rape victim.
Rape isn’t a black and white issue. Some people (Whoopie ‘rape-rape’ Goldberg for example) think it is something else than perhaps I do, and I used the phrase ‘a bit rapey’ deliberately to express the greyness of the issue – plus it is meant to be a FUNNY ad, and is an absurd, hypothetic scenario, not meant to be taken literally. It’s what it represents that I object to, as so perfectly summarised by some of the comments about this post, for example Rebecca on Twitter with “Pepsi Max: for guys who can’t get laid unless a woman thinks she’s about to die”.
I suppose I should have expected to no longer be the first by the time this went up :P
@ChrisZ:
I guess, responding to your first point, it’s not rape, exactly. But the degree of manipulation in this situation makes it a bit… rapey, as Tracy put it? Rape-ish? I think manipulating someone into believing they are going to die IS about power and control. It may not be rape, per se, but it’s rape-like. Kinda like how Manson didn’t exactly KILL anyone, but he more or less controlled people and got them to do it.
To your second point, the girl suddenly wanting to have sex with him even though she didn’t at first is actually kind of insidious. It implies that, underneath their “icy exterior”, women ACTUALLY want to fuck EVERY guy, even ones they act like they don’t, because they’re just THAT HORNY. It’s the same stereotype behind Girls Gone Wild; women are just inhibited, but underneath they’re crazy sex fiends! But here, it’s implied that the special circumstances of being about to die (rather than alcohol) removed those “inhibitions” and that girl would have fucked anyone there. I think that the rapey “no means yes” implications here are clear.
Finally, again, it’s the death threat that distinguishes this one from the other lies men are meant to tell to get laid. I’m with you on the hating lies in general… I’ve often been told I’m honest to a fault when it comes to myself. So maybe I see all misrepresentations as negative in this light… but this one is particularly so.
Another pepsi max ad currently running in the uk:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKV0QuQsonk
Clueless AND plagiaristic. *slow golf clap* Well done chaps.
I must admit that I didn’t immediately think that the first time I saw the ad. But by the second or third time I was thinking, “Why don’t they just drop the other shoe and bring out a version of Pepsi with added GHB?”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ssIwvcQykg
and another… This time with an octopus in it.
@ChrisZ
The definition of rape is penetration of the anus, vagina or mouth by the penis without consent.
The actus reus – the act of rape – is the penetration and without it prosecution will not succeed.
The mens rea – the intent – is that it occurs without consent, with consent defined as “if (s)he agrees by choice, and has the freedom and capacity to make that choice”. The defendant must demonstrate reasonable belief that consent had been given.
There is no requirement for any acts of violence to have occurred.
So the question isn’t whether the guilty act occurred – we can reasonably infer that it has – but whether or not the woman consented.
Consent requires:
a) that the woman is able to consent and
b) that the woman did in fact consent of her own free will.
The argument is whether by causing undue alarm (ie: faking the news story about the asteroid attack), the man removed either ability to consent or whether this removed her free will.
Arguably, putting a person into a state of panic is removal of free will. However, questions arise as to whether or not her subsequent initiation of contact arises as a result of putting them into the state of panic, or whether it was true consent.
The point of the advert is that the act resulted in her behaviour; if the fake news story hadn’t resulted in the sexual intercourse, the ad wouldn’t work.
It’s therefore a reasonable conclusion that faking the news story led to a chain of events which result in sexual intercourse to which the woman would not ordinarily have consented. In addition, there is the objectification of women (“it’s OK to lie to people if you get to have sex”), and that women who get stressed immediately want to have sex (which I suspect is somewhat falsifiable given the number of women in highly stressful employment who are not constantly jumping on guys.
Whilst some people might say “it’s just an ad”, ads do influence people (otherwise, why would people advertise?). Arguably, it’s a reflection of popular culture, but surely the minimisation of the harm caused by rape scenarios is an aspect of pop culture we’d like to change?
It’s also reasonable to conclude that drinking Pepsi Max makes misogynistic exploiters out of people.
@DcTurner: Wow, I really hate Pepsi for these ads. They couldn’t have just be inspired by the Fight Club scene? They had to be that specific and obvious? Of course, people are eating (drinking?) it up on YouTube as the coolest ad EVAR, but that’s to be expected when the level of marketing provided for most is on par with “smell my finger.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8_gG2D8QyI
Fucking gross.
@DavidW: Clap of win. Thank you for that reasoned, fact-based analysis.
@ChrisZ:
Force doesn’t have to be violent or physical. “Force” can also mean that the person you are getting it on with is unable to consent or is not of sound mind to consent. Coercing consent is the equivalent of force.
In this case you have a women who clearly said no… to talking to him. It’s pretty easy to infer that she is also saying no to sex.
I’m not sure how this pertains to whether or not this situation is or is not rapey.
Because saying, “What do I do for a living? Oh I founded an organization called Doctors without Borders.” is a different kind of lie entirely than putting together an elaborate hoax to make a person think they are about to die. Imagine it wasn’t a fake newscast, but instead he had his buddy come into the bar, fake guns a-blazing and pretend shooting people and the plan was for this PepsiMax drinker to take the hottest chick in the bar and whisk her into and have the buddy continue to pretend to be shooting people while the “couple” hid away from the shooter…with the knowledge that this would cause her to have sex with him.
If she would have said yes had he not manipulated her into thinking she was DYING, then it would be a different thing altogether.
Your comment points out an important misunderstanding about rape, too. It’s not “any consent” or violent physical force that makes it rape. I’d say that this commercial falls into the same gray area of “probably more than a little drunk” (and yeah, despite what college kids tell you, if a person is too drunk to consent, they can’t consent). It’s definitely not “she was passed out so she didn’t say no”.
Well since I’m doing this from my phone an on a train that is about to arrive, I’ll keep this brief despite all of your points I could respond to.
Let ne tell you what I see wring with this ad. The idea of fear-sex, plays into a cultural idea that women need to protect their sexual organs in a way that men don’t because they are somehow tainted by having sex with someone who isn’t “special” or their spouse or whatever. This is idiotic in my view, but that’s what I see. The girl needs to save herself and so can’t go having sex with people just because it’s fun. Once her future “taint” is no longer something she has to worry about she can have sex just for fun. That’s what fear-sex looks like to me.
I also see lots of stereotypes based on gender norms.
I don’t see rape. I understand the legal definition in this country, I understand there is some issue legally with having sex with someone who is distraught or drunk, and that this might apply here, but I’m really not interested inlegal definitions or even strict cultural ones. I’m interested in what happened and how we Gould talk about it. In her distraught state the woman in the commercial clearly consented, and so the only way (that I see) to look at that as rape is to say that even though she consented she was somehow harmed, and that plays into the idea that the woman was somehow tainted by that sex.
Sorry I couldn’t more directly respond to people as I’d like to have a conversation, nut my train is arriving so I’ll leave it there.
Would it be grossly insensitive to use this as the basis of a Gettier case? “Well, they were filming the TV programme to help a friend rape someone in a bar, but it just happened to be true that the world was ending…” — this is so replacing Fake Barn Country in introduction to epistemology classes…
I’m not sure about this at all – I mean, I can see why lying in order to get sex is wrong. Imagine if one person takes another back to their rich friend’s house in order to try and get them to believe that they were the true owner of the house, that might induce someone to have sex with you – is it a false pretence? Sure. But does that mean that it is rape or “a bit rapey”? What specifically about the situation depicted in the advert – lying about the “OMG end of the world, we need to fuck” scenario in order to get sex – makes it more rape-like than exaggerations about one’s income? How does one draw the line? There are people who deliberately do not tell prospective sexual partners their profession because they fear stereotypes will cause people to not accept them or treat them differently. I’m interested on how these kinds of lines are drawn – anyone got any strong moral intuitions about this stuff?
@ChrisZ: That is the question though: Did she “clearly consent”? She was under duress that he manufactured to manipulate her. It’s a gray area and definitely sleazy.
@tommorris: I’m pretty sure the sort of extreme, extreme, extreme emotional duress experienced by someone who thinks they and everyone else are about to die is on the ‘rapey’ side of the line. Thinking a dude is rich = greed. Thinking you are about to die and the instant emotional reaction that comes from that (in her case, either sex one last time, or the requirement to spend her last moments with another human being instead of alone, or whatever the Pepsi folk think her motivation is) is not the same as gold-digging.
That said – if someone has sex with you because they think you own a big house, they are not worth desiring. And if pretending to have a big house is the only way someone can get laid, they aren’t worth having either. So actually, those two people probably deserve each other. Not so the woman who thinks she’s about to be crushed in a fiery hellball and would rather be experiencing sexual pleasure at the moment of impact than nothing at all (or whatever).
@Expatria, the “icy exterior” could be the thing I find most offensive here. I guess the woman was made an ice queen to make the “poor awkward guy” the sympathetic character in this story.
I wish writers would stop using the” stuck-up ice queen” stereotype as it’s an idea men often use against women who reject them in real life. It’s a really nasty situation to be in- some (but by no means all) men can’t accept that a women may simply not be attracted to them, and to save their pride they’ll resort to the old “ice queen” argument, or tell her she’s got “issues”. Often they’ll make out that they were “led on” even if they did the asking out and the woman was completely passive- it’s the old “keepers of the sex” argument again, and some men “picking up signals” where there aren’t any. I’ve had a few nasty experiences with such men and don’t think they need any more encouragement.
There is also your point about women being inhibited sex fiends- this advert suggests that with enough pressure a woman will eventually give in, and that refusing to take no for an answer could be a good tactic. The old “no means yes” argument, which is very rapey indeed.
This reminds me of this series of Snickers ads –
Pretty creepy. Especially the second one where she is obviously about to have sex with the guy.
Quick question: reverse the genders. Better, worse, or just as rapey?
@thad: Hah, just posed the exact same question on Twitter. I don’t know. The media assumes men want sex all the time, are less likely to turn it down etc, even though that’s not actually the case. So that assumption would likely affect perception of the ad, yes. Plus, society likes to pretend that male rape doesn’t happen.
@Tracy King:
Or that, when male rape DOES happen, it’s funny. Because, you know, a MAN can’t be raped, so it’s emasculating to be raped, and we all know it’s funny to emasculate a guy! Ha ha!
Rape? Legally? Probably not, but if there is a hell that guy is going to it anyway. The bottom line is this ad fails for me because it makes me not want to buy their product, but maybe there is a large demographic of diet soft drink consumers with non-consensual domination fantasies who this ad is aimed at. I sure hope I don’t know any of them.
And for the record @davidw is not me if you couldn’t tell that already from the insightful and intelligent nature of his comment.
If folks are interested in a short story about hooking up in the face of real impending world doom I highly recommend Larry Niven’s _Inconstant Moon_. I think it might be my favorite short story ever.
I don’t understand the ad. The woman thinks she is about to be killed so that makes her desire sex? The way she jumps on him implies more than merely acquiescing to me. I think it also fosters the absurd belief that women may say no but actually they really want it. Very stupid ad.
What? I just read a couple of the comments at top – how is this “rapey”?
Obviously the woman didn’t run out because she kind of had it in the back of her mind that she wanted to bone (or at lest talk with) the “rapist”…
perhaps the character has a boyfriend/is married, and the initial rebuff was due to that. I know that I (a non single female) would act that same way to a guy in a bar no matter how attracted I was to him.
But mostly, I think that this is a serous case of needing to lighten up (unless this is like meta-comedy, where you’re being “outraged”, in which case, brava).
@ChrisZ:
In this particular situation, with these particular people, it is a given that the woman will consent if she feels her life is in danger. (Which, like I said is another topic altogether.)
If there were an actual news report that the world were about to end, and it was a mistake, but the girl and the guy got it on because they thought they were both about to die, then whatever. That was silly.
However this is NOT the case. The guy devised a plan to threaten the girl’s life if she said no. And it worked.
How people don’t think this is a legally and ethically questionable way to gain consent is beyond me.
@Jonathan: Maybe because the girl doesn’t become unconscious?
@whitebird
If you want a clear and concise reason why we think this is rapey (as well as what we actually mean by rapey) read expatria’s comments. I think he puts it best.
@Tracy King: Maybe people who jump on you the minute that they think they have 10 minutes to live aren’t the best catches, either? Sorry, just scrollin’ down the comments, and I still don’t get it.
Would you think it was “rapey” if an average-looking girl was depicted doing this to a super hot guy in a commercial?
I disagree with the rape analogy as I don’t think the woman was incapable of giving her consent.
The question isn’t whether the guy is a douche or even that he manipulated the situation for his own ends.
The question is under the circumstances from her point of view what actions does she take.
Run the scenario again except the news story is real, the world is about to end and she decides to jump the nearest guy for one last romp.
Now take this alternative scenario one step further, after said romp they come to find the world hasn’t ended and it turns out aliens or god has intervened to save the earth.
Clearly in these two scenarios both parties used their own judgement and neither are guilty of rape.
Now going back to the original scenario, right up until she makes a decision, from her point of view all three of these scenarios are identical.
She throws caution to the wind, exercising here own judgement. Had she been a little bit skeptical she would have flicked the channel or checked what was happening on twitter, or even just stepped outside.
Even under extreme situations I still think we are culpable for our own actions.
This is why critical thinking is so important, and why you should never just take the media at their word. If Phil Plait can’t confirm that “we’re all gonna die!” I think I’ll just keep listening to Curiosity Aroused or The Geologic Podcast. That way, if I’m wrong, I’ll die happy. It’s like Pascal’s Wager for skeptics.
@DanielMcL: There’s an important difference between the commercial and your analogy: It’s not an event that just happened, it’s a fake event that he intentionally manufactured for the purpose of manipulating a woman (or possibly women – suppose this commercial “documents” his one success out of many attempts) into having sex with him, with the potential of later emotional distress given that she’ll find out soon that he lied.
To those saying they don’t get what is wrong with this ad:
Deceiving a person (male or female) to get something from them (in this case, sex) that they would not normally give, is wrong.
Wilfully placing someone in a mental state (for example, drunk or panicked) in which they are unable to give informed consent and then taking advantage of them, is wrong.
Certainly there are ‘levels’ or wrongness, but this isn’t the ‘painting yourself in a better light’ deception that most people engage in simply as a matter of course in most societal interactions, this is outright, wilful deception with the intent of placing the woman in a compromised mental state, and taking advantage of her. This no better than getting her massively drunk.
I doubt this could be called illegal, but just because something isn’t illegal doesn’t make it right.
@Matt B: I doubt this could be called illegal, but just because something isn’t illegal doesn’t make it right.
I think there was a _Law and Order_ about this once. They tried to charge the douche bag with “theft by deception.” The trick was using a law that normally applies to monetary claims to something that has much higher value, but is hard to quantify.
Pepsi. Money for old rape.
This is not PepsiCo’s first marketing gimmick to be a bit rapey.
When that one came out, I quit drinking it. After they were crowded into apologizing for enabling PUAs (but apparently not into withdrawing the app), I can’t believe for a minute that the UK branch approved this commercial without thinking it through. I’m forced to conclude that PepsiCo really does think that it’s more important for men to have sex than women to have autonomy.
@chrisb: COTW
Oh, come on. Did you see the way she looked at the apocalyptic news report with those big brown terrified eyes? That outfit has “this is the last thing I will ever wear” written all over it. What is she doing hanging out in her local end times bar sitting next to a doomsday stud if she didn’t want it?
She was totally asking to be armageddon raped.
@delphi_ote: aka ARMAGEDDON IT ON WITH YOU.
Armageddon sex, Cthulu attack, interview assault… the message is: “Men are fucking douchebags who will manipulate you for their own personal gain. Drink Pepsi.”
Yeah, that’s not at all sexist. Stay classy, Pepsi.
It seems more implausible than “rapey” to me, that just doesn’t seem like the right word. If it was “you will die if you don’t jump his bones” that would be very rapey. Jackass move yes, rapey, I’m not convinced.
If say, she were an actress and someone conspirator pointed him out and said “jump his bones, he is in tight with the studios and he can get you a job” it would still be creating a lie and using it to induce bone jumping behavior, only it would be okay because it was greed not panic that was the emotion used. that doesn’t seem like a valid distinction to me. Furthermore if false pretenses make sex rapey then even most women are probably guilty of rapey behavior.
@Opcnup
I don’t know, I feel there is a difference between taking advantage of fear vs. taking advantage of greed.
Feer is such a basic human emotion that it is hard to overcome. It is also a very useful and important thing to feel when it is waranted. Abusing this trait to trick someone into having sex just seems to be somewhat more dispicable than using greed for the same thing.
After all, I would argue that a dicission motivated by greed is usually not made under duress, so you are more likely to use you’re higher brain function when you make it.
It’s a subtle difference, I’ll grant you, but it’s different none the less.
Most of the Pepsi Max Ads are pretty douchey.
Maybe their slogan should be “The cola for uncharismatic douchebags!”
Jeez, who knew mansplaining had a corporate sponsor?
“Your honour, the plaintiff had the fear of death in her eyes and had just shat herself, so was clearly asking for it. Also, did you see the length of her skirt?”.
@Kimbo Jones:
The question of intent on the guy’s side or the contrived circumstance is wholly irrelevant; when it comes to rape the deciding factor is the victim’s consent to have sex or not. She wasn’t under any sort of duress, she made a choice given the information she had at hand (whether it was reliable or not), having sex in that situation wasn’t her only course of action, she decided to have sex.
To imply rape here requires that every time a person lies in order to get laid it is also rape. I don’t agree with duping a person into sex, in fact I think it’s rather low; however there is a modicum of culpability on the other person not to be duped.
I have seen rapier. Not the sword, but to mean rapey-e-er, as in “more rapey”
On a related issue, and sorry about the shameless self-plug and link, but could this be the reason for what happened in Georgia recently?
http://depletedcranium.com/georgia-fake-news-causes-panic/
@DanielMcL: She wasn’t under any sort of duress, she made a choice given the information she had at hand
By your logic, if he put a gun to her head and forced her to have sex, it would be rape. But if he PRETENDED he had a gun, that would just be lying to get her to have sex with him. For some strange reason, I don’t agree with you.
@DanielMcL: Yeah, guys are always setting up highly elaborate fake news stories on bar TVs, I can’t believe she fell for that old chestnut! And faced with impending death, her decisions are clearly rational and the same as they would be under unemotional circumstances (such as those exhibited earlier in the ad when she turned the guy down).
So…if she wasn’t under any duress, then why was the fake news story necessary in order to have sex with her?
@Tracy King: That’s the best pun I’ve heard all day! (And it’s more clever than anything in the ad… but I guess that’s not much of a compliment.)
@Drbuzz0: No way. This is the rapeyist!
Do I detect some onerapemanship?
Late to the conversation but I’ll just say the commercial sounds like a crap idea that someone should have noticed in the chain of command .
Perhaps we could get that girl from Kick Ass to get all ninja nasty on the guys!
“The question of intent on the guy’s side or the contrived circumstance is wholly irrelevant; when it comes to rape the deciding factor is the victim’s consent to have sex or not. She wasn’t under any sort of duress, she made a choice given the information she had at hand (whether it was reliable or not), having sex in that situation wasn’t her only course of action, she decided to have sex.
To imply rape here requires that every time a person lies in order to get laid it is also rape. I don’t agree with duping a person into sex, in fact I think it’s rather low; however there is a modicum of culpability on the other person not to be duped.”
So…how is inducing panic, which has noted and potent psychological and physiological effects to reduce a woman’s inhibition different morally from a ruffy (or rapey if you watched the Hangover)?
@Tracy King: It’s just a TV advertisement. You know, in our city, London, there are 12 year old girls who are tricked into comming into the country and forced into prostitution. That is rape.
Some dumb advert for brown sugar-water, barely registers on my things-I-don’t-like-about-the-world-o-meter.
@ Russellsugden
Oh how is it rape for them, they do consented to coming over and act as prostitutes right?
Same argument. The problem is the commercial promotes the idea that it is not only ok by MANLY(tm) to get women to have sex against their desires.
@russellsugden: You don’t mind that men are routinely portrayed in the media as dumb shitheads, sleazy douchebags, and/or clumsy assholes? Fair enough.
@russellsugden: It’s just a blog post. Why is it okay for you to take the time to comment on a blog post seen by maybe hundreds or thousands, but not okay for someone to take the time to comment on an ad seen by millions?
The hypocrisy of this kind of comment just kills me.