BagNews Archives About Staff BagNews is a progressive site dedicated to visual politics and the analysis of news images.
Tuesday, May 21, 2013

Twitter

@bagnewsnotes »
Advertisement

July 15, 2011

KIA Ad: Pedophilia or Just Naughty School-Girl Fantasy?

By Cate Blouke

If you were left either puzzled or appalled after examining this Kia Sportage dual climate air conditioning ad, then you weren’t alone. Despite winning an award at The Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity, the ad has (unsurprisingly) garnered accusations promoting pedophilia.  In their brief article on it, The Huffington Post describes it as featuring a “teacher lusting after his elementary school-aged student.”

Though I can see where this argument comes from (and don’t entirely disagree), a strict reading of the image doesn’t support it.  In actuality, I think the ad shows us a horny adolescent fantasizing about her instructor, not the other way around.

In all the frames but one, the man is shown on the left and the girl on the right.  If the placement of the figures is an indication of perspective, then the left-hand (innocuous/cool) column is the teacher’s perspective.  His young, innocent, and entirely un-sexy elementary student is simply offering him an apple.

The right-hand (sexy/hot) column, on the other hand, is his female student’s perception of the scene.  The close-up of the teacher eating the apple (with an unattractive degree of slobber, if you ask me), is what she is imagining – as well as a fantasy, naughty school-girl version of herself.

– Cate Blouke

« Prev

Next »

  • http://twitter.com/Clarissasblog Clarissa

    Students do not fantasize about teachers unless those teachers invite them to through a variety of non-verbal means of communication. I’m telling you that as an educator with 21 years of teaching experience who first walked into a classroom to teach at the age of 14 and still does that every day at the age of 35.

    • jonst

      “Students do not fantasize about teachers unless those teachers invite
      them to through a variety of non-verbal means of communication”

      You are clueless.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_MC2AFMTPNMOAC26272RILT7TYA Antonio

      Honestly, I can remember fantasizing about at least on teacher and a dozen or so fellow students each year from sixth grade through the completion of my four year degree.  I’m pretty sure that if my seventh grade math class was taught by a talking peanut I would have fantasized about that.  As it stands it was taught by Ms Zalupski and I don’t have any lasting Mr Peanut fetishes.

    • SPC

      You are clueless. An ex-girlfriend of mine said she frequently had crushes on her teachers (though she didn’t act on them).

  • tinwoman

    Well it all depends on the POV doesn’t it?  And that isn’t explicitely provided, so we’re left guessing, but even if she’s fantasizing about him, it’s in incredibly bad taste.  I would have preferred the “two temperatures” approach showing two adults, co-workers perhaps.  It would have been memorable, shocking to Church Ladies, and it would have worked just as well (and it’s a really cunning ad, IMO).

    I just feel that the sexualization of children, in any context, is better left alone.  Besides, I doubt a child that young–what is she, 7 or 8–could have a sexually detailed crush on her teacher.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=810889128 Molly Whipple Douthett

      I agree with your last sentence. I don’t think the right hand column is from the POV of the student on the left at all. It is the adolescent fantasy of the teacher toward his Lolita student. BTW, the actual Lolita was not after Humbert at all. She truly was his victim. 

  • Anonymous

    This reminds me of the controversy over the Aguilera Skechers ads (http://www.adpunch.org/entry/skechers-naughty-and-nice/).

    “Naughty costumes” are aimed at stimulating male fantasies. Which are most popular? Catholic school girl, female teacher, cop, nurse, nun… In other words, figures that imply transgression of taboo and/or authority.

    The right hand column here seems entirely in line with that: a grown man imagining an adult realization of adolescent fantasy. What creeps me out is its juxtaposition with the left hand column, where a grown man is shown with an actual child.

  • Glenn

    Cate, I think you’re off base on this one. Interesting that anyone would assume it’s from the POV of the female, when the character whose body is being objectified is the female’s, not the man’s.

    Look at the images on the right. The girl’s body is highlighted –
    literally, by the lighting depicted – and the man is turned into shadow.  Look at how insubstantial his body is – especially his genital area – it’s almost dimensionless. It’s not about him, it’s about her.

    What makes it uniquely creepy is due to the age difference between the two versions. We’re not seeing two versions of a teenager or coed-age girl, we’re seeing a child transformed into a sexually active adult siren. THAT’s what makes it creepy and pedophilic. A scene between an adult and a child is being re-imagined into a sexual encounter from the point of view of the adult, transforming the child into a sexual object.

    the alternate interpretation of it being the girl’s fantasy is wrong on multiple levels. Is she a sexually aware adolescent or is she an eight year old? Eight year olds may fantasize what it’s like to be “all grown up,” but hardly in such a sexually informed manner – it’s creepy and near criminal to assume that an eight year old would be

    If, alternately she’s a sexually aware adolescent, why would her fantasy involve herself being on display and her male partner as a near-featureless mannikin? Seems to me she would  rather objectify the attractiveness of the man instead of herself. (Also, why depict her alternate self as a child?)

    Oh well. It’s Saturday and I’m stuck at home for Carmageddon, so I’ve nothing better to do.

    • Cate Blouke

      Glenn, I think you make some great points, and I don’t disagree.  Though, I would counter that the  male’s body goes from pear shaped to V-shaped from left to right.  So although there might not be highlighting on his trousers, his shoulders decidedly broaden.  If she is a sexually aware adolescent, it’s not unreasonable to assume that her imagined seduction would involve looking sexy…

      What I find interesting is that the assumption seems to be (in some of the comments above) that the left-hand column is somehow the “correct” one – that the girl is elementary-school aged.  The whole thing reminds me of William Blake’s “Songs of Innocence and Experience,” but that’s the lit professor in me. 

      Regardless, I think it’s both creepy and poor advertising, and I agree with tinwoman’s suggestion that an office setting would have been more appropriate/effective.

    • Cate Blouke

      Glenn, I think you make some great points, and I don’t disagree.  Though, I would counter that the  male’s body goes from pear shaped to V-shaped from left to right.  So although there might not be highlighting on his trousers, his shoulders decidedly broaden.  If she is a sexually aware adolescent, it’s not unreasonable to assume that her imagined seduction would involve looking sexy…

      What I find interesting is that the assumption seems to be (in some of the comments above) that the left-hand column is somehow the “correct” one – that the girl is elementary-school aged.  The whole thing reminds me of William Blake’s “Songs of Innocence and Experience,” but that’s the lit professor in me. 

      Regardless, I think it’s both creepy and poor advertising, and I agree with tinwoman’s suggestion that an office setting would have been more appropriate/effective.

  • Glenn

    Cate, I think you’re off base on this one. Interesting that anyone would assume it’s from the POV of the female, when the character whose body is being objectified is the female’s, not the man’s.

    Look at the images on the right. The girl’s body is highlighted –
    literally, by the lighting depicted – and the man is turned into shadow.  Look at how insubstantial his body is – especially his genital area – it’s almost dimensionless. It’s not about him, it’s about her.

    What makes it uniquely creepy is due to the age difference between the two versions. We’re not seeing two versions of a teenager or coed-age girl, we’re seeing a child transformed into a sexually active adult siren. THAT’s what makes it creepy and pedophilic. A scene between an adult and a child is being re-imagined into a sexual encounter from the point of view of the adult, transforming the child into a sexual object.

    the alternate interpretation of it being the girl’s fantasy is wrong on multiple levels. Is she a sexually aware adolescent or is she an eight year old? Eight year olds may fantasize what it’s like to be “all grown up,” but hardly in such a sexually informed manner – it’s creepy and near criminal to assume that an eight year old would be

    If, alternately she’s a sexually aware adolescent, why would her fantasy involve herself being on display and her male partner as a near-featureless mannikin? Seems to me she would  rather objectify the attractiveness of the man instead of herself. (Also, why depict her alternate self as a child?)

    Oh well. It’s Saturday and I’m stuck at home for Carmageddon, so I’ve nothing better to do.

  • Glenn

    Cate, I think you’re off base on this one. Interesting that anyone would assume it’s from the POV of the female, when the character whose body is being objectified is the female’s, not the man’s.

    Look at the images on the right. The girl’s body is highlighted –
    literally, by the lighting depicted – and the man is turned into shadow.  Look at how insubstantial his body is – especially his genital area – it’s almost dimensionless. It’s not about him, it’s about her.

    What makes it uniquely creepy is due to the age difference between the two versions. We’re not seeing two versions of a teenager or coed-age girl, we’re seeing a child transformed into a sexually active adult siren. THAT’s what makes it creepy and pedophilic. A scene between an adult and a child is being re-imagined into a sexual encounter from the point of view of the adult, transforming the child into a sexual object.

    the alternate interpretation of it being the girl’s fantasy is wrong on multiple levels. Is she a sexually aware adolescent or is she an eight year old? Eight year olds may fantasize what it’s like to be “all grown up,” but hardly in such a sexually informed manner – it’s creepy and near criminal to assume that an eight year old would be

    If, alternately she’s a sexually aware adolescent, why would her fantasy involve herself being on display and her male partner as a near-featureless mannikin? Seems to me she would  rather objectify the attractiveness of the man instead of herself. (Also, why depict her alternate self as a child?)

    Oh well. It’s Saturday and I’m stuck at home for Carmageddon, so I’ve nothing better to do.

  • Max Udargo

    Obviously the ad company that put this together was fully aware of the controversial content, are quite pleased it has stirred up a fuss, and built in the “alternate POV” ambiguity as an escape hatch if things get too intense.  Apparently the escape hatch will work because a narrative about a little girl sexualizing herself and her adult teacher is not a problem for anybody.

    All I know is I’m seeing a lot more skin on the little girl than I am on the teacher, and as a heterosexual male I don’t really care what perspective the ad guy chose, I’m responding to the sexy, half-naked girl.  That’s my perspective.  And the ad guy knows his escape hatch isn’t going to change that.

  • Max Udargo

    Obviously the ad company that put this together was fully aware of the controversial content, are quite pleased it has stirred up a fuss, and built in the “alternate POV” ambiguity as an escape hatch if things get too intense.  Apparently the escape hatch will work because a narrative about a little girl sexualizing herself and her adult teacher is not a problem for anybody.

    All I know is I’m seeing a lot more skin on the little girl than I am on the teacher, and as a heterosexual male I don’t really care what perspective the ad guy chose, I’m responding to the sexy, half-naked girl.  That’s my perspective.  And the ad guy knows his escape hatch isn’t going to change that.

  • tinwoman

    oh, and Bag–that “unattractive degree of slobber”—that’s the “apple juice”, if you follow my meaning.  It’s a little over the top for a car ad, but I guess we’ve come a ways since suggestive depictions of cunnilungus were taboo.

    • http://www.bagnewsnotes.com Michael Shaw

      Credit where credit is due: The author of the post is Bag contributor, Cate Blouke.  She’s a U of Texas doctoral student, Austin arts critic, and blogger. Her research interests span theatrical performance to popular culture, generally investigating the function and ethics of humor. She primarily writes for viz., the UT Austin Visual Culture blog. 

  • Peg

    Doesn’t matter if he said or she said, what matters is selling something using any reference to the sexy-ness of a relationship between an elementary school student and a teacher. 

  • http://profiles.google.com/fatunga robert e

    tinwoman, I don’t know how I missed the “apple juice” but you’re absolutely right. There are certainly graphical pointers toward that interpretation. But doesn’t that bolster the idea that it’s a female, rather than male, fantasy?

    It also seems to me that women took ownership of the sexy schoolgirl meme back in the 90’s, most visibly via Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Britney Spears’ infamous debut persona. Spears grabbed it so emphatically, in fact, that I think she still owns it.

    Frankly, I think the conflation of the two sides as reality and interpretation is a stretch, if an understandable one–more a projection of our (American) hyper-titillated sexual squeamishness than anything else. Try reading the ad as probably intended–one scene is a tame interaction between a teacher and child, the other scene is an erotic cliche with sexually mature actors. They don’t necessarily have anything to do with each other beyond similar setting and contrasting “heat”. Unless, of course, one wants them to.

    • Alice Paul FC

      robert e, just because Hollywood and record labels cast young women as sexy schoolgirls does not mean that women have taken ownership of the meme–”hit me baby one more time” is hardly a feminist mantra (side note: Buffy and Britney don’t belong in the same category. As media texts go, Buffy the tv series interrogated female power in a much more complex way than any Britney video). Regarding the ad, even if you examine the two sides as independent texts, consider how femininity and masculinity are being portrayed in both narratives–men are experts and authority figures. Women (and girls) are subordinates, compliant and eager to please. It’s the same old boring sexist story and, yes, it will probably sell a few cars. For advertising professionals to herald this as “original” is laughable.  Finally, Bag readers should care about the second story because, despite our “hyper-titillated sexual squeamishness,” women candidates are increasingly being  sexualized in exactly this way–from Larry Flint’s “Nailin’ Paylin” to the anti-Hahn video in the current California congressional campaign.  

    • tinwoman

      Robert, I’d agree with you, except the panels are clearly connected by the dialogue–the questions are being asked in the left, and the answers provided on the right–so it’s ridiculous to say they have *nothing* to do with each other–they clearly do, and the girl is the same girl (same tie, headband, red hair).  The question is, is this a man’s gaze or a woman’s?  Despite the apple scene, it’s clearly a male fantasy–the lighting is on her and her curves, the man almost fades out of the picture.

      and as another poster suggested, there’s always a problem with using a child in this sexually suggestive way, always, even if “she” is thinking it (which would not be possible–my kids were not that mature anyway).

  • Anonymous

    The basis of most pedophile fantasy is that the six year old is the one coming on the the perp.

  • Anonymous

    Fear! Fear! Sex! Sex! Children! Children! Fear Sex Children! Fear Sex Children! Blond girl in a dumpster! Blond girl in a dumpster! Make people fear for their children and they will give up all kinds of rights. Americans are propaganda sickened sex and anti-sex maniacs. McMartin! McMartin! Witch Craze! Witch Craze! No mention of McMartin, et Al, No mention of Eve and the Apple temptation theme in the right panels. It’s all sick, sick, sick.

    In the left panels with the true child there is no sexual reference.

    In the right, Eve has reached a bountiful Puberty, we have no idea she is of legal age or not and she is hot for the Teach or she wouldn’t have dressed that way. If you don’t think modern don’t school girls tease and seduce you must have crawled out from under your rock to post your comments.

    None of the commenters asks why her mother let her dress that way.

    None of the commenters observed the positioning of the hands on the desk in the right panels because mostly, you saw, “all you needed to see”, already and knew exactly what to think, and how to judge.

    Very few of you should ever be allowed on a Jury.

    Air conditioning? In the innocent left panel zone, normal AC is fine. The right panels, however are hot enough to need extra AC thus Dual Zone AC.

    I have to go now. I’m late for the slut walk.

    • tinwoman

      exo–stop drinking.  you’ll feel better.

    • Teresa

      What is wrong with you?  No, I mean really, what is your official diagnosis?

  • Violet

    I wonder why we should consider elementary school kid is the depiction of  the real student. It might just be the teacher’s perspective. The student might actually be the teenager whom the teacher is just considering as an innocent kid.

    And why shouldn’t the girl highlight herself as sexually desirable in her fantasy? The right-middle panel with just the teacher shows that it’s the girls perspective. Otherwise, it would be teacher imagining himself eating (why?).

    It seems to me that a high school/teenage student is more likely to need help after class than an elementary school kid.

  • S B Gypsy

    “The right-hand (sexy/hot) column, on the other hand, is his female student’s perception of the scene.  The close-up of the teacher eating the apple (with an unattractive degree of slobber, if you ask me), is what she is imagining – as well as a fantasy, naughty school-girl version of herself.”

    Uh NO, it’s Pedophilia, DUH!  

  • Kk

    http://www.kiamedia.com/secure/corporate062411a.html

    Kia Motors America Statement Regarding 
Inappropriate Advertising Material From Brazil
    IRVINE, Calif., June 24, 2011 – Kia Motors America (KMA) has become aware of an offensive piece of advertising material that was created by an ad agency in Brazil that KMA has no business relationship with and has never worked with. This ad was not created in the U.S. by Kia Motors America or any of its marketing partners and does not reflect the opinions or values of KMA or Kia Motors Corporation. The ad is undoubtedly inappropriate, and on behalf of Kia Motors we apologize to those who have been offended by it. We can guarantee this advertisement has never and will never be used in any form in the United States, and our global headquarters in Seoul, South Korea is addressing the issue with the independent Brazilian distributor.

  • Darkhumour

    Kind of icky but the concept reminds me of one of my favorite horror comic stories from the 70s where one half of the page is the perspective of an man convinced his neighbor’s children are devil worshippers while the other half shows them as innocent little cherubs whiile he’s a horrible deluded cranky old man,

    You’d think that if the right half in this ad was supposed to be from the girl/teen’s point of view that the teacher would be idealized and she wouldn’t fall into some kind of anime / comic book.bim. I already forsee a photoshop remix of this with the intro dialogue of the video ”Let’s Go To The Mall” by Robin Sparkles.

  • http://twitter.com/HubrisSonic HubrisSonic

    either way it’s not a very good ad… why the hell did it win an award?

  • http://twitter.com/HubrisSonic HubrisSonic

    either way it’s not a very good ad… why the hell did it win an award?

  • Mirror

    Oh man oh man.  I had a math teacher when I was 15… Fantasy city for a 15 yo.

  • Teresa

    not grade school age little girls skippy.  But thanks for supporting the pedophile’s argument that little girls want “it” and are ready for “it”.

  • Mirror

    PS.  I think this ad is creepy.  And despite the layout analysis, I think it clearly  focuses on the sexuality of the student from a male viewers (the teacher?) perspective.      And correct me if I’m wrong from a psychological perspective, but isn’t connecting truely young, immature, and innocent minors with highly charged sexual feelings/images on the part of the adult, like this ad does, at the core of the internal life of the pedophile?

  • Mirror

    PS.  I think this ad is creepy.  And despite the layout analysis, I think it clearly  focuses on the sexuality of the student from a male viewers (the teacher?) perspective.      And correct me if I’m wrong from a psychological perspective, but isn’t connecting truely young, immature, and innocent minors with highly charged sexual feelings/images on the part of the adult, like this ad does, at the core of the internal life of the pedophile?

  • tinwoman

    Okay….Cate then.  I just wanted to say that the apple panel increases the squick factor of the ad a LOT more than the suggestively dressed girl.  It makes it disgusting rather than attractive.  Maybe this was intentional?  maybe I’m just old and don’t want to be squicked out by soft core porn unless I’m looking for it.

  • Anonymous

    I must have drawn a little blo…, er…, lubricating oil to have Tinwoman squeaking ad hominem attacks at me.

  • Teresa

    I am sure that your ex didn’t fantasize about her male teachers taking a bite of an apple and the sexual imagery of it being juicy, when she was 10 years old.

    Kia is getting exactly the reaction they wanted.  Now everyone is talking about their crappy add for their crappy cars.  That is why I am leaving this thread and will not give them one more moment of advertising time.

  • Anonymous

    Yours is not a question. It is a passive aggressive ad homonym attack. You have said nothing about what I wrote. If you do not understand, what I wrote you could make real interpretations of what you think I said and I could respond to them. However, it appears the whole thing is way over your sheltered little head in the first place. I also have high confidence that I would be more qualified to tell you what is wrong with you than the converse… If you did ask those questions, and judging from your statements so far, I have high confidence that your questions would revealing about you than my honest and informed answers would reveal about me. 

Recent Comments

Popular Topics

More topics »

Popular Entries


Archives

Recent Entries