Swamp Dawg & Co. - which is more offensive to you ? Bible thumping or the Martin Ad ??

[stealthycat]

I'll tell you NEITHER is offensive, both use beautiful women to promote their products, not unlike using Will Primos or Chuck Adams or a WR elk to "grab" your attention to the product thats being sold.

I'll also tell you that the 3 Rivers ad woman is much more beautiful than the Martin woman is, it "grabs" my attention much quicker. I do not think nasty thoughts nor sexual thoughts, I simply see an ad with a beautiful woman holding a bow.

Neither ad is offensive. If you'd like, I can post pictures of my wife's latest Victoria Secret magazine ? Heck, even this morning in the Sunday newspaper there were lingerie ads that showed 90% of the womans body - ya'll ARE calling and writing your newspapers, right ?

[Vapodog]

Those are really nice bows!!!.....Great curves!!!!

[PAhunter86]

Those are really nice bows!!!.....Great curves!!!!

Are you sure your talking about the bows[:-]

[J in GB]

The woman in the two new Marin adds in incredible.

[121553]

Stealth, How could you put such porn on here, don't you know kids will see that? Bobby

[Swamp Dawg]

this may suprise ya'll, but these ads are not offensive to me. You either have not seen the other Martin ad or don't know what I was talking about. The back cover of Bowhunter had a different pic. It was a woman bent over forwards looking back as if she was ready to get it from the back side. That is the only thing I had a problem with.

[driftrider]

[color=#FF0000}]OH MY GOD!![/color]

Stealthy! How COULD you post such terrible pictures on this FAMILY website! You may have just created another batch of wife-beating, child molesting, rapists! You'll most certainly burn in hell for this travesty! Have you no SHAME, sir! [:@][:'(]

That 3Rivers girl is pretty good looking.

I still want to see the Martin ad that Swamp Dawg is referring to.

Mike

[logs]

I do not find either one offensive but if someone feels that it is not what they see as the way to get THEIR attention for a product they have all the right to voice their opinion.
Ever since that foolishness at the Superbowl half time and people voicing their objection to it this has become an issue here on the forum and elsewhere.
Those that disagreed with the objectors, some of them, started critizing others opinion and referring to them as prudish or of Amish mentality. I find that interesting on a forum where so many scream about rights, freedom of speach etc.
I think it is a good thing for individuals to have a moral compass. One that works. Now maybe theirs is different than mine but that does not reduce their right to voice their opinion.
Question why they feel or believe that way so as to gain insight into other ways of thinking but to be so closed mind to others standards, in particular more rigid standards is an indicator of their limitations. They lack respect for those who seek a differnt value system.
Unless one is intruding on anothers way of life or freedoms they have every right to see and do things differently.

[BOWFANATIC]

Well put logs!

Swamp Dawg & Co. - which is more offensive?

Asking a question and then answering yourself....why ask?

I'll tell you NEITHER is offensive, both use beautiful women to promote their products, not unlike using Will Primos or Chuck Adams or a WR elk to "grab" your attention to the product thats being sold.

It IS "unlike using Will Primos or Chuck Adams or a WR elk to grab your attention"! You see , all the above mentioned fit quite well with the common denominator...HUNTING or hunting equipment!

If I feel the need to look at something sexy in a magazine I'll pick up a smut mag and keep it hidden from my children. I'm not saying I feel that the two pics you posted are smut , but it always starts somewhere doesn't it. When I was a kid my dad would take me and my older brother to "rasslin" matches to see guys like the Crusher and Nick Bockwinkle. Nowadays I wouldn't dream of taking my kids to a wrestling match and I think you know why.

Your right , sex is used in almost all advertising. Some like it , some dont. Up until now hunting magazines was one place you didn't have to worry about your child picking one up and seeing something that you'd expect them to see in a Victoria Secret catalogue.

I'm having a hard time figuring out why it bothers you (Stealthy) so much that some folks dont want this type of advertizing taking over the hunting industry. If you like looking at provocative pics of women so much then pic up a magazine where the common denominator is sexy women!

[Swamp Dawg]

I'm having a hard time figuring out why it bothers you (Stealthy) so much that some folks dont want this type of advertizing taking over the hunting industry. If you like looking at provocative pics of women so much then pic up a magazine where the common denominator is sexy women!

Well put, bowfanatic. While these two pictures are not overly offensive, it is just a starting point. It's kind of like how HOTROD magazine or others started out. When I was a teenage kid about 15 years ago, I remember subscribing to Hotrod. Never any woman in seductive poses or half naked. Now, every cover has a woman wearing a bikini or less. Just about all car related magazines have followed suit. I felt like if I didn't let Martin archery know that this is unacceptable to me, it will only get worse. The sad thing is that it probably will get worse regardless of what I say to them.