B M,

I agree, the appropriate term for this is probably not "porn". I would call it "desparation sleeze", but not porn, necessarily.

I disagree, however, about not buying a bow , even if it fit you perfectly, being the wrong thing to do. The consumer has a choice. They know their money goes to pay the company's bills. IMO, I would not buy the bow knowing the money was in part going to help finance these kinds of ads. I would not want to reward this company for doing something I feel is unethical. There is such a thing as principle and integrity , you know. Or at least with me there is. I wouldn't shoot a Martin if they gave it to me. It's simply a matter of ethics, morals, integrity and PRINCIPLE. Surely you can understand that. Would you buy a product from the guy running an archery shop down the street if you found out he was a rapist? A little extreme, but it gets the idea across. LIke the song says, " you've got to stand for something , or you'll fall for anything".

By the way, if it's all about the bows, as you suggested, and we should be able to ignore the ad, then why have an ad like this to begin with???????
The fact is , as we have both stated, this ad is aimed at hormones, name recognition, shock value, etc. And there are still a lot of advertisers out there that do not stoop to this level, so I should be able to live in my home for a while, anyway.

What would happen if the bow were getting endorsed by Pope & Young, or Don Kisky, Jay gregory or the Drury brothers?? Those guys know there stuff.
That's something that would probably mean something to me, but I'm not falling for the girl-in-heat, especially with the suggestive nature. C'mon Martin, can't you do better than that???? Build a better bow and leave the sleeze to HBO!

Oh well, enough on this thread for me!