EMU Australia drops trousers and moons potential customers worldwide
So I’m paging through my Elle magazine and suddenly I think “What was that??”. Flipping back I am presented with this:
An advertisement for Emu Australia Footwear (Boots). It is the Emu Outback Lo Boot. But really, what are you looking at? The boot blends in with the landscape, just as the woman’s skin colour does. Yes, indeed, this advert features a big juicy arse in white knickers. Which has little if nothing to do with boots.
And I see this JUST when I was growing quite fond of the EMU Australia brand, having sussed it out and finding it largely comparable in product and quality to UGG Australia. NOW I’m irritated. Does Emu really need attention this much? Isn’t this rather cheap? Are we to believe women just wear pants in the outback? Or perhaps… Am I overreacting?
Weigh in and tell me
Ugh!
For Miss. H.
I think the image as a whole is obviously a “lifestyle” ad rather than merely selling boots with asses. There is a lot more imagery there to me.
Especially in a non-Aussie magazine the whole scene evokes a feeling of isolation, individualism, Australia (the “skyline” and red dust), and yes sex. But if she were wearing jeans of some other more appropriate outfit for the “outback” it would likely detract from the boots.
The image draws the eye, obviously to her butt and then straight down to the boots. While they are a small portion of the image their positioning really takes advantage of the compositional “rule of thirds.” It’s actually quite an excellent image in general.
I do not think the same theme would work particularly well in a video ad. (NOt to say I don’t appreciate a nice looking butt… but there’s is more to see here.)
These boots will give you a wedgie.
I’m no longer surprised by novel ways advertisers use sexualized images to sell their products. This is a rather crude and off-putting example.
I think this woman has very beautiful legs and the ad would have accomplished the same effect if she was wearing a pair of hiking shorts.