Showing posts with label Beckham. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Beckham. Show all posts

Thursday, 3 July 2008

BECKS UNVEILED!

Oh... Alright then!

Here you are...



An, in case you missed the story, apparently Beck's Mum was not amused at her son posing in his skivvies and rang him up in order - if you'll pardon the pun - to tear a strip off him!


By the way, I saw this somewhere on the web the other day --- do you think it's the Beckhams' doormat...?


I mean, it can't be Signor Armani's or it would say something like:

BELLO
BIANCHERIA



Wednesday, 2 July 2008

UNVEILING BECKS

One of my regular reader-correspondents cheekily asked the other day when I was going to blog the latest David Beckham posters for Georgio Armani... I won't reveal the identity of this lascivious individual, but suffice it to say it was not the Duchess!

Anyway, since it is always my aim to satisfy my readers' desires, here is one of those posters being unveiled at Macy's, Union Sqaure, San Francisco...



OK? Satisfied now?

Friday, 18 January 2008

TALKING PANTS

Shortly before Christmas, I blogged this picture of David Beckham showing off (among other things) his new Georgio Armani underpants that seemed to win general approval from even the harshest critics among my readers: viz Gill and her friend, The Duchess.

Evidently, this readership was not alone: following the launch of this campaign, the London store, Selfridges, reported a 30% rise in sales of Armani briefs - though whether purchasers achieved the same level of 'rise' as Mr Beckham is not reported!

Armani will doubtless be hoping for a new boost from the latest picture of Becks in his dacks...


And the football-model (who clearly knows which side his buns are buttered) is playing a particularly smart game by acknowledging that he has probably as many gay admirers as female ones, recently telling a BBC Radio 2 interviewer:

I'm very honored to have the tag of gay icon. Maybe it's things like [the fact] I like to look after myself, I like to look smart and presentable most of the time.

I always liked to look good, even when I was a little kid. I was given the option when I was a page boy once of either wearing a suit or wearing knickerbockers and long socks and ballet shoes - and I chose the ballet shoes and knickerbockers. It was a little bit strange at the time and my dad gave me a bit of stick - but I was happy.

Oh, David, darling, pleeeeease!

Meanwhile, here's an alternative approach to underwear advertising from McAlson, makers of 'The World's Most Comfortable Boxer Shorts'...

Wednesday, 26 July 2006

AN OUTING FOR AD-MEN

In case you haven’t noticed there are some pretty gay 'goings-on' going-on in the advertising world - particularly when it comes to the marketing of men's underwear.

There was a time - back in the halcyon, post-war days when Marks & Spencer weren't always in financial trouble and the women folk did the shopping, when it was said that wives and mothers bought men their underwear --- and mostly from M&S.

Today that seems considerably less likely. For example a recent news story --- sorry, item of gossip --- revealed that even the former captain of the England football team, David Beckham, buys his own knickers...

Allegedly, David spends £1000 a month on several dozen pairs of Calvin Klein underpants and only ever wears them once before throwing them away --- but, hey, so what? Maybe Victoria simply can't get the hang of how the washing machine works...

Anyway, let's just suppose, for the purpose of this argument, that the majority of customers who currently shop for male underwear are, in fact, male.

My question is: 'In what direction does their needle point when it comes to sexual orienteering?'

I am, of course, well aware that many manufacturers are chasing the highly lucrative ‘pink pound’, but surely - even based on the most generously calculated statistics - the gay community can’t be single-handedly keeping these companies in business?

Obviously not...

Then why are so many of them going in for such patently homoerotic advertising?

Psychologists may tell me that Abercrombie & Fitch’s use of virtually nude men to sell clothes is really about creating an illusion in the mind of the would-be purchaser that if he buys some new A&F gear he’ll also get a newly pepped-up body to go with it…

But the gay swishy-ness of it all is decidedly puzzling and A&F are not alone...

Plenty of other companies seem to be consciously concerning themselves with the extent to which their product placement is 'in' or 'out' of the closet…

Take the case of Wax brand who are so anxiously hedging their bets that they ran - and then removed - this curiously ambiguous image from their website…


Others seem perfectly glad to be (possibly) gay...

In the case of C-in-2, one is left wondering what on earth they were thinking of when they came up with their current campaign showing a brace of law-enforcement officers catching a couple of C-in-2-wearers, literally, with their pants down…


Obviously we're into fantasy time here, but precisely whose fantasies are being catered for?

One might ask the same of a raft of advertisements that have surfaced in what might be called ‘The post-Brokeback Mountain era’.

Cowboy imagery is now most definitely ‘in’ - and with decidedly gay undertones; and no one is more up for this than Ginch Gonch, as their current advertising campaign reveals…


It's no good asking me, of course, but maybe amongst the chaps in Straightworld, this kind of soft gay imagery implies nothing more than a bit of youthful fun and frolic, a sense of the freedom that existed in the days before relationships, mortgages and babies: an opportunity - in the imagination, at least - to be able to rustle a few bulls and horse-around with the fellas in a ‘macho male-bonding (without having to going quite as far as those two dudes in the movie) kind-of-way'.

But then, maybe it’s not such a new concept after all: witness the undercover activities of these all-American guys from the 1930’s…


Now, I guess that, seventy years ago, the slogan:'And now the Shorts with the Seamless Crotch go Gay! (BUT NOT TOO GAY)' scarcely raised a single eyebrow, but what about this one...?


Are you seriously telling me that the lads depicted - ostensibly trying to see if they can tear that 'NO-TARE FLY' - weren't really flirting with a decorous form of the same forbidden-fruit-picking fantasy currently being encouraged by so many of today's advertisers?