The above image is part of a Wieden+Kennedy designed “Hyperdunk print campaign” for Nike, and it’s drummed up quite a bit of controversy. Yesterday Gawker wrote at length about how the ad fits into the homophobic “sports status quo.”
That said, the larger point is that the joke here–as in other campaigns revolving around ALL OF AMERICA’S MOST POPULAR SPORTS–is based on the implacable homophobia of straight jocks. That can’t be denied. So Nike should pull the ads. Or rework them to be friendlier to gay basketball fans, at least.
Meanwhile the W+K blog has reader comments, and some folks weigh in on the issue:
The whole concept is immature and homophobic. Are we still so juvenile and insecure in our sexuality and masculinity that we think these are funny? LAME.
I don’t really see it. Now if the campaign focused on any of the other hundreds of outlandishly gay moments in sports (a quarterback’s hands delicately placed beneath the ass of his bent over center while awaiting a snap, baseball’s dugout buttslaps of approval, or this joyous celebration between two teammates) and declared them to be “ain’t right,” then we’d have a real problem. But this ad’s copy is based on the fact that the player in the image just got dunked on. Dunked on so badly that his opponent’s balls are now at chin level. Gay or straight, I assume no one wants an uninvited sweaty pair in their grill–now if it’s invited, well, that’s another story…
Of course, the NBA has reluctantly become the first major sport to address homosexuality–first there was former player John Amaechi (he’s gay) and then the comments of onetime all-star Tim Hardaway (he “hates” gays)–so the sport is a little sensitive right now. And while I don’t want to condone the blatant homophobia of the “no homo” sports world, it does seem like a bit of a reach to be offended by an ad like this. Thoughts?
has anyone seen the blazers billboard off burnside where on of the blazers hand looks like it is down front of another players shorts? bad photo shopping!! but kinda sexy.
sex and controversy sell… it might be tasteless and homo-erotic-phobic, but it’s works on a couple different levels if we seem to be having a discussion about the image that has been chosen to sell a pair of shoes. When I read this post title, before seeing the image, I thought we were talking about the spelling, and using the word Ain’t…. ha. I wouldn’t buy the shoes, but I’ll probably see this train-wreck of an ad a few times more as the news reports on the casualties. Why pay a magazine to run an ad anymore when you can create one that people will run on their own accord? I wonder if Adbusters will end up “running” this one?
HA!
“t ain’t”
mercury blog = free advert for w+k and nike
Miguelaron + mentioning w+k and nike = another free advert for w+k and nike.
if the person in the air were, instead of a hot physically fit man, a hot physically fit woman, i don’t think the caption would be “that ain’t right.” it’d be something like “awww fuck yeah.”
so yeah, this is homophobic (and my realistic hypothetical is misogynistic). biases against the “other” are sneakier than “whites only” bathrooms these days.
i think the mercury should pull this blog post before nike does because it might be slightly offensive to someone somewhere and it’s free advertising.
HORSE SHIT! This ad has nothing to do with sex. If you see homophobic remarks in this, you are revealing your own issues and/or insecurities and you probably don’t know Horse Shit about basketball in the first place. This ad is about being dunked on, which “ain’t right”. During that process you get an uninvited sweaty ass in the face from a stranger. I don’t care who you are or what you do in the bedroom, that too “ain’t right”. All that being said, This ad sucks anyway. W+K makes way too much money to give us Horse Shit like this. THAT is what “ain’t right”!
Me mentioning Steve mentioning Miguelaron + mentioning w+k and nike = another free advert for w+k and nike
I think the whole notion of “that ain’t right” implicitly suggests that it isn’t “natural” for this situation to happen. Even if you choose to read it as some sort of a, “it ain’t right that this one basketballer is so much better than you that he’s dunking in your face,” well, even that connotation, stripped of its obvious homophobia, still has a bit of aggression and domination/submission themes tied into a traditional Western definition masculinity. But then again, good luck escaping that.
But a “hot physically fit woman” dunking on a guy? Now THAT ain’t right.
No, what’s really the tragedy here is that I find myself agreeing with Ezra .
am, Good luck escaping domination and agression in competitive sports? Is that what you are saying? Isn’t domination (winning) the whole point of being competitive? Wouldn’t that naturally be translated into advertsing for gear needed to participate in competitive sports?
Maybe the ad isn’t clear enough for you. It’s not for herpe medication. It’s for basketball shoes.
Absolute Horse Shit Guy ftw
I know. Rough morning. sorry.
Gay or not, uninvited groin to the face mid sports competition seems that it would be unpleasant. Am I crazy? I don’t see anything homophobic about this at all.
Not funny. Next!
Groin in the face is the only reason TO play basketball. That’s right.
Absolute Horse Shit Guy ftw volume two!
And like Lord Chico said, gay or not, would you really want some dudes sweaty ass/junk in your face? Especially in the midst of a competitive game?
Come on people, use your liberal arts degrees for something a little more useful. You could find fault and hidden meaning in a effin’ STOP sign if you had enough time on your hands.
Are any of the people who’ve commented on this story queer?
I am, and though I rarely see homophobia where others might, this ad is steeped in it. The ad might get pulled, but it’s the tip of the iceberg in major US sports (and certainly their ad campaigns).
this ad is gay