So I heard about this campaign, and it's all over the internet, seems to be started by Ashton Kutcher or something. Chose this one to use as an example: http://storage.canoe.ca/v1/dynamic_resize/sws_path/suns-prod-images/1297339402999_ORIGINAL.jpg?size=650x

I really don't know where to begin with the numerous problems I see in this. First off, it's the "real man" bullshit o begin with. I hate it. Other examples of this shit:

http://www.ypsilon2.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/realmen.jpg

http://www.sportsbully.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Picture-11.png

I really don't get this campaign at all. Humans, men, women, we come with all attributes. Some more moral or capable than others. But they're all 'real'. Someone isn't a fake man, a fake woman, a fake human being, for merit of lacking a specific skill or inclination, for merit of doing or not doing a certain deed. It's simply a gender.

Now one problem here is, from what I read, Ashton is doing this to try and raise funds to combat slavery or something like that. In this case when the work slaves are put to is sex.

Even viewing the slogan in its initial context, it's still obviously bad, because "moral" should be used instead of "real", and "people" should be used in lieu of "men" and "girls". Even then, I find it a bit ambiguous. Sure, view it as immoral if someone is kidnapped, enslaved against their will, and bought that way, but what if someone chooses of their own free will to sell themself? Especially if it's more of a temporary rental and not a lifetime sale.

That brings me to my next point: the chose of imagery in the poster. It shows a girl leaning into a car. A street prostitute. This should not be the image chosen to represent sexual slavery. I realize a lot of girls who do this are in desperate situations, and sometimes coerced into doing this for violent pimps, but it is really not the ideal image, because it's an ambiguous image.

Not every street prostitute is a slave, and that's a simple fact. "Buy" is misleading because you're really just renting their time, renting occupancy within an orifice or three, purchasing temporary services. I would even wager the majority (be it slim or vast) of street prostitutes are not in a situation that would objectively be considered slavery.

Another problem with the image is the promoting of "ViolenceAgainstWomen" association. While violence is often linked to slavery, since it isn't necessarily slavery to sell sex via car window, implying that Johns are 'violent' for purchasing sexual occupancy/services for a period of time from street prostitutes is just fucking misleading.

So yeah.