lesday • June 2,1998
The Battalion
PINION
\d fads
lexist advertising makes no parallel to the actual product being marketed
jij
Alison
Lackey
columnist
■ oy protein, jasmine extract, citric acid, water ... do
• these ingredients exude an orgasmic experience?
■ OK, so maybe some people get a nice tingly.
Bn feeling in their scalp but
■s all.
■hese advertisements for
jrfcal shampoos, conditioners
id body wash are sexist. The
Hthe products are environ-
Btally sound and cruelty-
■ is truly something to coo
■ have an orgasm over —
ell maybe.
■he bright bubbly shampoo
IBs are frowning down at these
IBst attempts to cheapen
Hnen and their sexuality. OK,
He company is going to adver-
Hone gender extreme of sexual exploitation, then be
|ir about it. People deserve to see a guy in a tool shed,
[o] belt in place, hmmming, aughhhing, and
wesyesing with a drill in his hand.
J And just what is he drilling? He is drilling his way
BBiore soft and silky curls with lustrous shine; that
TjOuld at least breathe an air of equality in the ad
impnign. Undoubtedly, several men use these prod-
i but everyone knows a man hasn't been por-
IHed shampooing in an airplane lavatory broadcast-
■flhis very vocal, very enthused orgasm over the
[|i|ie's intercom.
B)r, how about the ad with the woman driving out
ito the west, pulling over to the side of the road to
BBwer with an herbal body wash? No man has been
TBicted pulling over for a spur-of-the-moment orgas-
liq desert shower.
ither way, this commercial is stupidity in its
bt striking form. One would almost wish the ac-
|sin the ad would scrape her leg on the rocks,
] on the orgasmic oh — I mean organic bubbles.
bust her a-- on a crop of baby cacti, get in the car
and drive to New Jersey.
Women and men have repeatedly indulged them
selves to give their hair various foofs and carefully un
tangled tresses. An abundant demand for these prod
ucts exists. And it is understandable that ad
campaigns need to be truly unique to catch the con
sumer. This, however, is not unique. Sexuality always
has been an agent of advertising. Before and ever since
beer commercials starred girls ornamenting the arms
of beer-guzzling yahoos, have we seen this link to sex
uality in advertisement.
Sex sells, however, herbal hygiene advertisements
are a moronic approach to product appeal. Sex-and-
beer, shampoo-and-sex? TV clickers all over the
world should move their pinkies in unison to better
TV commercials. Speaking for females, we are not a
bunch of idiots who need some male marketing
guru's sexist approach to buy shampoo. Women nev
er have bought shampoo based on its guarantee of
sexual gratification.
Truly, the commercials are dumber than a box of
rocks. The product primarily targets women because
women are perhaps more often concerned about the
particulars of shampoo shopping.
However, why attach sexuality to the grocery
store? May 1 have some cherry tomatoes with that or
gasm? Pathetic. That is such an incredible insult.
Women are in tune with their sexuality in their own
ways. There is no need for the sound of soft porn to
convince a woman to buy jasmine and mountain
spring water conditioner. If it's good shampoo, then
great, get happy and go buy a case. Get that good ol'
organic experience.
But, remember advertisers, you're barking up the
wrong shampoo bottle with these commercials.
Alison Lackey is a junior English major.
1 1 1 11 "liyl.railSSK"""?
1
ill
’——
Americans take responsibility for fires in Mexico
M
e have all heard and
seen the constant bar
rage of warnings of
effects of smoking and sec-
-hand smoke from our sur-
ion general, various medical
Bfessionals and even our par-
Bs. But now there is a new
Bard to our health: second-
Bntry smoke.
■Although there are those
woBv avoidable hazards we
'avitBl choose to partake in and i —
owivnn enjoy, this is one most
el'fexans will steer clear of and would like to see
realxtinguished.
,bti«The fires of Mexico are still ablaze and are show-
B no signs of letting up soon.
■ So far there have been an estimated 12,000 fires,
|d 50 people have died as a result.
Experts have predicted an average of 300 new
1 g 1
Richard
Paddack
columnist
fires a day. Once again, the United States, has decid
ed to lend a helping hand with over $5 million to
fund the fire-fighting efforts. Why our government
feels it needs to clean up everyone else's mess is un
certain, especially in this instance.
For starters, the fires in Mexico are not a result of
the infamous El Nino, nor were they started by the
backfire of some old produce truck on a farm-to-
market road. The fact of the matter is the Mexican
government instigated a majority of the blazes that
are polluting Texas skies.
With the dwindling economy in Mexico, the gov
ernment felt the need to produce more. Therefore,
the Mexican government is subsidizing its farmers
to clear their unused lands to start production.
Apparently, the most efficient means of clearing
land for farming is with a match and a gallon of
diesel. The end result are the landscapes of fires
Americans are helping to fight and fund with their
tax dollars.
But, certainly the Mexican government was fully
aware of and had thoroughly thought out the conse
quences of their plan to bring in a few more dollars.
Why should Americans help a country that obvi
ously cannot and will not learn from its mistakes.
Americans live in a country with some of the world's
most stringent pollution policies. Why? Because they
value the air they breathe and the water they drink.
They even enjoy camping once in while in one of our
many heavily-wooded state or national parks.
Americans are told where to put our trash and
how to properly dispose of their hazardous chemi
cals. They even pay hundreds of dollars more for
their cars to ensure their emissions systems are up to
par. These are just a few of the rules Americans
choose to follow in order to further their existence
and that of their planet. The reason why their fish
have only one head and their cattle still have fields
to graze upon is because Americans are all aware of
the effects of pollution on our earth, and they care
about the earth.
Mexico, on the other hand, whose ozone levels
are twice the amount they should be, has yet to see
the bigger picture. While their government is wor
rying about how to increase the wealth of their econ
omy, they are, be it inadvertently or not, diminishing
the health of their economy. It was not until days af
ter the smog began to blanket their horizon that they
informed the citizens to halt all modes of motor
transportation. Today, almost two weeks later, only
about 40 percent of their automobiles have heeded
this warning.
Despite all the United States has done and tried to
do for Mexico, they still went behind our backs and
attempted to take the upper hand. But, what hap
pened? They got burned.
After all the fires are out, and the United States
has signed their last check, American fire fighters
can finally come home, the treasury department can
tack on another $5 million to the debt, and Mexico
will start planting.
Richard Paddack is a junior journalism major.
LP0K Know
aged aup,
TIRED POlT,
IS LOOKI^l
Clinton scandals: fact or fiction?
HER HUSBtMD Bob's
TAKING-VIAGRA;
MAIL CALL
The following is a letter to Maj. Gen.
IT. (Ted) Hopgood Jr., Corps of Cadets
Mmmdcmt.
Mr. Hopgood:
hi Please explain why you establish
tW iksto abolish the display of the
a gof the Confederacy, part of our
Texas culture and heritage. I can
claim a grandfather who was a com
bat veteran of the Texas Brigade of
the Army of the Tennessee of the
Confederate Army.
I am proud of my grandfather.,
and 1 am proud of the 60,000 to
93,000 black Confederate soldiers
who fought for the Confederacy.
I do not understand why you at
tempt to eliminate one of the six
flags over Texas. I do not understand
why you discriminate against Texas
heritage and culture, while you al
low symbols of other heritages and
culture, Cinco de Mayo, for instance.
Diversity is not divisive.
What is happening to "old
army"? I am a former student and
Corps bugler.
I hope cooler heads and common
sense will prevail in this conflict.
Seldon B. Graham Jr.
Class of'47
The Battalion encourages letters to the
editor. Letters must be 300 words or less
and include the author’s name, class and
phone number.
The opinion editor reserves the right to
edit letters for lengtlt, styie, and accuracy.
Letters may be submitted in person at 013
Reed McDonald with a valid student ID. Let
ters may also be mailed to:
The Battalion - Mail Call
013 Reed McDonald
Texas A&M University
College Station, TX
77843-1111
Campus Mail: 1.11,1
Fax: (409) 845-2647
E-mail: batt@unix.tamu.edu
oes
Nathan
BoucheR
columnist
any-
one
still believe
in a "vast
right-wing
conspiracy"?
Well, they
should.
Our
much-ma
ligned Presi
dent Clinton
is the target
of an enormous effort on the part
of Republicans to defame and
smear his name.
He has done nothing wrong.
All of the women who have re
ported scandals — Flowers,
Jones, Wiley and God knows
who else — are tramps.
Not only are they tramps, they
are pawns of the Republican par
ty to boot. They wanted to see
what he really had to offer, so the
president obliged. Is that so
wrong?
And this Filegate crap, what is
that? Some Republican operative
left over from Watergate broke
into the White House and put
those files there.
How else can it be explained
how hundreds of secret FBI files
on key players in the Republican
party, filled with personal infor
mation, could wind up in the
White House?
And remember that guy who
testified to the Senate that the
whole thing was all his fault?
You know, the one who got a job
at the White House but didn't re
member who hired him, and no
one in the administration remem
bered hiring him — he is proba
bly the guy who the Republicans
hired to do the job.
Then there is the campaign
funding fiasco. Again, this is part
of the vast right wing conspiracy
that is eating away at the heart of
a great president.
So what if a Chinese-Ameri-
can businessman with strong ties
to communist China's govern
ment donates hundreds of thou
sands of dollars to the Democrat
ic National Committee? Who
cares if his business partner was
the daughter of a general in the
communist Chinese military?
Can't every one of us donate
large sums of money to the party
of our choice in an election year
without coming under suspicion
of "high crimes and misde
meanors?"
Maybe it was discovered that
shortly after the money was do
nated the communist Chinese
government got possession —
again, no one seems to know
how — of top secret satellite
parts, but is that something to
make such a big deal over?
White House lawyers did
claim in documents filed in Fed
eral District Court that "the pos
sibility of congressional impeach
ment proceedings [were] a
justification for his claim of exec
utive privilege."
The lawyers argue "he need
ed candid, private advice from
his aides about how to counter
any effort to remove him from
office," but that doesn't neces
sarily mean they think that will
happen.
In fact. Judge Norma Hol
loway Johnson at first ruled in
favor of president Clinton's at
tempt at invoking executive
privilege. She only changed her
mind when independent counsel
Kenneth Starr, showed her all
the evidence he had against
Clinton, as if he could have any
thing bad on Saint Bill. The guy
is a national hero, even if he did
dodge the draft.
I believe in Bill. 1 believe him
when he says he never inhaled. I
believe him when he says he did
n't show himself to Paula Jones. I
believe him when he says he did
n't knowingly accept or solicit il
legal campaign contributions
from foreign governments.
I believe him when he says
those FBI files got there by mis
take.
I believed him when he said
those subpoenaed papers of
Hillary's were lost, even after
they were found in the White
House residential quarters.
I believe he is truly looking
out for the constitution when in- •
vokes executive privilege.
I believe there is a national se- '
curity interest in not making Sid- .
ney Blumenthal and Bruce Lind- '
sey testify about what they know
about the president's sex life.
I believe there was a conspira
cy to kill John F. Kennedy, Elvis
lives in a trailer park in North
Carolina and jazz is the music of
the future.
But that's just my opinion — 1
could be wrong.
Nathan Boucher is a senior
political science major.