Would it make any difference if it was said the ad depicted a "gang bang" rather than a "gang rape"?

[LoZoccolo]

Poll question: Would it make any difference if it was said the ad depicted a "gang bang" rather than a "gang rape"?

I remember this DUer who used to be on here who was notable for his involvement amongst people pursuing alternate sexual paths and with sexworkers' rights, and he posted that he knew of someone doing a creative number on fundraising for victims of Hurricane Katrina in that it was a woman who was charging a $1000 donation for each of 10 participants in a "gang bang" to help those in need. Although I think that's kind-of gross (and kind of a rip-off to nine of the donators), it seemed to be viewed as a positive contribution by the initiator and the person who posted about it here. So would your perception change if the people who designed the ad stated it was a "gang bang" in no uncertain terms?

I apologize for the poor grammar as I am recovering from a migraine and my verbal capabilities are slightly off in that I really don't feel like concentrating on sentence structure when I'm this shot. I rarely get these headaches; I think it has something to do with eating beef jerky with MSG for breakfast on an empty stomach, though I don't think they really know that.

[lvx35]

1. Gang bang means gang rape in some contexts, but...

I've heard it used this way related to gangs and gang initiation. But in the traditional sex sense, polyamorous sex would be no more offensive to me than normal sex. rape is definately a different level than ANY consensual act, no matter how weird the consensual act seems.

[Greyskye]

2. Bingo.

Thank you.

[bigwillq]

3. I 'take' the ad as a gang bang

that's just how I see it.

We don't know either way if it's a rape or a gang bang (and in the good sense of gang bang).

So, I take it as a gang bang, that she will hopefully enjoy and not as a violent ad.

I can respect those who disagree, this is just how I see it.

[muriel_volestrangler]

4. Do you mean if it said, on the ad in large letters "this depicts consensual sex"?

Perhaps then, but somehow I suspect the advertisers would think that spoils their artwork.

If the designers just stated it in an interview - no, that wouldn't make any difference. It's the initial impression that counts, and the initial impression in the ad is 'forced sex', ie rape.

If it were a video, and what led up to this point made it clear it was consensual, then it would be OK.

[Buzz Clik]

5. Good gawd.

For some reason, being a voyeur of this scene -- gang bang or gang rape -- does not appeal to me. I don't recall what the hell it was they were selling. I simply find the ad immediately repulsive.

[BlooInBloo]

6. Only if consent counts as a "difference".

[Matariki]

7. If there was *anything* that indicated consensual activity

instead of vacant stares, a creepy guy in sunglasses, and the guy on the right looks like he's going to spit on the woman - then yeah, it would make a difference. It might even be hot.

[gravity]

8. I don't think the ad depicts either

It does suggests sexual dominance, but it's different than the act of rape.

[lvx35]

10. That's kind of how I feel about it.

It just looks dumb to me, all the body language and facial expressions doesn't portray distress to me on the part of the female. I can look at this image and see alternatively a nymphomanic woman who tried to ravage the construction workers so Donnie had to to hold her down, as hot and sweaty as he was:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17490782/site/newsweek/

[JackBeck]

9. Isn't one locked OP poll enough for today?

Or are you going for a record?

[Maven]

11. I like cupcakes.

Maybe I'll run down to Magnolia and get some.

[Fenris]

12. Locking.

You have pretty much reposted what we have already locked. Stop it.