Counterpoint.

First of all, does anybody know what blog means? I really dislike that term. Shouldn't it be like, "e-log," or something?

Anyhow, onto Monday's discussion.

To me, the argument made about the Tommy Girl advertisement seemed just a bit overly assuming, and also underestimated the intelligence of whoever made it.

Saying, "Tommy is 'in there,'" really makes little sense. What, are they trying to sell a product for women to men? This ad is not going to appeal to men, A: because it is a woman's product, and B: because if they are trying convince men that buying this perfume for a girl will help them get to that location where the Tommy logo is placed, men are going to be insulted by the fact that the advertisers think they could make them buy the product that easily. I really don't believe they're out to insult their consumer's intelligence. I also doubt the advertisement is aimed at lesbians, and therefore believe that they are not using sex appeal to sell this product.

This woman is intended to look confident enough, and, as the ad says, independent enough to sit on a stool alone in a diner wearing whatever she feels ok wearing with a smile that grabs us by the throat and strangles us like the perfume she might be wearing and screams, "I am enjoying life thanks to Tommy Girl!" She looks friendly, charismatic, and confident, and that is the real advertising scheme in this particular ad, my friends.