Meetzorp

Because bicycling has become such a thing lately, bicycling magazines have been popping out like mushrooms after a rainstorm. One of the many new players on the field is a magazine called Cog. It plays to the hipster/fixed-gear/polo/freestyle crowds and features a lot of advertising for products which purport a certain amount of lifestyle cachet along with whatever intended functions they may have. It is actually pretty interesting for a bike mag: they’ve got some good writers and photographers and write in-depth articles, not just little blurbs to pimp a product. Actual stories and interviews! It is a little like old-school Dirt Rag, ‘cept not centered around mountain biking.

I’ll check out bike magz once in a while, but I don’t usually dig them. On the whole, they’re all about pushing the latest-and-maybe-greatest gear, and I’m not a fan of gear-gab. Each panders to a niche: road, mtb, fixie, ‘cross, etc. They tend to be laser focused on their genre, which can be monotonous to someone who doesn’t really fall into any of the categories. And saints preserve me from any publication that tries to cater to the “utility cyclist.” There is little more tedious than discussions about bicycle safety, advocacy, and how best to clean up once you get to work. Fenders, pannier, lights, wet-wipes, good boots and a balaclava in the winter. Ride with traffic, stop for lights, signal your intentions. We all know the drill, and if you don’t, it ain’t that hard to figure out. Bleh.

So, it’s established that I’m basically a grumpy bitch about bike shit. I don’t read the magazines, I don’t participate in the online discussions, hell, I don’t read them in order to preserve my tenuous grasp on sanity.

So, in an uncharacteristic swan dive into the madness that is bicycling media, I took it upon myself to look at a back issue of Cog over at a friend’s place the other day, and guess what I saw in a Knog ad?

A fucking penis is what I saw.

Twice. Some random dude’s cock and balls all sitting festooned merrily across the end of his saddle as he perches nakedly on his bike. In one shot he appeared to be mesmerized by his penis, as if he had fallen under its hypnotic one-eyed gaze.

For those who might have the misfortune to be reading my blog at work, I’m only adding a scan of this picture as a link, and you can click on the picture once you get there, if you want the large version *shudder*

Now here’s the thing about Knog. Knog is an Australian bicycle accessories company, and I think a lot of the stuff they make is actually pretty neat, but I boycott them because their advertising is so sexually objectifying and brain-thumpingly stupid. Half the time, a bike isn’t even readily apparent in the ad. If you looked at the penis ad linked above, would you guess it was an advertisement for bike stuff? No, you would probably think it was an advertisement for naked homoerotic camping adventures, wouldn’t you?

They had an ad campaign a couple of years ago for their Frog lights, which are little rubber blinky lights you can affix to your handlebars, seat-tube, or wherever else you feel is a good place for an LED “be-seen” light. They’ve become so ubiquitous with the hipster/fixie crowd that Bike Snob of NYC calls them hipster cysts.”

Anyway, the ad campaign that started me off hating Knog featured TaTu style fauxmoeroticism. Again, look at the ad. Would you believe that it was an advertisement for bicycle lights, or would you think it was a PSA advocating making out with cute girls in laundromats? It’s just pointless titillation. It says nothing about the product. It implies that you will be sexy if you use Knog products, but it doesn’t really say anything of value.

One of the reasons that I’ve loved Bitch magazine forever is that they have a history of deconstructing and disemboweling sexist advertising. I’d like to see what they’d make of Knog’s perennially oversexed ads. I have a feeling that they’d take a look at the penis ad and say, “well, shit, junior. Just because you’re objectifying a guy this time doesn’t really make it any better.”

I am aware that my prickly response to the Knog advertising is part generation gap, part culture/nationality gap. This article, written by a woman who looks at advertising and cultural sexism from a similar angle that I do sums up the generation gap regarding sexy vs. sexist. The gist of it is that a lot of GenY and younger see oversexed media as positive, fun, exciting, and empowering, while us old fogeys think that women being used as “catch your eye” sex objects to big up everything from chewing gum to computer parts is a bit degrading (not to mention gratuitous). And I recognize that my being a Yank may have more than a bit to do with my distaste for overtly sexual advertising. I was raised in a culture that permits only insinuation and innuendo in our ads. We can insinuate pretty fucking loudly, but we don’t actually show genitalia in our advertising, so seeing this guy’s pecker all “hey, there, hi, there, nice day to be a penis” was a bit of a shock.

But really, the core of my objection is that the sexy-sexalot advertising is stupid. It doesn’t really promote the product, it makes an oblique suggestion that you’ll be sexy if you use their product, and I think that on the whole, sex is oversold. If a product is good, it pretty much sells itself. Knog could do just as well with more pertinent ads which showed their products in use. If they showed hip, cool, exuberant cyclists having a good time (and incidentally using their lights, wearing their clothes, and using their accessories) it would be more relevant, would reach a wider audience, and would not make your co-workers think you’re looking at porn in the breakroom.