Languish.org

General Category => Off the Record => Topic started by: jimmy olsen on May 18, 2011, 10:19:11 AM

Title: The Ide School of Advertisement
Post by: jimmy olsen on May 18, 2011, 10:19:11 AM
How the hell did this pass muster?  :lol:

More can be found here.
http://www.icanhasinternets.com/2010/05/25-horribly-sexist-vintage-ads/
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.icanhasinternets.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2010%2F04%2Fvintageads24.jpg&hash=ac38930d38544622a930d7af871e5cf24388ee29)
Title: Re: The Ide School of Advertisement
Post by: garbon on May 18, 2011, 10:26:05 AM
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=blow%20job

Quoteblow job Look up blow job at Dictionary.com
    also blowjob, 1961, from blow + job. Exactly which blow is meant is the subject of some debate; the word might have begun as a euphemism for suck (thus from blow (1)), or it might refer to the explosive climax of an orgasm (thus blow (2)). Unlike much sex slang, its date of origin probably is pretty close to the date it first is attested in print: as recently as the early 1950s, military pilots could innocently talk of their jet planes as blow jobs according to the "Thesaurus of American Slang." Cf. blow (v.1).
Title: Re: The Ide School of Advertisement
Post by: Grey Fox on May 18, 2011, 10:30:02 AM
About 5 for 25¢? What, sometimes you only got 4½ cigs?
Title: Re: The Ide School of Advertisement
Post by: Ideologue on May 18, 2011, 10:46:31 AM
Quote from: garbon on May 18, 2011, 10:26:05 AM
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=blow%20job

Quoteblow job Look up blow job at Dictionary.com
    also blowjob, 1961, from blow + job. Exactly which blow is meant is the subject of some debate; the word might have begun as a euphemism for suck (thus from blow (1)), or it might refer to the explosive climax of an orgasm (thus blow (2)). Unlike much sex slang, its date of origin probably is pretty close to the date it first is attested in print: as recently as the early 1950s, military pilots could innocently talk of their jet planes as blow jobs according to the "Thesaurus of American Slang." Cf. blow (v.1).

You know, I'd never thought of it that way.  That makes so much more sense. :)

In any event, something as pure and honest as a facial shouldn't be so crassly commercialized, even as a joke.
Title: Re: The Ide School of Advertisement
Post by: Razgovory on May 18, 2011, 11:06:37 AM
Looks like Malthus has already seen it.
Title: Re: The Ide School of Advertisement
Post by: Malthus on May 18, 2011, 11:11:06 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on May 18, 2011, 11:06:37 AM
Looks like Malthus has already seen it.

Yep. Or rather, a collection like it.  :D

Though another old favorite vintage ad has nothing to do with sexism - I do love that "Is your bathroom breeding bolsheviks?" paper-towel ad.  :lol:
Title: Re: The Ide School of Advertisement
Post by: HVC on May 18, 2011, 11:21:08 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on May 18, 2011, 10:46:31 AM
You know, I'd never thought of it that way.  That makes so much more sense. :)

In any event, something as pure and honest as a facial shouldn't be so crassly commercialized, even as a joke.
i had heard it was a corruption of "below job", ie job below the belt.
Title: Re: The Ide School of Advertisement
Post by: Ideologue on May 18, 2011, 01:50:19 PM
Quote from: HVC on May 18, 2011, 11:21:08 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on May 18, 2011, 10:46:31 AM
You know, I'd never thought of it that way.  That makes so much more sense. :)

In any event, something as pure and honest as a facial shouldn't be so crassly commercialized, even as a joke.
i had heard it was a corruption of "below job", ie job below the belt.

May be true.  If the description relies on the presence of ejaculation, just about every thing is a "blowjob."

It should probably be called a "facejob."  I mean, handjob, titjob, footjob, and... blowjob.  It doesn't fit.
Title: Re: The Ide School of Advertisement
Post by: HVC on May 18, 2011, 02:04:41 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on May 18, 2011, 01:50:19 PM
Quote from: HVC on May 18, 2011, 11:21:08 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on May 18, 2011, 10:46:31 AM
You know, I'd never thought of it that way.  That makes so much more sense. :)

In any event, something as pure and honest as a facial shouldn't be so crassly commercialized, even as a joke.
i had heard it was a corruption of "below job", ie job below the belt.

May be true.  If the description relies on the presence of ejaculation, just about every thing is a "blowjob."

It should probably be called a "facejob."  I mean, handjob, titjob, footjob, and... blowjob.  It doesn't fit.
well to give a blowjob one must physically be below the belt, most other acts don't require that (unless you consider doggy style below the belt lol)