Skip to content

Calvin Klein Mark(et)s Your Cock

… or at least, your cock as you might wish it to be.  If it was endowed with very good genes, worked out in the gym twice a day and had zero subcutaneous fat.  And was shot in high gain black and white.

But for all the professional production values, these models in the new ‘Mark the Spot’ campaign are nasty.  As in, just stepped off a multi-racial porn gang-bang shoot nasty.  Still covered in… cockiness.

And initially at least it seems as if they’re talking cock as well.

I’m not sure I ‘want to see more’, though.  I’m not especially fond of this ad with it’s in-yer-face arrogance (and it reminds me more than a little of this chap).  But I suspect it’s meant to be as annnoying as… an erection.

Or an internet virus.

Nevertheless, partly because he was the least convincing cock, I did watch pretty-boy Kellan Lutz talking about how much he loves to be in front of the camera in his Calvins (‘they hold everything together’), and tries to convince us that he got his vast, juicy cantaloupe melon pecs from boxing and snowboarding.

Tip: Stephen B

19 thoughts on “Calvin Klein Mark(et)s Your Cock”

  1. These ads are directed at the average flabby man who needs a male corset to pull his saggy buttocks into shape, and a nice thick elastic band to give him a prosthetic waistline . When you’re wearing Calvins, they have a shape of their own so you don’t need to bother to have one yourself. But you couldn’t market a corset as a corset to men, so you tell them it’s all about making your cock look good instead.

  2. I find it nothing short of endearing when straight males, knowng that I’m gay, and that they don’t have to prepare a rear defense flaunt their wares teasingly. They do that you know! It’s really not all that antimetro., quite the contrary. Cute guys know that their best audience is other guys(esp gay); women react to a primarily other set of qualities; so pussies would not be thieir goal in any case.

  3. I have a feeling I really ought to watch it again or else withdraw from this discussion though, so I think I’ll pipe down now…

  4. never meant actually to suggest that Calvin would blanch at epater-ing the cocksucker-oisie I’m sure nothing would put these undies (which I’d never heard of) on the map quite like GLAAD getting all up in limp tentacles about the the affair. (maybe for once they realized it might be a bit too ridiculous to go there. maybe they just haven’t gotten around to it yet! they’re administration seems pretty half baked if you follow that “trannies with knives” controversy that seems more than anything to be be a matter of mixed up memos or something). of course the jocks check each other out in the showers. I’m not following the hence what figures into an I’ll show you my anything when everyone is standing there buck nekkid to begin with. I never thought of them as being in the shower anyhoo. It doesn’t really matter, there is an insinuating proposition that in the course of the 30 or whatever it seconds that is withdrawn in such a way that my database classifies not as playful but if anything at all as vaguely sinister bordering on threatening. I don’t wonder at all whether they didn’t put that “I’m just playin” specifically for the 95 percenters but I do wonder whether they really needed to in order not to offend their metrosexy target. who’s to say they’re not saying they want to see a snatch. who said they were in the showers maybe they’re at the cuntry club.

  5. supermarky: re; data processing; first yu assue that the advertizers would have sensative gays in mind, which makes no sense at all, because they are trying despirately to sell something. Their target is straight men-%85-90 of the population (perhaps). Straight men, if you were ever in gym class you would realise that hetertosexual guys compare each others wares. The I’ll show you mine if you show me yours is no more than a play on that senario, whether guys wiould admitit right off does take place: hence the playfullness , and teasingness of the ad. (teases prudes who would be shy to admit it.) The point of this approach with the underware is to point out that it shows your “manlinesss” as it is physically demonstrated, without nakedness.

    That’s sales. Usually advertizers appeal to the reptile brain of buyers; what aer they really processing.
    Nothing would be gained by downing anyone.

  6. I think it was explained already… although I’m not about to read everything over again, nor am I willing to watch the spot again. It could be that in my emotional response I got some of the data wrong coming in. that actually happens rather more often than is acceptable, sensitive soul that I am.

    as I recall, briefly though (no pun intended!), eventually one of the models says, re I”ll show you my bleep “I was just playin with ya” and as far as I’m concerned it doesn’t matter whether or not it’s the same guy who said I’ll show you mine if you show me yours. I think whoever dreamed up this campaign knew that there’d likely be no backlash, that the gays would be drooling too much to quibble over such subtleties. and I would take exception to the use of the word “phobia” there is that I thought famous quote from C Everett Hoop in which he made the point that the word homophobia is used to denote something that isn’t phobia at all, that it’s hatred and not fear that was behind the laggardly response of american society to the aids epidemic. anyway my feeling about the “I was just playin with ya” is it’s classic queer baiting of the sort that is often followed by classic bashing. here it’s just intended in as a little bit of something spicy. but you know… some people can’t cilantro, which is something I’ve never understood…

  7. I’m not really the one making the argument that this ad is homophobic, but plenty of things can be homophobic and homoerotic at the same time. High Period Eminem and Marky Mark spring to mind. Along with the USMC. Even I can be homoerotic and homophobic, in the right light. I think though that one thing is unambiguous: the ad, even if I’m not a fan of it, has succeeded if it has got us discussing and even arguing over it.

  8. Could someone please explain how this add is homophobic? If anything, it seems to me that this ad is rather homoEROTIC.

    Specially in that part where Mehcad Brooks says: “I’ll show my [bleep] (meaning d*ck*) … if you show me yours.”

    So, my question is … how exactly is this ad supposed to be for “straight men” and homoPHOBIC?

  9. I have no doubt that a certain percentage of straight men are narcisistic enough to jest with both straight and gay men on their own diverse territories. Something doesn’t have to just have to leave one impression.. I agree with Mark that it probably is aimed at straight men. There would be little point in advertising to just a small percentage of the potential buyers with the intent of teasing them overtly.
    Making the fellow hoodlumish clarifies rthe issue that it’s “straight”-OK for suspicious souls, to want all your stuff together(which is the original practical reason for breifs after all..

    Now in the post HIV/dot-com era of guilt ridden home jerkingoff , any male even straight can be an object. Guys into that sort of thing are free to let their imaginations do what ever, if that’s appealing.

  10. Yes, the ad is intended for ‘straight’ men and not for the gays. And straightonlyinbed’s analysis of it is entirely on the money – and very funny. But, as the people behind the ad clearly calculated, many of the gays will lap it up too. I’m not sure though that the ‘hoodlum’s’ teasing/dissing behaviour isn’t ‘gay’ too in the sense that it is trying a little too hard. Again, it reminds me of the bad acting in gay porn. But then, as you’ve probably noticed, everything reminds me of gay porn.

  11. Or, it could just be an ad for selling underwear that is designed to push some “edge” where metros / straights with aspirations are concerned. Perhaps, straightonlyinbed, it is not the beginning of some gay holocaust.

  12. that last question is not serious, is it? I don’t know if the hard core gay oriented undies manufacturers like ‘freshpair’ and ‘m2m’ (if that one even xists anymore) even make boxers!

    yes of course this is really for straights “I’m just playin with ya” basically it celebrates fag baiting but the sad thing is, it’ll be looped for sure for play in gay bars for the delectation of the many queens whose only thought about eminem, say, is that he’s HAWT.

    I personally can’t enjoy this ad it is immensely irritating reason enters into it I suppose but my reaction is completely emotional, in fact when the guy says “I’m just playin with ya” it’s quite upsetting I mean it really brings back some unpleasant memories in fact.

  13. straightonlyinbed

    You people need to talk to straights MORE not less.
    This ad IS FOR straight men. Not for nasty asshole cocks. This is as homoPHOBIC an ad as I ever saw, but that’s no reason not to enjoy it.

    It’s the winter of irony at its supremacy (and it’s going down, just like the left in america, unawares). If it doesn’t go down, I’m going to.make.it go down. Straight men are expected to watch this, thinking, “whoa that’s metrosexual! Whoa that’s borderline-gay-but-holding-at-the-last-inch”. They are meant to IDENTIFY with it. I, yes, haha “AYEEEEEE”, am meant to identify with it and buy the underwear.
    Why? Don’t know yet? Because the underwear will make my cock so big, so super, so ab-so-lute-ly huge, that all the gross fags will be, gosh, so really impressed, that they’ll hunger after me. Yes, even gay men will want me so bad that it’ll turn on my narcissism like never. But of course no linseed oil will be rubbed into the school cormorant, because it is OUT ! OF ! BOUNDS !

    Would any gay man really try to offend such strong, brutally muscled hoodlums by adventuring a proposal? Their such jerks they look ready to commit a hate crime.

    However, if this were women, especially lipstick lesbian women, being paraded as a forbidden yet possibly available fruit for straights, I’d be too “busy” right now to say this or anything, ever again.
    I guess the sales pitch there would be to get guys to buy their chicks the underwear, because I don’t know how much straight women actually want to be gay (through consumption in a consumer culture), even as they (allegedly, very allegedly) “experiment” and “play”.

    And the only way to judge what a “real man” would do is to have a real man to judge, first. And you do that, in this pathetic, spineless, geeked up office society, by getting that underwear, the only kind, that makes your cock huge even when “small”. Are there ANY gay men who don’t wear boxer briefs, after all?

  14. I would only have done Kellan Lutz but I wouldn’t have minded the other models joining in a tag team of Kellan’s arse. Does this make me a stereotypical Calvin Klein advertising mark?

  15. I hear what you say, but I personally have no objection to straight men offering me their arse – just so long as it looks like Sean Lamont’s.

  16. this didn’t go through before, I try again! plus there are a couple more lines, naturally. ..

    I clicked just to see if I was right in guessing which one you liked. I was!

    this campaign is revolting though it gives me the same strongly resentful feeling I get accosted by all these annoying ubiquitous ads for sites like brokestraightboys.com for one thing cause they think I’m stupid enough to believe these blatent gaibois could pass as straight if their lives depended on it but much more so cause the presumption seems to be that I have any interest in seeing straight guys do gay porn or to be with straight guys myself as though they are so much better somehow. cause as far as i’m concerned there are gay guys who are the equal of any straight man out there in terms of their capacity to allure, in addition to which they might be into me. I do think ti’s super exciting to be with someone I think isn’t into me, but to be with a straight guy would not provide that piquancy, it’d have to be a gay guy who wasn’t into me to make feel that abjectly turned on. I mean that’s not my preference but it’s a sort of set up that can be thrilling to be sucking some guy’s dick who is busy on the computer looking for someone else. I guess now that I reflect on it an obviously gay guy trying to pass for\ or even beleive himself straight would probably turn me on. As far as taking pleasure in something like this ad, I am just not that sort of faggot at all! And I have no interest in leafing through books like the “gods of football” etc. It’s different in the case of say those famous turkish wrestler photos cause that’s something so unexpected and not something completely staged and phony and basically condescending to . . . well, I always imagine it’s the old men in sweaters who fill 85% of the theaters at the gay film fests for the “nudie/sexy/naughty bois” shorts programs.

Comments are closed.