Pre-Owned Vehicle = Non-Virgin Woman?

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Oh dear. Another day, another questionable advertising decision. Via Sociological Images, this Canadian ad for used cars compares them to women who aren’t virgins. “You know you’re not the first” the ad reads. “But do you really care?” The message seems to be it’s okay for cars to be used (and for women to have more than one lover) if they’re very aesthetically pleasing.

Oy. Firstly, it’s a bit sexist to assume every man wants to be a woman’s first. Virginal sex can = awkward sex. Secondly, naturally women are being judged on their “number” and not men. Thirdly, just because it looks good on the outside doesn’t mean there’s nothing wrong under the hood, so to speak. (Side note: during a routine HIV test, I once had a nurse tell me I was the “perfect” vehicle to transmit the virus because I was so “clean” and “wholesome”.) And finally, why? Just… why? I don’t understand how these things actually make it to print without someone saying along the way, “Hey, maybe we should rethink this because it could turn off half of our customer base.”

The owner of the dealership that created the ad describes himself as “professional” and “people-oriented” but also says that his family-owned business provides an “excellent selection of competitively priced, great-looking cars with lots of curb appeal. These beauties draw auto fans from far and wide, and have given rise to the dealership’s well-known slogan: Hot Deals, Cool Wheels!” Okay, okay, I get the idea of describing cars like women, but the ad seems to take it a tad too far. “She’s a beaut!” is quite a bit different from “She’s not a virgin, but she still looks great! How much do you want to pay for her?”

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate