The Antichristian Phenomenon
Another Lesson in Advertising, and Missing the Point
Posted by: Anath in Culture, Religion, World Events
It appears to be more important to rail against a preconceived notion of a concept rather than engage the idea itself. What do you think this ad is saying about those children in the image? Why are they so happy? Is the message based on who the children are?
No, its not. It doesn’t matter who those kids are, the point is that they’re kids. They could be happy, sad, cute, or ugly, and the message would stay the same. It also stays the same regardless of what religion their parents are members of… which happens to be Christianity.
The idea that somehow the fact that these kid’s parents are Christian undermines the message of the advertisement is absolute nonsense. It wouldn’t be reinforced if their parents were atheists. The fact is, those kids are way too young to really choose whether or not they believe in any religion, so as the ad says, DON’T LABEL THEM. They are not “Christian children”, they are children of Christian parents. It is not ironic in any way that their parents are Christians. This ad is not about their parents, its about them.
Additionally, they probably chose happy looking kids not to make any statement on religion itself, but because a picture of a smiling person is better suited to advertising. Why do you think soap and underwear and laxative advertisements have “smiling” people? Same reason this ad does, it grabs attention. Also, look closely at their faces, they’re not *really* smiling and happy–just like every other lame ad photo, they’re being told to smile for the camera. Their smiles are insincere zygomatic-only smiles, not the sincere Ducenne smile, which also entails the involuntary contraction of the orbicularis oculi, which creates “crow’s feet” at the corners of the eye. Due to the fact this muscle contraction is completely involuntary and unable to be recreated at will (short of artificial stimulation with electricity) when people are genuinely happy, they can’t help showing it, and they can’t force themselves to appear happy when they’re really not.
So they didn’t REALLY choose genuinely “happy and free” children. They chose children who LOOKED “happy and free” because they possess the ability to “smile” on command… just like every other model in advertising. Look closely at the next few ads and magazine covers you see with “smiling” models, you’ll find this phenomenon of not-really-smiling universal.
(And before the inevitable accusation–it would be exactly the same if the parents were Muslim.)
Welcome! If you're new here, before you open your mail program to fire up a nasty email, you may want to first read our FAQ to avoid being ignored. If you like the content, we hope you will to subscribe to our RSS feed. Stay open minded!
If you don't like the content of this website on the other hand, kindly fuck off.
Loading ...
November 22nd, 2009 at 12:00 am - Edit
Very perceptive, Anath! I agree that it is missing the point a bit to portray these children as "being happy" when they are merely smiling. However, one could argue that smiling or laughing is not indicative of a person's happiness per se. On can also argue that children are generally happy. Perhaps those points are a bit … forced and far-fetched, but I thought I'd mention them anyway.
November 22nd, 2009 at 3:55 pm - Edit
Anath, could you explain exactly how a Duchenne-smile looks like? I read the Wikipedia link, it didn't frankly make me feel much smarter, more confused. Crow-feet? Say what now?
As for the ad itself, the whole point of advertisement is to show that we become so much happier when we buy the product the ad advertises, since the person in the ad is obviously happy for owning the product. The whole idea of advertisement is to create a hole where there is a need we must fill up, and it can only be done to consume the product it advertises for. In this regard, the whole idea of advertisement is rather hypocritical in the context you just described, since none of the people who are in ads are truly happy, and the ads are thus lying, since consuming the product does not make us more happy per se.
And of course, I think maybe there should be a line drawn betweeen general contentness of one's life and right-out happiness. Happy as a term is a bit ambiguous as well, as it can be anything as happy over a funny moment to deep satisfaction/slash content of one's life, as I think Waldheri is trying to say. I can laugh over a funny moment but still be deeply depressed once the moment passed. I also think the ad plays a bit on the idea of the perfect childhood, but that's for another time
November 22nd, 2009 at 5:18 pm - Edit
This image shows it best: http://brokenspines.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/2...
Image A is an insincere smile, image B is a duchenne smile. Look at the eyes to tell the difference, notice how in image B there are wrinkles at the corner of the eye, and underneath them? That is the involuntary contraction of the muscle I mentioned- Orbicularis Oculi. A lot of people will believe that if the mouth is in that position, the person is "really" smiling, but they're not. Frequently there are a lot of other emotions displayed in the face of someone who is not "truly" smiling– the key is the eyes, not the mouth.
Its interesting to note too, that you can get a Duchenne smile by telling a really funny joke, so even that doesn't indicate "happiness." I definitely agree with your statement on ads.
And your link is broken. : )
November 22nd, 2009 at 6:50 pm - Edit
I wouldn't say the points are far-fetched based on the responses this ad is generating. The Christians opposing it seem to be taking up the position that the fact these kids of Christian parents are "happy" is proving that indoctrinating them with religion does not affect their happiness, maybe even enhances it.
However, I bet you we could get children of parents of any religion and in any socioeconomic situation to smile like that by bribing them with candy and toys (smile for the camera and we'll give you…), and we could probably get a "real" smile with a joke, funny cartoon, tickling, genuine presents, etc.
November 23rd, 2009 at 1:41 am - Edit
Yours as well
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:09 am - Edit
Haha!
Well this page depicts both images: http://www.answers.com/topic/smiling-2
November 23rd, 2009 at 11:32 am - Edit
Ah, it's a bit clearer now. I also did some additional reading, is the muscle located below or underneath the eyes?
And now the link should work: http://www.firstscience.com/home/perspectives/edi...
November 23rd, 2009 at 5:02 pm - Edit
I agree with the blog entirely – and would add that if the xtian parents were concerned about how their children's images might be used
perhaps they shouldn't sell their photos to stock image companies.
if you're willing to exploit your kids and rent them to others, then you can't really complain about how the images are used.
November 23rd, 2009 at 5:47 pm - Edit
It's actually all the way around the eye like this : http://userpages.monmouth.com/~wstreett/FaceIT/st...
November 25th, 2009 at 3:30 pm - Edit
Haha, no one noticed that I wrote the same thing
I meant above and below obviously, but I think you got that. Yeah, makes more sense now. Wikipedia said it was above only and I didn't understand how that would've caused the crow's feet.
December 24th, 2009 at 8:31 am - Edit
Hi I was adopted into a family at 5yrs old and they are all strong Atheists my mom was an RN very abusive to me behind closed doors but outwardly looked like the sweetest most amazing nurse. When people came over to the house she would beat the crap out of me and then tell me to not act like a zombie when i go out their to meet people so I go out with a smile on my face I read the bible once in the house she said do u know what ur reading? I remember reading to FEAR GOD so i told her that. She said why should I fear God? I couldn't give her an answer cuz i didnt know the bible very well she just made fun of me. I think like any other religion Atheist can smile at someone and look like a nice guy but at home he does something unspeakable probably cuz this person doesn't FEAR GOD I think a lot of people can say they believe in God but not follow him the Good book says they worship me with their mouth but their hearts are far from me. I do believe everyone has a rite to believe in something but every Atheist I know tears me down cuz of what i believe in. I just thought I would speak my mind do wish you all well and God bless. EX-prostitute changed by JESUS
January 18th, 2010 at 2:35 am - Edit
I entirely agree with this blog and I would also like to write here so people outside Romania should also know what pressure are Atheists supose to endure from the orthodox-christians.
I am just sick of them.
Despite the fact that 90% of the population declaired themselves orthodox christians, in reality only 45% from the population is an actual follower of a the imaginary god.
Moreover, there are also people who are just look-alike christians who condamn you for declairing yourself an atheist but they also curse or do unchsritian things. They are so called "creştini din an în paşti" (christians only on christmas and on easter).
I've read around here that I have to follow a registration process in order to write an article here.
I shall follow it and write a long and detailed article about the fundamental christianity that exist here in Romania.
March 4th, 2010 at 1:31 pm - Edit
free
downloads
fun
download
games
videos.
March 14th, 2010 at 6:58 pm - Edit
Highly helpful site. Wish it will continually be alive!