At the International Consumer Electronics Show last week, vendors were unveiling a myriad of new gadgets, some of which were marketed specifically toward women. This, in theory, doesn't really sound like a bad idea. I don't know if it sounds like a good one, but it doesn't sound like one that is going to irritate people. But although it doesn't sound like it, it is. Irritating, that is. Very irritating.
Take our good friend, the Taser. The good folks over there at the Taser factory think that a good way to sell Tasers to women is to have them in pink or in jungle themes; leopard prints, for example.
Why is pink or the fur pattern of any jungle creature supposed to be a selling point for women? Most women I know don't particularly like pink. A shade of pink, perhaps. Maybe a mauve, a rose, a toasted plum even. But the stereotypical, bubble-gum pink is not at the top of our list. (Hey, product marketer idea guys! We, women that is, like things that are sleek. Anything kinda metallic, anything a shade lighter than the basic color, anything silver, and anything curvy, we're down for. Bright six-year old girl pink? Not so much.)
As for the jungle creature prints? What am I? A hooker? A pole dancer? A hoo-ure? I'm none of those and I'm none of those on safari either. Remember those great bands of the 80s? Poison? Warrant? Now they weren't women, but they were big on the animal print spandex. And women did like that. A lot. Have ya seen Bret Michaels lately? Have ya seen him in zebra spandex lately? That's my point. What's good then is not necessarily good now. We're over the 80s and the product designer/marketer guys should be too.
Personally, when it comes to Tasers, I don't care what it looks like. All I want to know is if it's going to fry the genitals of my male attacker when I whip it out to do it's thing before he whips his out to do it's thing. As long as it does that, I'm good.Sphere: Related Content