This kind of ad makes it so much easier to THINK advertisers are all unscrupulous manipulators.
It's a well known fact that ads play off of people's insecurities, especially, say, the home security ones. Outside of the realm of the 1950's period, however, I didn't think that clothing ads did so so explicitly with the subject of finding a suitable mate! Not only does this ad manage to attempt to tug at the insecurity of the single, it manages to do so while insulting BOTH sexes on more than one level.
The insult to women is the most blatant- the implication that the best reason to dress yourself nicely is to snag a boyfriend and not JUST a boyfriend, that might be compatible with you on a personal level, but a HOT one. Men aren't left out, though. Basically, it says that if you're an attractive guy, all you care about is the shallow bits of stitched cloth on the outside. Not only that, but it implies that "ugly guys" can or should only be attracted to girls in inexpensive or unstylish clothing. Seriously?
On a deeper level, it perpetuates the stereotype that women are nothing but tricksters- slathering on things that make them seem prettier in order to con a man into taking care of them. Not only that, but it also relies on the myth that all men will fall for said tricks! It almost seems like this little button ad gives no credit whatsoever to our inteligence as a species! Somehow, I can see aliens reading this post and just whispering in shock- "They're onto us!".
This ad takes 'lookism' far too far. We all know it exists, and of course no one wants to be thought of as unnatractive, but this pushes on that insecurity much too hard, especially considering the sinister "Am I pretty enough to be loved/ Is she pretty enough for me to love her" context.
