Is Adriana Lima being unfairly chastised for her recent Teleflora Super Bowl Commercial? Now that Valentine's Day has arrived, the debate is raging again about the sexy Brazilian supermodel's commercial with the insinuated premise of "sex for flowers."
Look, while many people found the Adriana Lima, Teleflora ad all in good fun...especially after the she delivers the sexy line just after getting dressed:
Guys, Valentine's Day's not that complicated. Give...and you shall receive.
At least some people see this as not only just objectifying women but also as flat-out prostitution. Giving Adriana (or any other girl) gifts...in this case, flowers... is the quickest way to getting sexual favors in return. The advertisement could be seen as advocating a "transaction" for sex. Yes, the commercial was effective if not offensive. It is not as if Valentine's Day is some sacred day.
It is not as if the 'holiday' is just another financial bonanza for flower companies, chocolatiers, and lingerie manufactures. Did the Adriana Lima, Teleflora ad cheapen all of this? Probably not, as it was already a 'Hallmark Holiday.'
The question however whether the commercial gives false expectations for men that they should somehow expect to "get some" by "giving" flowers. Is the act of giving women flowers some somewhat dirty, sexual transaction? Hardly, though the Adriana Lima commercial may lead one to believe that it isn't flowers the guy may get in return on Valentine's night.