I don't know if this is partly what you meant, but the idea of women seeing that commercial and then buying that for themselves is messing with my mind.

OR the idea that that's what the advertisers wanted all along.
*head explode*

It makes more sense when you realize the ad is targeted at men, to get them to buy the product for women as a gift.

You'd think that appealing to the people they were advertising to would be the goal, but people tend to remember things that make them uncomfortable more than they remember things that are enjoyable. One of the more commmon ways advertisers have taken advantage of this during, especially in the mid to late 20th century, has been using sexualized images of THE SAME GENDER as the target market. The textbook example is that Betty Crocker ad from the late 50s that has a vulva sculpted into the frosting, but it's everywhere (probably less so now but who knows - you could still find tons of stuff in the late 90s if you paid even minimal attention).

This is a good one:
http://tinyurl.com/qflyd9n

This is only a few years old:

http://pileofphotos.com/pics/pic_055495001182623764.jpg


Back in college me and one of my roommates used to go through another roommate's Cosmopolitans and try to find all the vulvas hidden in the ads. It wasn't a very hard game.

Another classic:

http://tinyurl.com/p3hq26t

OZ-
what I meant was the possibility that the ad might somehow provoke 70's women to buy that for themselves- in order to become the kind of sex baby that men buy that for.

I know what the first-glance read of the commercial is.

And I was saying that I think they WERE directly targeting women as the buyers.