Calvin Klein CKIN2U Heat (2009) {New Fragrances}

The Calvin Klein CKIN2U franchise sees the addition of a new her-and-his duo of fragrances
this year with CKIN2U Heat, apparently the most sexually explicit CKIN2U to date.

When the original duo was launched sex pheromones were flying around in the air already but
they got rapidly cooled down by the term "technosexual" which sounded a little inhuman. The
target audience was not pleased...
CKIN2U Heat sound more like some good old-fashioned mating ritual, in a pool this time. Both
fragrances contain alcoholic drink accords to help you loosen up and in reference, for me, to American
youth culture with its tendency to over drink once the ban is lifted.

CKIN2U Her is a floral scent with notes of appletini cocktail (vodka, orange liqueur, apple juice), juicy
blood orange, nocturnal orchid from the Caribbean, almond paste, ginger snap, wet cedar wood,
sandalwood, creamy musk.

CKIN2U Him is described as a fruity and woody scent with notes of chilled Caipirinha, coriander, juicy
pear, stimulating green mate tea, ginger, orris root, vetiver, musk, birch bark.

Both perfumes are available in100 ml Eau de Toilette concentration and are priced at 47,70 €

Source: News Parfums

Calvin Klein Secret Obsession, Uncensored: X-tra Sensuous? {Fragrance News}

{Perfume Ad}

I don't know if I have shared one particular Franco-American TV anecdote with you before on
this blog, but it is worth retelling in the context of the "controversy" unleashed by Eva Mendes
posing suggestively for the upcoming perfume by Calvin Klein, Secret Obsession. But first the
context. As we all know, there are no-nos everywhere, the interesting part is that they differ
according to the predominant cultural values that are exhibited or advertised by said-culture or
sub-culture. In other words, certain things are done in the open and others recede in the
background but it is safe to assume that it is not because sexually suggestive images are deemed
improper for wider TV-consumption that America is a less sexually active country than others
which would, officially, not bat an eyelash at the sight of Eva Mendes's nipple or backside and
more generally speaking, soft erotic choreography staged by Fabien Baron to sell Secret
Obsession...

Baron, who is originally from Paris, the city where you sell Camembert with the help of black lacy
garters, and who is obviously stupefied by the narrow-mindedness and/or hypocrisy of TV execs
is incensed and hurt and makes the point, which is one often made, that it is completely irrational
to see TV networks ban a sexy perfume commercial in the name of public morality while
machine guns can spit out their wrath and bombs explode all over mainstream programming (and
high-calorie meals be force-fed at all hours of the 24/7 cycle to the nation).  He is right, it is
completely coo-coo, but it's a choice that reflects the fact that sex is thought to be more shocking
to family values than violence, the latter which can arguably ultimately have a cohesive effect
on, not only family units, but the whole country. It is called the cement of fear. Sex on the other
hand bespeaks of the couple rather than the family and for this reason contains an element of
division, a potential fissure to family values. Hence, the No-Sex-Please-We-Are-The-
Descendants-Of-Puritans attitude. But honestly, what is more indecent? To speak of sexual
pleasure (not pornography) or to be complacent towards aggressive human instincts and trigger-
happy representations? Baron, who has done many perfume commercials in the past (Guerlain
Samsara, Viktor & Rolf Flowerbomb, Burberry The Beat and many more...) via his firm Baron
& Baron, Inc. reacted to the TV ban of the advertising for Secret Obsession by saying,

"You must be kidding me. This country [the US] really needs a new president -- this country is
so messed up," said Baron. "It's such a joke and it's quite upsetting, frankly, how hypocritical this
country has become. It's OK for children to see people killed by guns? Spreading a little love
right now would be a good idea.

"She is being a little sexy, but they are not provocative," added Baron. "They are really well
done. The spot is really beautiful -- I really can't believe this is happening....I don't know what
else to say." (via WWD)

This leads me to recounting one particular anecdote about watching the same documentary on
the topic of Nevada brothels, first in Paris, then in the US (I have no idea how this happened,
believe me, except to ascribe it to mere chance). The resulting contrast made for comedic
material when it put me in the involuntary position of comparing the works of French and
American censors who were definitely not asleep that day and were particularly detail-oriented.
In one particular sequence that offered a striking oppositional relationship in terms of the
dominant values expressed, you discovered what was deemed truly disturbing on each side of the
pond. In France, what was thought to be disgusting to public morality and unfit to be seen on TV
was the mercantile section of a soda-can that bore the brand name of a very famous tonic drink
originating from the turn of the 20th century. It had therefore been feathered, but you could still
guess what it was, of course. On the other hand and in a different part of the screen you could lay
your now nearly-sullied eyes that you had promptly averted from the sin of product-placement
on the furry pubis of a prostitute getting ready to enter a jacuzzi. Yes, the pubis was okay, not the
Coca-Cola can. And then one day in America, I happen on the same sequence. And then it turns
out to be a brilliant example of structural opposition: the Coca-Cola can was shining like a star
with all its letters and pride-of-place reclaimed while that unmentionable part of the feminine
anatomy that is best ignored by the sages had been made to appear to be viewed through a thick
and foggy window pane. It did not really prevent you from guessing what it was, but at least you
couldn't spend your leisure time counting the number of hair on the pubis. Good work!

In the end, the Nevada-brothel topic was relevant to both networks - because sex sells - but you
just had to put certain meaningful limits: make it more decent or make it about the pure topic of
prostitution at hand and nothing else.

Fortunately, the web exists and censored TV images look really good in the blogosphere, plus it
probably won't hurt sales (although you never know...see the Opium ad with Sophie Dahl). Of
course, there is an element of buzz-marketing to it, but the fact remains that these images were
thought to be unsuitable for public viewing by a number of channels. So to get the full view,
please follow this link where you can watch the uncensored commercial with Eva Mendes
interpreting Secret Obsession.

I happen to think that the commercial is qualitatively good, which cannot be said of most of TV
programming.

What do you think? Have you seen worse? Is this ad hitting a new low?

Via press release