Photo from WWD (click to enlarge)

What a way to wake up. I know. 

“Once you see it, you can’t stop thinking about it,” said Wang to WWD.  “It’s not provocative just in terms of sexy, but provocative to provoke conversation. I'm not dictating what that message is exactly. The interesting part is to see how people interpret it, and what they have to say about it. Of course, there are going to be people who disagree with it.” 

You were right on the latter but not the former, Wang. This ad definitely provokes conversation (such as this post or this one on HuffPost) but it is not "provocative in terms of sexy". It does not make me think, "Damn, those jeans are fine. It's so sexy. Anna Ewers makes them look so darned sexy. I need to look and feel that sexy. I need to get those jeans!" Instead, it makes me think, "Where are the jeans?!"

In Communication Studies, we call the strategically placed "Denim X Alexander Wang" an "anchor" which is words put in an ad to give meaning to the photograph because let's face it, without those words, what do viewers get? Tasteful porn, maybe. The advert is supposed to be selling jeans but the first thing that you see is Ewer's cleverly posed body and her "hidden" nipples because everyone knows what's behind those words, Wang. You can't hide them. What it does sell is the sexualisation of women's bodies in a way that is neither tasteful (like lingerie ads) nor elegant not even provocative. Don't even get me started on the shot where Ewers' hand is positioned to look as if she is masturbating. 

Photo from WWD (click to enlarge)

(On Wang's instagram @alexanderwangny, this was a photo teaser that came with the caption "Coming Soon") 

At first when I saw the advert, the first thing that came to my mind was, "Revolutionary. A designer who is not afraid to show that a woman is sexual and that a woman can claim her sexuality without a man." And then, it hit me that this is an advertisement and the object of the advert does not seem to be the jeans but rather a naked Ewers or Ewers' hand between her thighs. It is objectifying the model and thousands of women across the world. It reduces her to a naked body. It reduces her as something to be stared at, to be looked at. It is exploiting a woman's body, her femininity and her sexuality to sell a product that would otherwise be boring.

In fact, the "masturbation" shot disembodies the model, reducing her to just a hand between her thighs. It does not show her face (whether she is in the throes of passion) or anything else to indicate this this is a woman who is confident with her sexuality and is not afraid to show it. 

It does not scream high fashion. It doesn't even scream fashion. It's just a cheap and tired and boring way to grab attention, at the expense of women and feminine sexuality. It is as if you and your company were not confident that your jeans could sell and had to do something over-the-top to do so.

It is as if the jeans are marketed to come off rather than stay on. But, "The Wang 001 is not a “skinny” jean per se, but a “slim” with a high rise to sit at the waist as well as 1 percent stretch for the two indigo washes and 2 percent for the black wash. The Wang 002, or relaxed fit, has zero stretch and is based on a classic men’s fit, but cut for a woman’s body. Then there’s the Wang 003. “We’re not calling them boyfriend jeans,” he said of the boy cut, which rides low and has a wider yet tapered leg. “I hate it when you roll them and your ankle is swimming, so I cut it so you roll it twice and it stays pegged.” (WWD) You has given so much thought into these jeans even citing your inspirations as "female friends and the girls whose style he admires" (WWD) yet it seems no thought has been given to the adverts. 

It is as if you thought, "Sex sells. Let's put a naked girl in jeans. Tons of people will talk about it and buy it." You are an amazing designer, Wang and with all that brimming creativity, I'm sure you could have come up with something better than a naked girl with jeans that are around her ankles. Yes, people will talk about it and because of your reputation, people will buy your jeans but you don't need to objectify a woman to do so. Rely on your reputation, rely on your quality and rely on the fact that your clothes are beautiful. 

In fact, relying on those details in WWD (and if I wasn't so loyal to Guess Jeans), I would buy myself a pair. The jeans sound utterly sexy on their own, Wang. You don't need a naked woman to make them sexy.