This is all the organizers of the London Olympics could come up with for a mascot. Of course when the PC police are examining every aspect of your design for evidence of sexism, racism, stereotyping, etc, it's hard to come with anything that is both marketable to children, yet doesn't make adults turn away in disgust at the stupidity. When everything can be interpreted by hypersensitivity police as being offensive to one group or another then you are left with nothing....and that's exactly what these two creatures represent....nothing.
Why do the Olympics have to have a mascot anyway? I can honestly say that I've never seen a child holding an Olympic mascot doll or action figure. To whom are they marketing these stupid mascots? They seem to have nothing to do with sports or athletics in any way. The only apparent purpose is to move merchandise. Otherwise I don't get it.
Exit question: why is the blue one wearing a crotchless unitard?
3 comments:
Atlanta's 1996 mascot was infamously unsuccessful and thankfully all but forgotten. The Vancouver mascot was a pile of rocks.
Izzy was Atlanta's mascot and if I'm not mistaken, looked disgustingly like Smurf sperm.
Speaking of PC blandness, isn't it about time to know what Ed is listening to?
Post a Comment