I...um...it...what...

"Zokoko chocolate is male ejaculate" does not seem like a good message for the company to be sending.

If we must interpret a gloopy white substance on a human skin literally as "ejaculation imagery," then how should we interpret the viscous brown substance? If we're not at least a little flexible with visual metaphor (which doesn't tend to be as This-Is-That as Ms Lovelace's comment implies) then this ad would be veering into some very unpopular kink.

Obviously, the ad is using eroticism and sensuality for effect. But is there any good reason not to? We don't consume chocolate for its nutritious value or utility, but rather for pure sensual pleasure. And sensual pleasure is precisely what this ad lingers on in unrestrained detail.

It would be a confusing them in a tv spot for Metamucil or Preparation H, but as far as ads go it makes perfect sense here.

I'm torn! That was, artistically, REALLY COOL. I'm still not sure I like all the disembodied lipstick mouths and sexy gasps and stuff, but it sure was well-designed.

I'd rather have Marmite; same colour, totally different experience!

Honestly, I like the commercial. Maybe because I'm American, and I'm used to all the 'sexy chocolate' ads featuring exclusively superskinny, tall white airbrushed women with straight shiny hair in expensive clothes moaning all alone about their indulgences (which seems to imply, at least to me, that chocolate is the substitute for a man, which has some unfortunate connotations on it's own) which usually end with the 'AND ONLY BLAHBLAH CALORIES!' schtick. In contrast, while all the people shown in this ad are attractive, they're relatively diverse as far as looks go, they look realistic (more like an attractive person I might lust after at a party than a photoshopped person in a magazine), and they're making no coy little references. They're HAVING SEX, not making dainty moans and subdued 'o-faces' every time they take a bite of chocolate. If anything, it's at least interesting, and refreshing from my perspective.

I think the reason chocolate is often associated with sex is, honestly, because chocolate is often literally an accessory to sex. It isn't like other food 'indulgences;' it's not seen as sexy to lick salt or melted cheese off your partner, but you can buy chocolate specifically made to be part of sex at any suburban shopping mall (it's supposed to less sugar than grocery store chocolate sauces for health reasons, which might also explain why dark chocolate is more associated with sex than, say, a Hershey's bar). The same is true for why fruit is sometimes advertised or referenced in sexual ways (peaches, strawberries, cherries, etc), but it's unusual for vegetables to be advertised the same way. While vegetables longer than they are wide are often joked about sexually, few people make pleasurable sexual connections when seeing a vegetable.

I think the ejaculation imagery is a bit muted. The chocolate is being drizzled onto people, not (pardon this imagery) "shot" at people. It seems more of an allusion to sex being used while being intimate as opposed to an ejaculation parallel. That being said, I am personally guilty of eating something delicious and chocolatey and calling it a "mouthgasm" or a "foodgasm" (and if you add peanut butter to that...well, you remember that scene from When Harry Met Sally?). Chocolate does release many of the same chemicals in the brain that sex does, so the jump isn't that drastic. It would be incredibly different and probably much less appetizing if any other type of food was used in this way...you don't see a Red Lobster ad where someone is drizzling butter on a naked form, there aren't milk ads that have gasping and moaning. I just think chocolate in itself is extremely sensual, an indulgence; making the jump from chocolate to sex is not unusual, and...to be honest...it's a bit overused.

Is anyone else picking up on the fact that throughout the majority of the spot, the lighter-skinned models are the ones "desiring" the chocolate, while the rest of the people are representing what is desired? E.g. they "are the chocolate" and either have it already on them or sans product, they just give the camera a sultry look. Meanwhile, the white people are licking it off of them or have it actively being poured into their mouths (by someone else?)...

Just some food for thought.

I thought all the sexual imagery was represented within a framework of a drug experience.

Gross.

This ad certainly does NOT make me want to eat this brand of chocolate. Yuck.

I kind of liked it, actually.

I'm not seing the issue with this ad. I'm sort of tired of sexy chocolate adverts, if only because they're boring now, but this isn't as sexist as you're making it out to be.

Also, if the white chocolate is meant to be read as cum, I'd say the sex they're trying to show us is rather non-typical. The dude and the chick are totally snow-balling all that white cocoa goodness. He's got it pouring all over his back at one point. Is that heteronormative? I dunno. They do show the chick more than the man, which is sort of lame, but the inclusion of a guy at all is somewhat refreshing to me.