This one should be obvious. Three things:1. Why in the world would ANYONE naming a product whose only function is to increase obesity and diabetes rates in this country be so stupid (some might say "bold") as to name their product after the very outcome it produces: FAT BOYS. Although, to be fair, they really should have named it "Fat Boys and Girls," or, in the interests of political correctness, "Fat People," or even "People of Fatness," or perhaps "Differently Corpulent." Because believe me, a diet of these fuckers is not going to leave you merely corpulent, but FUCKING GROTESQUELY GUINNESS-BOOK OBESE. You can't have just one! In fact:
2. You can have twelve. I realize that the the "12" got cut off in the picture, but there are TWELVE of these gut bombs in this package, and seriously, for people who buy this kind of thing, how long do you think twelve will really last? They may as well just have combined all twelve into one single serving and called it a Super-Sized Fun-Filled Fat Boy and marketed it to the gastronomically suicidal.
3. And, as the icing on the cake, so to speak, they are the ORIGINAL Fat Boy ice cream sandwiches. You mean there are OTHER Fat Boy ice cream sandwiches that are merely cheap imitations of this disgusting mash of ground-up pieces of other despicable non-food items ("Cookies") inside what might possibly be (but probably isn't) milk ("N' Cream") mixed with sugar (milk itself being essentially all lactose, don't forget)? Good god, fuck the imitations! Get the original!
Now, the only reasons Comrade X can see for this gross violation of usually-obfuscatory and utterly meaningless advertising language are these:
1. The advertising agency is utterly lazy and shiftless and the copywriter working on this campaign was being laid off anyway and so put no effort into it, choosing instead to spend his working hours consuming said Fat Boys, or:
2. It is a take-off on the short-lived generic food craze of 1979-80 (or thereabouts), only in this case instead of labeling the item as what it is without any other distracting advertising language, it labels the CONSUMER after what HE (or she) is, without any other distracting advertising language, or:
3. The copywriter in question is actually a subversive Revolutionary whose tactic is to shock into wakefulness the capitalism-duller consumer so that they are suddenly shocked by a vision of what this product will do to them, thus subverting the company's attempts to sell said product.
Comrade X prefers explanation #3 (but knows that it's actually explanation #1).
