I phrased that badly in that I understand where you're coming from but I'm not sure I agree. I'd have to think on it more. But no one complains when the reverse happens (naked men for dolce and gabbana cologne ads, etc etc). Fashion in a lot of ways is fundamentally about sex (especially for someone like Tom Ford) so I don't think it's offensive to be direct about that in advertising, in this case.
I don't really have the theoretical vocabulary to back this viewpoint up, though. Maybe I'll look into it tomorrow. I'm just not really convinced that presenting sex as an idea in an ad is objectifying anyone.
Actually lots of people complain when the reverse happens -- but it's not really the same situation due to the fact that Western society is a patriarchy and men hold a lot more power. So "objectifying" a man is not really robbing them of power and maturity in the same way objectifying women is. It's still kinda shitty though. And for the record, I don't think that sex should be removed from fashion or advertising. You're being way too absolutist about this. I just think it kinda sucks because Tom Ford is a super talented guy and I don't think he should have to reduce himself to this, but both as an intelligent businessman and as a homosexual male who has largely been divorced from feminist narrative I can understand why it is the way it is.
But both of these things are true, right? Making people feel shitty about being fat doesn't really stop them from being fat. And yeah, America as a whole is obese, but it's largely quite young women being affected by this who haven't really reached a point in their lives where obesity is an issue. By the time they enter their 30's and beyond, the damage has kinda been done.