Sexism in advertising......

Batsy

No they're not. The majority of television ads are not offensive to anyone at all, group or individual.

The majority of television ads in Britain are sexist towards men. These adverts usually involve some sour-faced harridan - who looks like a bulldog chewing a wasp - doing something awful to some bloke who is portrayed as being hapless, gormless and a bit thick.

The worst ones at the moment are the adverts for Boots, with their annoying "Here Come The Girls" by The Sugababes theme tune. The one I've got in my head at the moment is the one that ends with the line “when he’s ill and you don’t have time to be – get cold and flu products for just 99p at Boots”.

smash

Dr. Manhattan wrote: »

doesn't mean nobody else should have a problem.

I'd love to know exactly what their problems are. How exactly is it sexist or demeaning or indecent? You see worse walking down any high street or through any shopping centre.

Bad Panda

ixoy wrote: »

Amusingly the ad at the bottom of this thread for me currently is a female model sporting American Apparel lingerie.

Was just going to post something similar - I saw an ad with two women having a pillow fight and a guy watching.

At least, that's what I think I saw!

Katgurl

I thought the hunky dorys ad was hilarious. I love looking at beautiful people on tv, I'm sick of all this everyone is beautiful movement, celebrating real women etc, models should look better than the average person, that's why they are paid to model.

However, promoting the staff (not models) for their looks, not the work they do is offensive. If my boss sent my photo out to clients and said "this is a reason why you should use us" I would be bulling.

LittleBook

smash wrote: »

The "models" are real crew as far as I know. There was an article about it in the paper a while ago. I don't see how it's demeaning to them, they wanted to do that ad. Same way they did the Ryanair calendar!

Yes, that's why I said "they're demeaning to Ryanair cabin crew (not the "models")."

pickarooney

ixoy wrote: »

Amusingly the ad at the bottom of this thread for me currently is a female model sporting American Apparel lingerie.

I'm going to guess it's doing nothing for you

Seachmall

bluewolf wrote: »

Some women do seem to care, even if I disagree with them.

But the fact that some women care and more-or-less no man does the whole argument of equality in advertising is undermined.

It's inherently flawed. They can't be equal when both sides have different fundamental ideas on what's sexist and what's not.

Napper Hawkins

Dr. Manhattan wrote: »

That's a poor argument for anything, just because the people appearing in an ad, any ad, don't have a problem with it that you know of doesn't mean nobody else should have a problem.
The fact that "the world isn't how you think it should be" is a poor argument, by that logic we'd never try to improve anything.

I have little problem with these ads, but those arguments are weak.

So you disagree with me that people offended by this ****e need to get a grip? Ok.

Dr. Manhattan

Batsy wrote: »

The majority of television ads in Britain are sexist towards men. These adverts usually involve some sour-faced harridan - who looks like a bulldog chewing a wasp - doing something awful to some bloke who is portrayed as being hapless, gormless and a bit thick.

Yeh, they're still not. Both your statistical analyisis and your analysis of the content are bullshít.

Batsy wrote: »

The worst ones at the moment are the adverts for Boots, with their annoying "Here Come The Girls" by The Sugababes theme tune.

This shows how unreconstructed your views on this are. That series of ads is inoffensive, even if you do find it annoying. You've confused "ads I don't like" with "ads that could objectively be said to be offensive or discriminatory".

Bad Panda

LittleBook wrote: »

Yes, that's why I said "they're demeaning to Ryanair cabin crew (not the "models")."

You say they're demeaning to the cabin crew, what do you say to those women who might disagree with you?

Dr. Manhattan

Napper Hawkins wrote: »

So you disagree with me that people offended by this ****e need to get a grip? Ok.

No, I don't. I said I have little problem with these ads, but then they don't affect me and I don't expect others to judge their views or level of offense by me.

LittleBook

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

I thought the complaint re Ryan Air stemmed from female cabin crew objecting to the fact that only female cabin crew were being used?

Actually Ickle, I think the issue is that the ad states that Ryanair has "Red hot fares & crew" which is a problem for the staff who take their jobs seriously and don't particularly want to be seen as glamour models, particularly not by their employer.

_feedback_

Katgurl wrote: »

However, promoting the staff (not models) for their looks, not the work they do is offensive. If my boss sent my photo out to clients and said "this is a reason why you should use us" I would be bulling.

They agree to it

Georgia Salpa made a career out of being sexy for ads. Most girls I know hate her.

MrStuffins

Dr. Manhattan wrote: »

Yeh, they're still not. Both your statistical analyisis and your analysis of the content are bullshít.

You're just nit-picking here. He used the word "most" and didn't really mean it. No big deal.

This shows how unreconstructed your views on this are. That series of ads is inoffensive, even if you do find it annoying. You've confused "ads I don't like" with "ads that could objectively be said to be offensive or discriminatory".

No he's not. Have you seen those Boots ads? the ones of Christmas that showed men as idiots who didn't know how to shop. "Here come the girls" to the rescue to give them perfume and other sh1te Boots sell because, of course, this man can't possibly know how to shop for his wife.........

Napper Hawkins

Dr. Manhattan wrote: »

No, I don't. I said I have little problem with these ads, but then they don't affect me and I don't expect others to judge their views or level of offense by me.

But we're not talking about me or you, are we?

Batsy

The Men's Health Forum (MHF) is a charity that provides an independent and authoritative voice for male health in England and Wales and tackles the issues and inequalities affecting the health and well-being of men and boys.

MHF’s vision is a future in which all boys and men in England and Wales have an equal opportunity to attain the highest possible level of health and well-being.

On its website, MHF has highlighted the sexist attitudes towards men's health issues in the UK. On its website it has posted a picture of a poster which shows a man sitting on a settee, wrapped in a blanket and blowing his nose.

Above him are the words Brian, man flu victim. It's not a cold, it's a debilitating disease. "Sniff."

The MHF then asked an important question…..

“Is this a good laugh or just the sort of thing to make men even less likely to go to the doctor when they’re ill?”

http://brightonmanplan.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/medshield_print-2-580x819.jpg

smash

Katgurl wrote: »

However, promoting the staff (not models) for their looks, not the work they do is offensive. If my boss sent my photo out to clients and said "this is a reason why you should use us" I would be bulling.

If your boss paid you to star in a TV because you were hot would you be offended?

LittleBook wrote: »

Yes, that's why I said "they're demeaning to Ryanair cabin crew (not the "models")."

How is it demeaning?

MrStuffins

LittleBook wrote: »

Yes, that's why I said "they're demeaning to Ryanair cabin crew (not the "models")."

You think this ad is demeaning to Cabin Crew because the lady in the ad is a member of Cabin Crew.........

Do you think the David Beckham ads demean footballers?

ixoy

pickarooney wrote: »

I'm going to guess it's doing nothing for you

We need to get the context-sensitive ads to get ads featuring scantily-clad men. Purely in the balance of fairness and respect to this thread of course.

LittleBook

smash wrote: »

How is it demeaning?

LittleBook wrote: »

Actually Ickle, I think the issue is that the ad states that Ryanair has "Red hot fares & crew" which is a problem for the staff who take their jobs seriously and don't particularly want to be seen as glamour models, particularly not by their employer.

.

Ickle Magoo

LittleBook wrote: »

Actually Ickle, I think the issue is that the ad states that Ryanair has "Red hot fares & crew" which is a problem for the staff who take their jobs seriously and don't particularly want to be seen as glamour models, particularly not by their employer.

Oh I agree there is that - but the ASA would have had much less grounds to ban the ad had Ryan Air used both genders in their ad campaign.

Father Damo

smash wrote: »

Didn't Michael O'Leary say that feminists need to get a sense of humour?

Obviously they didn't listen to him!

O Leary is a legend. When Nicholas Sarkozy and his hot missus sued him for taking the piss out of them in some ad, his response was

“We paid €60,000 to their charity but we got more than €5 million worth of free publicity so we’re happy,” Mr O’Leary says. “I’m available to kiss and make up with Mrs Sarkozy any time she wants.”"

:pac:

Legend.

Seachmall

The real issue here is some women looking at the models and thinking that model represents them.

They don't.

I'm sure if you asked one of those models "why are you engaging in the objectification of women" they'd find you very patronising.

Chris Tucker doesn't represent all black people.
Colin Farrell doesn't represent all Irish people.
And Katie Price doesn't represent all women.

The only person being objectified when Katie Price poses nude is Katie Price, and clearly she doesn't care. So why do you?

She's not your fucking ambassador.

Katgurl

elviscostello wrote: »

Katgurl wrote: »

However, promoting the staff (not models) for their looks, not the work they do is offensive. If my boss sent my photo out to clients and said "this is a reason why you should use us" I would be bulling.

They agree to it

Georgia Salpa made a career out of being sexy for ads. Most girls I know hate her.

Maybe you should change your circle of female friends.


I love georgia salpa, she is stunning. But she's a model and when she's modelling you know she's there as a model.

They might have agreed to it but you don't know what went on behind the scenes. Most likely:

some were delighted / flattered and said yes
some were not happy but didn't want refuse boss and said yes
some were flattered but rowed with husband said no
some thought totally demeaning and said no but worried offended management
some were not asked and very hurt that after X years working for the company and doing great job demonstrating loyalty were humiliated internally for not being pretty / slim / young enough

bottom line, they are hired to be air stewards, not models. It is not their job to be beautiful.

I think it's an appalling way for O'leary to treat his workforce

smash

LittleBook wrote: »

Actually Ickle, I think the issue is that the ad states that Ryanair has "Red hot fares & crew" which is a problem for the staff who take their jobs seriously and don't particularly want to be seen as glamour models, particularly not by their employer.

That's an assumption you're making yourself. That's not coming from any staff. And you don't hear of Virgin Airways staff complaining about their ads do you?

Edit: Katgurl you're jumping to your own assumptions here too.

Ickle Magoo

smash wrote: »

That's an assumption you're making yourself. That's not coming from any staff. And you don't hear of Virgin Airways staff complaining about their ads do you?

Did you read the article? The complaints were coming from staff!

MrStuffins

Seachmall wrote: »

Christ Tucker doesn't represent all black people.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIYU2MZ6edQ

Crooked Jack

Wasn't there an ad for Zelda 64 with the tagline "Whilst thou get the girl, or play like one."
That was brilliant.
As for feminism in general, it's a load of bull**** now. If there is any inequality these days it goes the other way if nothing else. Sexism only exists in jokes and a number of middle eastern countries these days. The only people who get offended by stuff like this are whizened old hags whose vaginas resemble the bag inside a vacuum cleaner

mod: Poster banned.

Seachmall

MrStuffins wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIYU2MZ6edQ

He's like black people's savior, it's only fair to give him said title.

Oh, no wait...

:pac:

Katgurl

smash wrote: »

Katgurl wrote: »

However, promoting the staff (not models) for their looks, not the work they do is offensive. If my boss sent my photo out to clients and said "this is a reason why you should use us" I would be bulling.

I'm very good at my job and that's what I get paid to do.

If I wanted to make money out of my looks (not putting down anyone who does) I would have pursued that line of work.

smash

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Did you read the article? The complaints were coming from staff!

Did you? Because the complaints didn't come from the staff about this ad. Those complaints were to do with the calendar last year. And it was UK staff too, not Irish.

Katgurl wrote: »

If I wanted to make money out of my looks (not putting down anyone who does) I would have pursued that line of work.

Doesn't mean the opportunity couldn't arise. Would you turn it down?

MrStuffins

Katgurl wrote: »

bottom line, they are hired to be air stewards, not models. It is not their job to be beautiful.

I think it's an appalling way for O'leary to treat his workforce

Treat his workforce? Come on now.

Do you think these people who complain now complain every Christmas when the Firefighters put together THEIR calendar? After all, the picture in the ad was taken from the Ryanair Charity Calendar. These women posed like they did in order to raise money for charity.

Do you think the complainants here were writing letters saying the semi-naked fighfighters in the calendar were a disgrace and it's demeaning to the rest of the country's firefighters who like to take their job seriously?

AeoNGriM

jester77 wrote: »

I'm all for banning these type of ads, if it means I don't have to look at David Beckhams crotch every corner I turn. It's f*ckin everywhere the last few weeks, plus I think he's meant to be selling to men... go figure that one out!

It's piss easy to figure it out. The advertisement isn't meant to arouse you, it's meant to make you say 'Hmmm, if I purchased Becks' kecks', my crotch could look this good, therefore I will be more attractive to women'.

(I think you might secretly be gay, or homophobic.....or possibly a public sector worker )

:pac:

jaja321

Crooked Jack wrote: »

Wasn't there an ad for Zelda 64 with the tagline "Whilst thou get the girl, or play like one."
That was brilliant.
As for feminism in general, it's a load of bull**** now. If there is any inequality these days it goes the other way if nothing else. Sexism only exists in jokes and a number of middle eastern countries these days. The only people who get offended by stuff like this are whizened old hags whose vaginas resemble the bag inside a vacuum cleaner

Classy.

smash

AeoNGriM wrote: »

Hmmm, if I purchased Becks' kecks', my crotch could look this good

...

I think you might secretly be gay

You think Becks' crotch loks good, but you think he's gay?

Zulu

Katgurl wrote: »

bottom line, they are hired to be air stewards, not models. It is not their job to be beautiful.

I think it's an appalling way for O'leary to treat his workforce

They were forced into modelling? They didn't volunteer &/or get paid for it??

MrStuffins

Crooked Jack wrote: »

As for feminism in general, it's a load of bull**** now. If there is any inequality these days it goes the other way if nothing else. Sexism only exists in jokes and a number of middle eastern countries these days. The only people who get offended by stuff like this are whizened old hags whose vaginas resemble the bag inside a vacuum cleaner

Feminists wanting "equality" is a paradox!

Feminists don't want a level playing field, they say they do but they really want an unlevel playing field in their own favour.

Otherwise the'd be egalitarians.

Katgurl

smash wrote: »

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Did you read the article? The complaints were coming from staff!

Did you? Because the complaints didn't come from the staff about this ad. Those complaints were to do with the calendar last year. And it was UK staff too, not Irish.

Katgurl wrote: »

If I wanted to make money out of my looks (not putting down anyone who does) I would have pursued that line of work.

Doesn't mean the opportunity couldn't arise. Would you turn it down?

I've taken the opportunity in the past but it was nothing to do with the job I actually do.

smash

Katgurl wrote: »

I've taken the opportunity in the past but it was nothing to do with the job I actually do.

What's that got to do with anything though? Being the face of a company wouldn't undermine your position.

Zulu

MrStuffins wrote: »

...Otherwise the'd be egalitarians.

It's true, really. Underneath all the huff & puff, egalitarians are looking for equality.

Ickle Magoo

smash wrote: »

Did you? Because the complaints didn't come from the staff about this ad. Those complaints were to do with the calendar last year. And it was UK staff too, not Irish.

*Reads article properly*

They pulled the ad due to 17 complaints by joe bloggs public? That's a bit mad...you'd have to assume given RA were using the pictures that caused the initial furore by staff that the ASA was just heading off the inevitable...


...and O'Leary gets yet more free publicity...man's a genius.

Katgurl

smash wrote: »

Katgurl wrote: »

I've taken the opportunity in the past but it was nothing to do with the job I actually do.

What's that got to do with anything though? Being the face of a company wouldn't undermine your position.

yes but if I heard my boss saying to clients -

this is katgurl, check out the rack on her

not

she's great at what she does


I'd be pretty f&&king pi$$ed off yes.


And regardless - what about the other staff that are male / older / whatever??? They might be the best and hardest working staff in ryanair and they are being overlooked. if they were prepared to be measured on their looks they would be working in the modelling industry

Crooked Jack

Crooked Jack wrote: »

Wasn't there an ad for Zelda 64 with the tagline "Whilst thou get the girl, or play like one."
That was brilliant.
As for feminism in general, it's a load of bull**** now. If there is any inequality these days it goes the other way if nothing else. Sexism only exists in jokes and a number of middle eastern countries these days. The only people who get offended by stuff like this are whizened old hags whose vaginas resemble the bag inside a vacuum cleaner

Haha care to support this "theory" you really love the fairer sex dont you ?

I could counter any man who complains about the david beckham add is a jealous small ..... Aww dosnt matter im better than that .

_feedback_

Katgurl wrote: »

Maybe you should change your circle of female friends.


I love georgia salpa, she is stunning. But she's a model and when she's modelling you know she's there as a model.

They might have agreed to it but you don't know what went on behind the scenes. Most likely:

some were delighted / flattered and said yes
some were not happy but didn't want refuse boss and said yes
some were flattered but rowed with husband said no
some thought totally demeaning and said no but worried offended management
some were not asked and very hurt that after X years working for the company and doing great job demonstrating loyalty were humiliated internally for not being pretty / slim / young enough

bottom line, they are hired to be air stewards, not models. It is not their job to be beautiful.

I think it's an appalling way for O'leary to treat his workforce

I wasn't being entirely serious about the Georgia Salpa bit.

At the end of the day, that comes down to the people that are feeling that hurt which you speak of.

It is not Ryanairs intention to hurt anyone. They do the charity calendar, and it is what it is. If a role came up that involved heavy lifting, they wouldn't pick someone who couldn't lift. If a role came up that involved a lot of presentations, they wouldn't pick someone who is no good at public speaking.

In this case they are looking for some attractive girls to feature in a lads calendar. So, they are going to pick people that fit in that criteria.

If you don't fit in there, or if you take offense to the whole thing, that is your problem.

I really can't imagine that anyone is forced in to it, or feels they will be frowned upon by management if they refuse.

By the way, I'm not suggesting that the charity is the primary reason that Ryanair do that calendar. It's obviously a publicity stunt.

MrStuffins

Katgurl wrote: »

yes but if I heard my boss saying to clients -

this is katgurl, check out the rack on her

not

she's great at what she does


I'd be pretty f&&king pi$$ed off yes.


And regardless - what about the other staff that are male / older / whatever??? They might be the best and hardest working staff in ryanair and they are being overlooked. if they were prepared to be measured on their looks they would be working in the modelling industry

MrStuffins wrote: »

Treat his workforce? Come on now.

Do you think these people who complain now complain every Christmas when the Firefighters put together THEIR calendar? After all, the picture in the ad was taken from the Ryanair Charity Calendar. These women posed like they did in order to raise money for charity.

Do you think the complainants here were writing letters saying the semi-naked fighfighters in the calendar were a disgrace and it's demeaning to the rest of the country's firefighters who like to take their job seriously?

Well?

smash

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

They pulled the ad due to 17 complaints by joe bloggs public? That's a bit mad...

Remember the black and white Lacoste ad where you saw a man's bare ass? Well that was pulled from RTE a few years ago over 2 complaints.

Seachmall

smash wrote: »

Remember the black and white Lacoste ad where you saw a man's bare ass? Well that was pulled from RTE a few years ago over 2 complaints.

But he had a great arse :mad:



:pac:

Katgurl

MrStuffins wrote: »

Katgurl wrote: »

yes but if I heard my boss saying to clients -

this is katgurl, check out the rack on her

not

she's great at what she does


I'd be pretty f&&king pi$$ed off yes.


And regardless - what about the other staff that are male / older / whatever??? They might be the best and hardest working staff in ryanair and they are being overlooked. if they were prepared to be measured on their looks they would be working in the modelling industry

MrStuffins wrote: »

Treat his workforce? Come on now.

Do you think these people who complain now complain every Christmas when the Firefighters put together THEIR calendar? After all, the picture in the ad was taken from the Ryanair Charity Calendar. These women posed like they did in order to raise money for charity.

Do you think the complainants here were writing letters saying the semi-naked fighfighters in the calendar were a disgrace and it's demeaning to the rest of the country's firefighters who like to take their job seriously?

Well?

a charity calendar is different to advertising your companies services

Crooked Jack

Dean Nice Cone wrote: »

Haha care to support this "theory" you really love the fairer sex dont you ?

I could counter any man who complains about the david beckham add is a jealous small ..... Aww dosnt matter im better than that .

Yes. Because i said so. Now go make me a sandwich.

MrStuffins

Seachmall wrote: »

But he had a great arse :mad:



:pac:

Now now.............



They ALL have lovely bottoms!