Three Ireland removes ad after mob misinterpret it

Dogowner55

Custardpi wrote: »

How could you dislike the guy who gave us Father Ted & The IT Crowd?

He is usually on of the side of the perpetually offended, I am kinda surprised he didn't come down on the otherside of this.

Will say his tranny episode of the it crowd is brilliant

efb

So what movie is it? Boys don't Cry???

The King of Moo

What a terrible ad; it's not clear at all that it's a reference to The Crying Game, they got the genders mixed up, and the twist occurs early in the film.

My initial thought was that it was a "laddish" joke about some someone unknowingly "scoring with" a transgender person, so it's very easy to see that it could be seen as using transgender people as the object of a cheap stupid joke. I think it's disingenuous to say that's not apparent.

And you shouldn't have to read small print on a billboard to understand an ad.
Don Draper must be rolling in his televisual grave.

jackofalltrades

I think the ad's vague.

That said do people really think a large multinational company is going to bring out ad that has a go at transgender people?
It seems highly unlikely.
Maybe we should give Three the benefit of the doubt before castigating them.

zeffabelli

Well I'll be damned, what is this about? I neither understand the ad nor the offence to it.

And I am so sick to the teeth now of protected species and special interest groups expecting the world to mollycoddle them.

In what universe were we all born into unconditional approval?

Grow up.

Links234

jackofalltrades wrote: »

That said do people really think a large multinational company is going to bring out ad that has a go at transgender people?

Well, yes actually. Both Vodafone and Paddy Power have run ads that had goes at transgender people just off the top of my head. Trans people are often just the butt of jokes, so it's quite an easy assumption to make if you're on the recieving end of that.

BunkMoreland

Transphobic, never heard that word. I'd be a bit of an ould transphope to be fair.

JONJO THE MISER

I saw one of the adds on t.v with your man falling on the ice.
Dont think that is right to broadcast over and over, surely your man could sue them.

lazybones32

Links234 wrote: »

I've neither made it an issue, nor taken offense. All I asked was that folks try and see how the ad might come across.

But how in the World can I, a male, try to imagine what this advert may appear like in the eyes of a man or woman who thinks they were born in the wrong body?

Why don't you try see it through my eyes? I saw it; didn't understand it; carried on with my business and didn't take to Twitter/FB/Boards because of faux-outrage.

Wright

Clandestine wrote: »

The perpetually offended

So, Irish people? :V

TBH that ad does make light of transgender people and in the current climate 3 should have known better.

Ken.

Wright wrote: »

So, Irish people? :V

TBH that ad does make light of transgender people and in the current climate 3 should have known better.

They do know better. Look at everyone talking about them here and on other sites. Job done.

Fleawuss

Custardpi wrote: »

So it's not a great advert. So, what? Plenty of those about which don't attract that kind of outrage. Once again, why would a company decide to randomly insult a minority group as a "selling point"? It makes no sense if you stop & think about it for a moment. Sadly that appears to be too much of an effort for some people.

The point is that you would expect a company trying to promote itself and paying to do that, to do it in an effective way that understands its audience. Clearly there is a failure. I can see how trans people would be offended by it. It's glib, cliched and badly out of step with Irish society. Things are not as simple as the powers that be in 1992 had us all believe.

SMJSF

I didn't read the comments on here before clicking on the link..... But I thought it was about catfish-ing!!!

Ken.

BunkMoreland wrote: »

Transphobic, never heard that word. I'd be a bit of an ould transphope to be fair.

I prefer megatron to Optimus Prime. Am I transphobic?

wp_rathead

I thought it was a reference to the show Catfish myself - when they track the person down at the end of the show they are often someone older or a completely different gender in some cases. The show is on Netflix so alot of people would watch it on their phone..

The add makes no sense if it is having a go at Trans people..

4zn76tysfajdxp

I think it's misogynistic, actually. Like there's anything wrong with a man actually turning out to be a woman. :mad: I, for one, am outraged.

Fleawuss

lazybones32 wrote: »

But how in the World can I, a male, try to imagine what this advert may appear like in the eyes of a man or woman who thinks they were born in the wrong body?

Why don't you try see it through my eyes? I saw it; didn't understand it; carried on with my business and didn't take to Twitter/FB/Boards because of faux-outrage.

You have answered yourself. If you say you couldn't possibly understand how a trans person would react that's fine. If you then claimed to be outraged that would be faux outrage. It's not faux outrage for a trans person.

Dogowner55

Fleawuss wrote: »

You have answered yourself. If you say you couldn't possibly understand how a trans person would react that's fine. If you then claimed to be outraged that would be faux outrage. It's not faux outrage for a trans person.

But just like you can't understand a schizophrenic, you shouldn't have to pussyfoot around trying not upset them when they are not all mentally there, if you are a man that thinks he a woman that person will never full right in the head.


Mod: Please do not respond to this user as they have been banned.

lazybones32

Thomas Fancy Poker wrote: »

I think it's misogynistic, actually. Like there's anything wrong with a man actually turning out to be a woman. :mad: I, for one, am outraged.

I think you're a misandrist for thinking it's misogynistic.

Fleawuss wrote: »

You have answered yourself. If you say you couldn't possibly understand how a trans person would react that's fine. If you then claimed to be outraged that would be faux outrage. It's not faux outrage for a trans person.

And you have answered me answering me. I love these philosophical back-and-forth's...it makes boards special.

P_1

Look if you've had years of being made a joke of just because of who you are you're not going to be exploring the subtleties of an ad that is appearing to be more of the same too deeply.

Cold War Kid

If trans people got the wrong end of the stick due to being on the receiving end of belittling and abuse for years, fair enough, but... are context and intent being taken into consideration? Clarification that what they thought was meant was not meant?
And trans people don't need non trans people getting offended on their behalf do they? Particularly when it seems more about them (the non trans people) and just an enjoyment in revelling in the drama and outrage?

thee glitz

I'm glad so many have expressed their outrage at this ad. Things must really be improving if people have nothing better to do. So you're offended by something like this - don't go embarass yourself on internets, determine and address the reasons why you believe the problem is not yours.

humanji

Dogowner55 wrote:

But just like you can't understand a schizophrenic, you shouldn't have to pussyfoot around trying not upset them when they are not all mentally there, if you are a man that thinks he a woman that person will never full right in the head.

Mod: And with that the troll was banished and never bothered the villagers again.

Links234

Cold War Kid wrote: »

are context and intent being taken into consideration? Clarification that what they thought was meant was not meant?

You mean like the initial tweet from TENI?

https://twitter.com/TENI_Tweets/status/621298496587624448

I think the choice of words on how it "seems" transphobic is giving the benefit of doubt and is not a direct accusation, and asking them to elaborate is looking for clarification on what the intent was, so it reads to me like a fairly measured comment directed towards Three.

thee glitz

Links234 wrote: »

I think the choice of words on how it "seems" transphobic is giving the benefit of doubt and is not a direct accusation, and asking them to elaborate is looking for clarification on what the intent was, so it reads to me like a fairly measured comment directed towards Three.

It reads to me like willful ignorance of the intent.

SpaceTime

If they'd only concentrate on making their damn network actually function instead of offending trans people we might actually get somewhere!!

lertsnim

Links234 wrote: »

I think the choice of words on how it "seems" transphobic is giving the benefit of doubt and is not a direct accusation, and asking them to elaborate is looking for clarification on what the intent was, so it reads to me like a fairly measured comment directed towards Three.

Fairly measured? It was confrontational from the get go.

Samaris

OK, I'll admit I did not get the reference to the movie. To me, not having seen the film, it came over to me as a sly poke at a hypothetical situation where someone was flirting with a girl, and only after they'd used all their data, they found out she was born male. OH SHOCK HORROR.

I think that was actually a fairly reasonable interpretation of the stupid ad. And it must be nice to drive past that billboard and have all the cases where this really goddam happened jump to mind. Read on if you want, don't if you prefer not to, but if it makes someone think for a second that maybe of all the films they could have chosen with twist endings, they could have used "It was a sled" or "The ship sinks." or y'know, anything else, then my absolute basic skimming of the internet will have been of some use.
_________________________________________

Deoni Jones (23) - fatally stabbed in the face at a bus-stop in 2012 by a stranger. Believed to be because the killer could tell she was transgender.

Brandy Martell, (37) - was in a lcub with three other transgender women, when they were approached by two men who wanted them to go with them. When they learned they were transgender, they left, then returned and shot her dead.

Tiffany Edwards, (28) shot by a man who reported himself as having suffered "trans-panic" on realising she had been born male.

Çağla Joker (21),- shot dead and her friend, another transgender woman, was injured when two teenagers opened fire on them. They claimed that they wanted sex with them, then found out they were transgender.

Marcela Duque, (46) - stoned to death by a crowd in Columbia. Being investigated as a hate crime.

Those are just the ones where it is extremely likely that it was specifically due to being transgendered, and you'll note the "trans-panic" thing popping up there. A further 226 names were listed for 2014 in Europe. For such a tiny proportion of the population, that is high. A large number and most of the cases I read about and then excluded were quite simply never solved. A crime where a total stranger pops up, murders someone for apparently no reason (albeit perhaps being transgender counts) and then vanishes is tricky. Two transgender women [Kandy Hall and Mia Henderson] were found savagely mutilated in the same community within weeks of each other in 2014. Neither case was solved. Those above were all 2014, and they were only a very select few.

Other sample cases:
Angie Zapata (2008) - beaten to death by a man who referred to her as "it". She was 18.

Tyra Hunter (1995) was injured in a car accident. When rescue workers realised she had been born male, they pulled back, refused to treat her, and insulted her as she lay dying. She almost certainly would have survived if they'd done their jobs.

Robert Eads died of ovarian cancer in 1999 after being refused treatment by more than two dozen doctors who were afraid that taking on a transgender man might harm their practice

Brandon Teena - raped and murdered and frankly, I don't want to go into the details of that case. You know it from the film Boys Don't Cry.

Nireah Johnson (2003) murdered by a man who was initially sexually attracted to her and then discovered that she was transgender.

Alexis King (2006) - transpanic claimed as the defence for shooting her several times in the back and side as she tried to escape, having picked her up for sex. Presumably he panicked at the concept of a penis being within 100 yards of him. Obviously the judge agreed, as he got five years, since he was obviously in mental distress and terror.

Ffs, I could go on, but if you're not convinced yet that this whole OH GOD SHE'S A HE is a serious issue that is killing people, then you never will be.

__________________________________________________

TL:DR - it was a dumbass ad, and yeah, it was about the MOVIE, GUIZE.

Jesus. Just say it was the ****ing sled next time.

Taco Chips

A lot of very predictable responses on this thread from the usual crankies complaining about "PC gawn maaad" and "people seeking offence" and all the usual empty rabble terms. I've never seen the film the ad is supposed to be referencing. When I looked at the ad first I thought it was a pretty poor attempt at humour at the expense of the transgender community along the lines of "haha he got tricked into thinking he was scoring a woman... when it was really a man!1!! isn't that so gross and funny". And so did many other people, hence the response to the ad in the first place. They have a valid point.

Transgender individuals are one of the most vulnerable groups in society currently and certainly judging by the tone of many posters in this thread very few people seem to consider their feelings or bother to try and perceive things from their POV. It's very easy to think people are over reacting when you've never had to deal with the daily slights and prejudice against you.

Fortunately many positive steps have been made this year for the LGBT community in Ireland and there has definitely been a wider acceptance and extension of love from Irish people. There's still plenty of work to be done but Ireland is doing a great job in leading the world. What is disappointing is sometimes seeing a tone of "well you got marriage equality, what more do you want?" It's not pervasive thankfully but it exists. At the very least many of the contributions on this thread show that there is still plenty of awareness required for the needs of transgender people in Ireland. Three have apologised and removed the ad, acknowledging that it was wrong. Hopefully some of the others who posted on this thread will sit back and reconsider their words too.

mcmoustache

I actually thought that this was about transvestites like Annie Lennox or French and Saunders or something.

The word "was" is/was a little ambiguous in that context.

Carlos Orange

People who are offended about everything still offended.
The rest of us just confused about what the ad meant.

jackofalltrades

Links234 wrote: »

Well, yes actually. Both Vodafone and Paddy Power have run ads that had goes at transgender people just off the top of my head. Trans people are often just the butt of jokes, so it's quite an easy assumption to make if you're on the recieving end of that.

I don't know know the Vodafone ad you're talking about, but the Paddy Power ad was over 3 years ago.
Public opinion has moved on a lot since then.
I still don't believe a reputable company like Three would use transgender people as a butt of a joke.

Links234 wrote: »

I think the choice of words on how it "seems" transphobic is giving the benefit of doubt and is not a direct accusation, and asking them to elaborate is looking for clarification on what the intent was, so it reads to me like a fairly measured comment directed towards Three.

They would have been better simply asking them to explain what the ad was about.
Saying that it seemed transphobic just adds fuel to the mob response, before Three have a chance to explain themselves.

Samaris

psinno wrote: »

People who are offended about everything still offended.
The rest of us just confused about what the ad meant.

Dunno about "the rest". I don't SEEK to get offended, for instance, but I was first confused by that ad, and then rather pissed off because it just plain looked like a cheap shot. Knowing it's about the movie, I'm more "sheesh, couldn't you have picked any other film? Really?"

I -am- a filthy liberal, but it's mostly that I don't like punching down, so to speak. Pick on someone your own size, rather than making a cheap joke at someone who gets this **** from every direction anyway, is rather my view.

Carlos Orange

Samaris wrote: »

Dunno about "the rest". I don't SEEK to get offended, for instance, but I was first confused by that ad, and then rather pissed off because it just plain looked like a cheap shot. Knowing it's about the movie, I'm more "sheesh, couldn't you have picked any other film? Really?"

I -am- a filthy liberal, but it's mostly that I don't like punching down, so to speak. Pick on someone your own size, rather than making a cheap joke at someone who gets this **** from every direction anyway, is rather my view.

Well done. You get to be both groups.

tommyombomb

Samaris wrote: »

Dunno about "the rest". I don't SEEK to get offended, for instance, but I was first confused by that ad, and then rather pissed off because it just plain looked like a cheap shot. Knowing it's about the movie, I'm more "sheesh, couldn't you have picked any other film? Really?"

I -am- a filthy liberal, but it's mostly that I don't like punching down, so to speak. Pick on someone your own size, rather than making a cheap joke at someone who gets this **** from every direction anyway, is rather my view.

Don't know the movie, it's in the tread, tl;dr but I would take it as someone who was messaging someone on tender etc and didn't realise someone was a transgender or a guy messing with another guy. Political correctness is going too far lately.

NachoBusiness

Samaris wrote: »

TL:DR - it was a dumbass ad, and yeah, it was about the MOVIE, GUIZE.

Isn't all that just a little ott?

I mean, wouldn't it be better if the Transgender community had in someway embraced the advert and saw the funny side of it. Having a sense of humour might actually go a long way to taking away the stigma surrounding transgender. Surely it is more important to be seen as being human, above all else, no?

Speaking as a straight guy, the jokes I have heard / laughed at where someone had mistook or was mistaking one sex for another, it tended to have been where members of the transgender community where far from the butt of the joke. The butt of the joke tended to be the person who has made the error chatting up the guy thinking they were a girl. I'm sure there has been hundreds of such jokes on Boards. In fact, I think I recall someone here starting a thread where they were due to marry a woman they had met online, but had never met them in real life and a few users made some 'Bet she has a dick' jokes but those type pf jokes are not meant to poke fun at transgender people, or even gay people, they are meant to make poke fun at the guys for having ended up in that position.

Have you ever seen Trainspotting? Well that film is over twenty years old now and even then, when Begbie (one of the main characters) loses the head after realizing a woman he was trying it on with was in fact a transvestite, the joke is on Begbie for having got himself in that position, not on the transvestite. Begbie is the one portrayed as the twat as while the subject of a joke might be transgender, the butt of it may very well not be and that is a crucial point often overlooked by those that take offence.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAbIL8C2JJ0

Three meant no malice and so in my view should not have pulled the ad but they are the times we live in unfortunately. It's all about appearance and the real reason, I would suggest, that those ads were pulled were because Three feels they have caused offense, bit because they want to put as much distance between them and such controversy as is humanly possible, for PR reasons. It's bad business. Missed opportunity I feel here for the trans community. They could have used it to their advantage in some way, but now they have just come across as a group looking to take offence. Which could backfire in the long run, as the little boy who cried wolf knows only too well.

Taco Chips

NachoBusiness wrote: »

Isn't all that just a little ott?

I mean, wouldn't it be better if the Transgender community had in someway embraced the advert and saw the funny side of it. Having a sense of humour might actually go a long way to taking away the stigma surrounding transgender. Surely it is more important to be seen as being human, above all else, no?

SNIP

Speaking as a straight guy, the jokes I have heard / laughed at where someone had mistook or was mistaking one sex for another, it tended to have been where members of the transgender community where far from the butt of the joke. The butt of the joke tended to be the person who has made the error chatting up the guy thinking they were a girl. I'm sure there has been hundreds of such jokes on Boards. In fact, I think I recall someone here starting a thread where they were due to marry a woman they had met online, but had never met them in real life and a few users made some 'Bet she has a dick' jokes but those type pf jokes are not meant to poke fun at transgender people, or even gay people, they are meant to make poke fun at the guys for having ended up in that position.

So transgender people should just crack a smile for a change and not be annoyed at the barrage of daily insults, pass remarks and being made feel less worthwhile? It might not seem like a big deal to you because you're not experiencing it but I'm sure it gets exhausting having to deal with the little slights every single day of your life.

Have you seen "Panti's Noble Call" speech? It was a viral video made last year by Panti Bliss addressing an audience in the Olympia. In it she spoke of daily instances of homophobia that seem inconsequential and how she usually just puts up with it or puts a smile on. But lots of little instances add up to a wider issue. She was always stopping herself, checking to make sure she wasn't being "too gay" or "too queer" in the way she spoke, acted. Because that's what was drawing the jokes and the criticism all the time. It's largely similar for trans individuals.

A lot of little things contribute to a big problem in attitudes. It's little digs like this that are passed off as banter that chip away at the basic decency that trans people are entitled to. You say they should lighten up. Maybe they can lighten up when they have something to be light about, when they are given the proper consideration and respect they deserve as fellow humans in society then maybe we can all enjoy some friendly jokes. At the moment one group in a dominant position of power is undermining a much marginalised, vulnerable group.

Samaris

I do get your points there, NachoBusiness and you're not wrong. BUT...I would certainly defer to the transcommunity in this case, and no, I -don't- know if it was mainly them or mainly people like me who were protesting. If the transcommunity have no problem with it, grand! It's them that are affected, not me. But it does seem that there are people who find it stupid and hurtful, and if they are affected, then they have more right to ask that it be taken down than others have the right to see it.

I do think it's very dodgy to ask that people have a sense of humour about something that affects them more than anyone else though. "Ah sure, it's only a bit of a laugh" is a dangerous defence. The specific examples that you gave, no, I don't reckon are offensive, -in my opinion-. I do feel that the ad is very readable in at least two different ways though, and the other, I -can- see why people could be angry. Living under the fear that someone could feel that sense of ...claiming you as a woman, and then being honestly so damn angry about finding you're not what they think you should be, that they might murder you for it, even if their attentions were unwanted in the first place sounds like a terrifying position to be in. And it -happens-, far too much. It's damned hard to turn that into a bit of a laugh.

I do get that it was referring to the movie plotline. But out of context and to an audience that might not get the reference, it's a bit...well, it's a bit unnecessary.

lertsnim

Taco Chips wrote: »

It's little digs like this that are passed off as banter that chip away at the basic decency that trans people are entitled to.

But this wasn't a dig at transgender people.

Taco Chips

lertsnim wrote: »

But this wasn't a dig at transgender people.

Not directly, but it was perceived as such and its easy to see why. The ad reads as a casual dig to most people, hence the reaction and why we are here talking about it in the first place.

Samaris

Taco Chips wrote: »

Not directly, but it was perceived as such and its easy to see why. The ad reads as a casual dig to most people, hence the reaction and why we are here talking about it in the first place.

Yeah, basically that.

Having said that, if transgender people aren't offended, then I certainly don't have the right to be, and this is definitely not about me, or, I suspect, anyone in this thread. But if people who are transgender, who actually live with this crap day to day find it upsetting, then I can see why.

Smiles35

Samaris wrote: »

Yeah, basically that.

Having said that, if transgender people aren't offended, then I certainly don't have the right to be, and this is definitely not about me, or, I suspect, anyone in this thread. But if people who are transgender, who actually live with this crap day to day find it upsetting, then I can see why.

No. I'm not buying that. The line it self is sanguine. Could have been a happy suprise. And it's pretty insulting that someone conciders their past sexuality a dirty slur.

frostyjacks

When I was growing up we all believed gays and transsexuals etc to be really hypersensitive drama queens, always making a song and dance over nothing. Later we were taught that that was wrong, that that was a stereotype, and they're actually the same as you and me. But now I can see that my first impression was correct; they really are a bunch of sissies. There was nothing in that ad worth complaining about. Just an excuse to cry victim.

Samaris

Noblong wrote: »

No. I'm not buying that. The line it self is sanguine. Could have been a happy suprise. And it's pretty insulting that someone conciders their past sexuality a dirty slur.

..I ..don't follow. What?

Taco Chips

frostyjacks wrote: »

When I was growing up we all believed gays and transsexuals etc to be really hypersensitive drama queens, always making a song and dance over nothing. Later we were taught that that was wrong, that that was a stereotype, and they're actually the same as you and me. But now I can see that my first impression was correct; they really are a bunch of sissies. There was nothing in that ad worth complaining about. Just an excuse to cry victim.

Do you make a habit of ignoring every post explaining things before just so you can blurt out some crudely formed, unoriginal opinion?

lizzyman

Custardpi wrote: »

That's some of the milder stuff actually. Have a look for "Otherkin" & "Headmates" there. :eek::eek::eek:

Reading about 'otherkin' now. And there was me thinking I'd seen all the crazy ass shít the internet had to offer.

RayM

frostyjacks wrote: »

When I was growing up we all believed gays and transsexuals etc to be really hypersensitive drama queens, always making a song and dance over nothing.

So, you were brought up by ignorant bigots then? That explains a lot.

Smiles35

Samaris wrote: »

..I ..don't follow. What?

Apologies. Did'nt really read your post properly. Much to fair though imo. We've all grown up with advertising and know about smart tag-lines .ect.

Tombi!

frostyjacks wrote: »

When I was growing up we all believed gay and transsexuals etc to be really hypersensitive drama queens, always making a song and dance over nothing. Later we were taught that that was wrong, that that was a stereotype, and they're actually the same as you and me. But now I can see that my first impression was correct; they really are a bunch of sissies. There was nothing in that ad worth complaining about. Just an excuse to cry victim.

mod: have a holiday from here for your homophobia

Little CuChulainn

Links234 wrote: »

Well, yes actually. Both Vodafone and Paddy Power have run ads that had goes at transgender people just off the top of my head. Trans people are often just the butt of jokes, so it's quite an easy assumption to make if you're on the recieving end of that.

But this ad isn't having a go at anyone other than Vodafone. It seems the mere mentioning of transgender people is considered having a go.