A few days ago I posted on the Brut ads which feature a group of boys ogling a woman, as part of the ‘Brut code’ to ‘spot and share’.
I also commented on ‘lads ads’ on the Channel 7 Morning Show Friday, saying that Brut was brutally sexist and was reclaiming sexism as something that should be considered cool. The ads contributed to socialising boys to see girls and young women in sexually objectifying ways – as catering for their sexual fantasies. I argued the Brut ads helped undermine the global movement for women’s equality.
[vimeo]http://vimeo.com/13227994[/vimeo]
Well now the ad has been banned by the Advertising Standards Board.
Which we should be celebrating right?
That would be the case, had the Board ruled that the ads were objectifying and demeaning to women. But it didn’t. In its ruling, the Board:
“…expressed concern about the man seen sitting on the rear shelf of the vehicle and the man in the boot of the car. The Board considered that as the vehicle is depicted in motion the depiction of the person in the boot and the person sitting on the car rather than in a seat is a depiction of material that does breach community standards on safety in vehicles and safe driving.”
So, vehicle safety is more important than how women are treated.
The decision is reminiscent of a recent UK decision about Diesel “Be Stupid” ads, which I mentioned here. The ad watchdog there ruled against them – not because they were sexist, but because they might encourage copy-cat behavior.
Read Mumbrella’s account of the ASB’s decision on Brut here. Note the comment: “Isn’t it time we all went back to basics and concentrated on making great ads that sell products!?!?!” Because that’s what’s really important, not all this carry-on about the right of women to be seen as more than their sexual allure.
10 Responses
I don’t know how many times I have watched ads and wondered what they were selling, even the basic household product seems to require a pair of breasts, naked body, a bikini or some woman flirting with ‘come to bed eyes’.
And then an ad mentioned here is banned because of a safety issue rather than another blatant attempt to reduce a product to sex, sexism, objectification etc.
The government spends on trying to fix up issues in society (mental health, youth issues, drug and alcohol, a body image advisory board.) But they have yet to intervene to address this issue. I am no professor but wouldn’t one think that if these addressed advertising (print included) then maybe we would have less issues to deal with in society?
Ah, Mumbrella. An eye-opening site to be sure, letting us know what some in the ad industry really think about the way they operate.
My favourite comment from recent days was found under this post about the Brut “codes” campaign
http://mumbrella.com.au/asb-brut-ads-discriminate-against-women-27554
It’s from Jason Pryor (3 Jul 10; 4:33 pm) and goes like this:
Sorry girls who winge and sook. Big deal. It is the radical feminists who would be opposing any advertisement that depicts women as sexy. From my 40 years experience I understand most women I know or have ever known, they like to feel attractive to the opposite sex. (us guys) That is because they are normal women who don’t have hang ups. It is the gay and lesbian women who have become radical feminists morons, who complain. Get over it. Yeah what would happen if radical feminists ran the earth ? The human race would die out because gay women who don’t have normal God given relationships with men. Face it radical feminists. If all females were like you, the human race would die out because your views are wrong. You are the minority. Get lost radical feminists.
Nice.
Hi Sheryl,
Maybe if we let Jason Pryor continue speaking, he will prove our point for us. I think he’s the one with the hang ups.
i think the one good thing we can take from this (i am outraged it even got on air in the first place) is the reaction- there were at least three good pieces in the age/age online speaking out against it and lots of other media exposure of those who oppose this kind of blatant objectification. if (should i say when!?) it happens again, the asb can expect an even stronger response, i think.
Hey Melinda, Just read your book (actually just read both Sexualisation of girls and Defiant Birth) I’m ready to complain about some billboards. However I am living in North Carolina, USA at the moment. I have been searching high and low and cannot find any government or advertising standards board to complain to. Do you have any suggestions?
Fiona
So the fact that guys are topless and are pretty good looking really isn’t sexualising the ad for females at all, is it?
In fact, there definitely is no advertisements out there that try to appeal to women sexually at all.
Harden up, hypocrits.
did the ad not show a close up of a mans genital area, show girls laughing at him, and make a joke about them being “small”? i only just watched the ad on tv and wasnt paying much attention so that might not have been the case but i googled it expected to find complaints about how sexist it is towards males.
“So the fact that guys are topless and are pretty good looking really isn’t sexualising the ad for females at all, is it?” by John
John, if you find the ads sexist and offensive , why don’t YOU do something about it and complain to the ASB instead of whinging here?
Personally, no , I dont’ find topless men sexist but if YOU do, go ahead and complain if it makes you feel better.
As a male I’m embaressed that this ad is still being shown on TV. Spot and Share? I can’t believe the sleaziness being portrayed and I don’t think it’s a realistic portrayal of either sex.
Don’t tell me it’s okay to lear at women. And If I want to wear cossies instead of boardies then I f***ing will!
Brut code my arse!
Thank you.