Regulators from the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) have banned one of these adverts on the grounds that it objectified women and yet it found the other one perfectly acceptable and no more than mildly sexual.
Now I rather suspect that like me, you will be hard pushed to decide which of these adverts is acceptable and which is objectifying women, I did ask my wife and female children and none of them could tell me which was banned.
The ASA said of the advert which was displayed on a train platform in November, “we consider she (the model) would be seen as being in a state of undress and that the focus was on her chest area and lower abdomen rather than the clothing being advertised.
Having received complaints from the public they also said of the model’s pose “that her head was tilted back, with her mouth slightly open and her leg was bent and raised.” “We considered that the sexually suggestive styling and pose would be seen as presenting woman as sexual objects and because the ad objectified women it was likely to cause serious offence.”
Now, I’m guessing you are still none the wiser as to which advert was banned, it was in fact the one on the left although I would have thought the ASA’s description could have described either.
Personally, I saw nothing wrong with either photo except for the fact that the model in the banned ad seemed to have put her seamed tights on back to front!
About The Diary of a Country Bumpkin
I am a retired actor, although to be honest I only retired because I wasn't getting any work due to losing my agent when I became a full time carer to my mother who had dementia. and the option of becoming an unemployed actor/waiter at my age was ludicrous, especially as my waiting skills are non-existent.
Having said I’m retired, I don’t think there really is such a thing as a retired actor for I am still available for work, I just don’t have an agent or any connections with regards to obtaining any worthwhile work.
I have over the years done student films when there is nothing else available, always low paid (if at all) the only incentive was always the promised copy of the finished film for your show reel which nine times out of ten always failed to materialise.
I spent many years looking after my aged mother and shortly after her death I was lucky enough to run into an ex-girlfriend of many years ago and our romance blossomed once again, resulting in us getting married in 2013.
My move to the countryside inspired me to write The Diary of a Country Bumpkin which tells of my continuing dilemmas in dealing with the rigors of the countryside from the unexpectedly large number of pollens, fungal moulds and hay products waiting to attack the unsuspecting townie.
I enjoy writing, see my play Dulce Et Decorum Est Pro Patria Mori on The Wireless Theatre Company, The Plays Wot I Wrote and The Battle of Barking Creek both available on Amazon.co.uk and am very fond of classic cars so my ideal occupation would be acting in a film I had written set in the 1930s/40s, we live in hopes.
I am delighted to say that since venturing to the countryside where space is not quite the premium it is in town, I have due to the availability of two double garages acquired more classic cars to form a small collection the pride of which are a 1947 Bentley Mk VI and a 2000 Bentley Arnage.
My various blogs and websites are continually evolving and I’m sure that by following the appropriate links you will find something which will edify or amuse.
I have written a number of different books all available on Amazon, so don't be shy should you feel the urge to purchase. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Mr-Joe-Wells/e/B06XKWFQHT/ref=dp_byline_cont_book_1
This entry was posted in Uncategorized
. Bookmark the permalink
You got me on that one. This reminds me that many years ago before the Internet when people had to go to porn theaters for sex flicks, the City Of Albuquerque formed a porn board to determine which films were appropriate for Albuquerque’s porn consumers. It was a joke, because many times the member of the board had to go back and watch a film more than once to determine it’s appropriateness.
I thought I was seeing things with the seams at the front!
I’m glad I wasn’t the only one to see it.
Well it’s obviously the one on the left because she’s wearing black … I mean who would be interested in looking at the one on the right, she’s wearing a dressing gown! – sarcasm mode engaged.
I thought the stockings was a new fashion trend.
It wouldn’t surprise me if it was but as someone who takes part in forties events with my wife I am only used to seeing seamed stockings put on the correct way.
“ We considered that the sexually suggestive styling and pose would be seen as presenting woman as sexual objects”
Of course it is, and this is exactly what the advertiser intended with both photographs. So, if the ASA is using those grounds, why on earth didn’t they ban both?