kat_lair: (FUTURAMA - leela)
kat_lair ([personal profile] kat_lair) wrote2016-04-23 12:36 pm

As expected...

***

I did complain to ASA about this advert. As expected, this made exactly zero difference. Here is the (somewhat patronising) reply

While we appreciate your concerns, we note that the ad promotes Wilkinson Sword’s Quattro for Women Bikini, a women’s hair removal product for the bikini line, and while we acknowledge that the ad may not appeal to all viewers, and may be considered distasteful by some, we note that it does not contain any sexually suggestive or explicit language or imagery and that the ad is directly related to the product concerned.  The ad displays a light-hearted attempt at humour using a scenario that consumers may be able to identify with to some extent. We do not consider the ad likely to imply that it would be in anyway unacceptable to be anything but clean shaven, but rather to target those who do generally prefer to be clean shaven. This is of course a creative choice on the advertiser’s part and they may risk alienating sectors of the audience who disagree with their approach. We also note that Clearcast, the organisation responsible for clearing TV ads prior to broadcast, applied a scheduling restriction to the ad, which means it cannot be broadcast in or around children’s programmes.  Therefore, we consider this restriction to be sufficient and that the ad is unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence, and as such, will not be taking further action at this time.


And my reply to that:

This is exactly the outcome I was expecting, so the decision is no surprise. The complaint was made out of desire to make a point rather than any expectation of change, as change about things like these is slow in coming and hard won. I continue to disagree strongly about what the ad implies regarding women’s beauty standards - not that it’s the only one of its kind as these problems are far more systemic and structural, embedded into and perpetuated by the media well beyond advertising industry. I appreciate the personal response from the ASA though, thank you for that.


I will continue to shout about stuff like this at any given opportunity.

***

[identity profile] milly-gal.livejournal.com 2016-04-23 12:19 pm (UTC)(link)
The point of the complaint also had NOTHING to do with sexual content, why exactly do they assume when a woman complains about something that it's because it's about sexual content and not the fact that it's fucking offensive to assume that *THAT* is the body norm and isn't gonna make girls/women everywhere feel inadequate and promotes the wrong image. Damn stupid company!

I know they then went on to actually mention the real need for the complaint but to go straight to sexual content is a cop-out!! GRRR!

[identity profile] kat-lair.livejournal.com 2016-04-24 02:19 pm (UTC)(link)
Oh I know and completely agree; I think a lot of that reply was kind of 'stock answer' as those are the things ASA can officially pull an ad for and so they went to pains to point out that they weren't present and these kind of 'implication' type of things are too hazy to do anything about.

[identity profile] milly-gal.livejournal.com 2016-04-24 03:06 pm (UTC)(link)
Least they actually bothered to reply at all, I 'spose, still though....O.o

[identity profile] chocolate-frapp.livejournal.com 2016-04-23 04:30 pm (UTC)(link)
good for you for getting up in their shit. I kind of knew it was gonna fall on deaf ears because they're sexist dumb fucks but you did the right thing.

[identity profile] kat-lair.livejournal.com 2016-04-24 02:20 pm (UTC)(link)
Thank you! I was angry enough to make the point even though I knew it wouldn't make a difference this time around... But still needed saying.

[identity profile] moth2fic.livejournal.com 2016-04-23 05:14 pm (UTC)(link)
Hugs you for taking the time and effort needed to write to them. I dont even watch enough TV to see adverts so would never have noticed it, but it sends messages to the world for us all.

[identity profile] kat-lair.livejournal.com 2016-04-24 02:21 pm (UTC)(link)
I end up ranting at TV adverts a lot (for reference, see any time an ad comes about the super!mums cleaning the kitchen etc) but this was the first time I got angry enough to fill the ASA for. I may just start doing it more often to be a pest :D

[identity profile] margaret-r.livejournal.com 2016-04-24 01:26 am (UTC)(link)
The context of your complaint was completely lost on them, but at least you tried!

[identity profile] kat-lair.livejournal.com 2016-04-24 02:24 pm (UTC)(link)
As I said in an above comment, I think the reply uses some stock phrases. What's amusing of course that if the advert had actually used the word 'vagina' instead the infantilising 'down there', it probably would've been pulled. Because using proper names for genitals if far more serious than the implication that women's genitals need grooming to be acceptable. *rolls eyes*