Taste and decency - the depiction of women
Every year we receive hundreds of complaints about the gratuitous use of female images in advertising. In broad terms, complaints concern ads in which young women may appear sexually submissive, sexually suggestive or overtly sexual.
We consider several factors to determine whether an advertisement is acceptable including what the ad is for, the place it appeared and even the pose of the women shown. Below are some examples of our rulings about the depiction of women in advertisents. (Full details of these and other complaints can be viewed in the adjudications sections of our website (www.asa.org.uk/asa/adjudications).
Problematic Images
In July 2001 we received complaints about a Kwikcyl-24 advertisement, for hot water cylinders, that appeared in a specialist magazine. It pictured a woman, bent over, dressed only in thigh-length stiletto boots and a PVC mini-skirt and was headlined "IF I DON'T COME ON TIME, YOU'LL GET ME FREE". Readers of the magazine complained that the picture, coupled with the headline, was offensive. We agreed. This Kwikcyl-24 ad was in no way unique and is typical of the sort of images, texts and narration that appear in ads and commercials.
The Snappy Snaps Franchise caused several complaints in 1996 when it produced a poster of a busty woman in a black bra alongside the caption "It took all evening to pull the cracker. The photos took one hour". Thirty Six people believed the advertisement was offensive and portrayed women as sex objects. We agreed and decided that the headline, together with the image, was likely to cause offence.
Acceptable Ads
Sexy images in advertising are not always deemed to be inappropriate; for some products and services we consider they are acceptable or even necessary. We tend to be more accepting of ads that use sexy or provocative images of women to advertise products aimed at making women feel sexy or better about themselves. The following are examples of such ads and the rulings we made on them.
Gossard (1994)
We received 89 complaints about the poster campaign for the new wonderbra. The complainants found the large depiction picture of a woman in only a bra, alongside the caption “Hello Boys”. sexist and offensive. Nevertheless, in the context of an ad for underwear, we believed the posters were humorous and that the complaints were not justified.
Yorkie (2002)
Sixty Nine viewers complained about a commercial that showed a young woman impersonating a man in order to buy a Yorkie chocolate bar in a sweet shop. She had to pass several tests to prove she was a man before she could be allowed buy the chocolate bar. Viewers complained that the commercial discriminated against women and encouraged sexist attitudes. We believed that people were unlikely to be seriously offended by the commercial.
Other Rulings
Kwikcyl-24 (2001)
Two people complained about an advertisement, in Plumbing, Heating & Air Movement News Magazine, for hot water cylinders. It pictured a woman, dressed only in thigh-length stiletto boots and a PVC mini-skirt, lying on a cylinder, with the headline "HOW DO YOU WANT ME? (Horizontal or Vertical)". The complainants objected that the advertisement was tasteless and unnecessary. We believed that the advertisement was likely to cause serious or widespread offence.
Amen Ltd (2004)
Seven people complained about an advertisement, for a webserver, in PC Pro magazine. The ad stated “BOUND TO SERVE” and showed a photograph of a woman in her underwear, wearing an eye mask and kneeling down. The complaint was that the ad was offensive because it showed the woman in a degrading and subservient posture and we agreed that the image and headline in the ad was likely to cause serious or widespread offence because of the implication of subservience.
Rimstock plc (2004)
A car magazine ad showed a picture of a woman in lingerie kneeling with her bottom pressed against an alloy wheel. The ad was headlined “I Know You Want Some!” and “NEW Popstar 15 – 16 – 17 and 18 inches of Pure Pleasure!” It received a single complaint that the ad was offensive and irresponsible because it encouraged readers to think of women solely as sex objects. We agreed that the ad was likely to encourage readers to view women as sex objects and believed it may cause serious or widespread offence to readers of the magazine.
Nickers Ltd (2002)
Four people objected to a poster, for lingerie, that showed a photograph of a woman, from the thighs up, wearing only a bra, with the caption “GET YOUR KNICKERS OFF… THE NET”. The complainants were primarily that the poster was offensive and not acceptable because children could see it. We disagreed and believed that the poster was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence.
YSL Beaute Ltd (2003)
We received a single complaint about a magazine advertisement for perfume. The ad showed seven naked women with their breasts partly concealed by their hair and some were seated while others were lying down. The objection was that the ad was offensive and irresponsible because it showed naked young girls. We believed that the advertisement was not irresponsible or likely to cause serious or widespread offence.