The British Empire As A Giant Nursery School With Pubs And Kilts
Jezebel reports (with some glee) that the UK ad industry watchdog just released new regulations intended to cut down on the "gender stereotypes" in advertising. Jezzie laments that such speech bans "will likely never, ever, in a billion years, happen in the United States!"
Yes, free speech is so sad, ladies.
The new standards in the UK are not intended to prohibit all stereotypes--an ad can still show a woman cleaning and a man doing something involving a car or physical labor, or whatever--but they will apply to stereotypes that "can potentially cause harm."Via the report, those stereotypes include:
An ad which depicts family members creating mess while a woman has sole responsibility for cleaning it up.
An ad that suggests an activity is inappropriate for a girl because it is stereotypically associated with boys or vice versa.
An ad that features a man trying and failing to undertake simple parental or household tasks.
More from Mark Sweney at The Guardian:
It will also toughen rules on ads that "body shame" young women after an outcry over Protein World's controversial "Beach body ready" campaign, which was not banned despite a petition with 70,000 signatures claiming that its depiction of a bikini-clad model in an ad for a weight-loss product was socially irresponsible.The ASA's proposals, outlined in a report conducted with research firm GfK, are part of an effort to address the portrayal of women in ads in particular.
The project, which the watchdog considers the most comprehensive review of gender stereotyping anywhere in the world, follows a major crackdown on "airbrushing", which has seen major beauty ads featuring stars such as Cara Delevingne, Natalie Portman, and Julia Roberts banned. It has also banned ads featuring "unhealthily thin" models.
Its proposals will also clarify the existing code relating to ads that objectify or inappropriately sexualise women and girls.
"Our review shows that specific forms of gender stereotypes in ads can contribute to harm for adults and children," said Ella Smillie, lead author of the report.
Really? @YeyoZa tweets:
Study found no relation between gender stereotypes in TV advertising and gender equality across different countries https://t.co/DCTVzLTVZy
— Yeyo (@YeyoZa) July 19, 2017
More from the piece:
Guy Parker, the chief executive of the ASA, said: "Portrayals which reinforce outdated and stereotypical views on gender roles in society can play their part in driving unfair outcomes for people."While advertising is only one of many factors that contribute to unequal gender outcomes, tougher advertising standards can play an important role in tackling inequalities and improving outcomes for individuals, the economy and society as a whole."
Couldn't be, like, hormones 'n' stuff that leads women to want to be moms. And when dad's working all day at an office, should he really come home, don an apron and start vacuuming?
via @Robert_Graboyes
"An ad that features a man trying and failing to undertake simple parental or household tasks."
Throwing a bone to the MRAs. Was that sexist of me to frame men as dogs? Anyhow, as a divorced dad - a qualified member of this victim class - I say bring on the ads poking fun of the fact that I never remeber to buy paper towels and toilet paper. So long as they're at least reasonably funny.
smurfy at July 20, 2017 9:01 AM
Though I think some of those MRAs can be a little sensy too. Maybe I'm not a true member of the class.
smurfy at July 20, 2017 9:16 AM
Did I just hear a dog whistle? However, as a single dude, I resent those that would belittle my station as Chief Cook and Bottle Washer.
Additionally, that guy is using the sock wrong.
I R A Darth Aggie at July 20, 2017 10:48 AM
If you look at ads in magazines that objectify women, have unreasonably thin models, or airbrush, their removal would put every single woman's mag out of business and leave most men's magazines untouched.
And who exactly is a weight loss ad aimed at? Women who want to look like the bikini girl. So, targeted correctly but now forbidden.
The idea that this agency can properly determine which ads are harmful to future success of people is simply nuts. They have no idea and will simply ban stuff that hurts their personal feelings.
cc at July 20, 2017 10:52 AM
Wow. The people in charge of stuff must really believe that women and girls are pathetic imbeciles, given that they need so much help not to be "harmed" by living in society -- at least in comparison to those dastardly menz for whom life is a bed of roses, apparently.
Well, they're in charge, so they must be right, right?
Jay R at July 20, 2017 1:07 PM
It (the Advertising Standards Authority or ASA) has also banned ads featuring "unhealthily thin" models.
This is motivated by envious, overweight women.
Protein World's "controversial" ad shows a fit, healthy young woman in a bikini, and encourages young women to seek such a fit, healthy "beach body" by buying and consuming its product. Apparently that constitutes "body shaming" in the UK now.
Being overweight (a BMI of 25 or higher) - the politically correct term for it is "having a different body shape" - is a bigger threat to health and life than being skinny.
According to World Health Organizaiton, 65% of the world’s population live in countries where overweight and obesity kills more people than underweight. At least 2.8 million adults die each year as a result of being overweight or obese. About 600,000 in the U.S. if you count the deaths from heart disease, cancer and diabetes that are related to obesity. In countries where more people die from being underweight, the problem is famine, poverty and starvation, not body shaming, anorexia or slim young models.
About 0.9% of American women have anorexia; about 38.3% are obese (BMI of 30 or higher) Fat causes more deaths and is a greater burden on the healthcare system and economy. But fat women have a lot more votes. If they don't want to see slim, healthy women in advertisements I'm sure the politicians will be happy to accommodate them.
Ken R at July 20, 2017 3:13 PM
And when dad's working all day at an office, should he really come home, don an apron
___________________________________
Well, given that the tradition/cliche is that a husband likes to see supper on the table at the same time before 8 pm Every Night, that WOULD make sense. Why should he get to flop in a chair when she can't? She's been working all day too - on her feet. If he works at an office, he gets to sit down a good deal.
Depends on the household. If we're talking about a house where, despite all the modern labor-saving devices, the housewife simply can't keep the house from smelling truly bad (not to mention laundry, dishes, grocery-shopping, and keeping a toddler out of mischief) AND get dinner on the table at the same time every night, yes, he should pitch in. If the kids are old enough to pitch in beforehand, then in theory, EVERYONE should get to sit down when Dad wants to sit down. Same goes for those couples who don't mind a smelly house but who want dinner on time. If he DOES mind a smelly house, again, he should be doing what he can to get the basic chores done. (Obviously, one doesn't typically need to dust or vacuum every day - but with a family of four, you can't say the same about the kitchen or bathroom.)
lenona at July 21, 2017 9:26 AM
Leave a comment