Depiction of women
Upheld advertisements
The Board has found a number of advertisements in breach of Section 2.2 of the Code for the use of sexual appeal in a manner which is exploitative and degrading to women . The Board ’ s view is :
• Advertising which reduces a woman to a single part of her body and suggests that she is property or that she exists for the enjoyment of others is exploitative and degrading .
--
An Instagram advertisement depicting a t-shirt with a picture of a woman in underwear from behind . A male hand is grabbing her bottom ( TakeClothe – 0582 / 16 ).
• Advertisements for lingerie can breach this section of the code , if the advertisement suggests that the woman is the product , rather than the lingerie .
--
A poster advertisement featuring an image of a woman wearing black , lacy lingerie , and included the text “ introducing Natalie ” and “ room service ” ( Honey Birdette – 0217 / 16 ).
Relevance to product
Advertisers should use caution depicting sexualised or nude images when there is no direct relevance to the product . The Board ’ s view is :
• When a woman is depicted in swimwear or underwear , and it is directly relevant to the product being sold , it is not degrading so long as the woman is depicted in a positive light and her pose is not overly sexualised .
--
Women in bikinis to promote a tanning and beauty salon ( The Beauty Door – 0504 / 16 ) and a surf shop ( Offshore Surf – 0034 / 16 ).
• It is reasonable for advertisers to use attractive models in their advertisements , if the women are not used in poses or situations which are exploitative and degrading .
--
A woman on the beach eating a burger ( Carl Jr Burgers – 0015 / 16 ) and women promoting a mechanic service ( Ultra Tune – 0022 / 16 , 0024 / 16 , 0040 / 16 , 0145 / 16 and 0236 / 16 ).
• It is reasonable to depict attractive models in costumes associated with brands or products being sold , and while it may be exploitative to use women in this way when they are portrayed in a positive light it is not considered degrading .
--
A woman in a bikini to advertise a bikini car wash ( Bally Cafe and Splash – 0570 / 16 ).
--
A woman with a tool belt and hardhat and the words “ tradies wanted ” ( Zac Homes – 0117 / 16 ).
--
Promotions for Octoberfest with women in traditional German costumes with low-cut tops and steins of beer ( Urban Purveyor Group – 0137 / 16 and 0182 / 16 ).
• Images which involve women and men in consensual sexual poses is not considered degrading , however may breach other sections of the code .
--
Women and men in lingerie in various poses ( Vodka plus – 0193 / 16 , 0195 / 16 and 0196 / 16 ).
--
A topless woman lying on top of a man ( Lonsdale London – 0216 / 16 ).
• In advertising for adult venues or products , it is reasonable for the advertiser to use images of scantily clad women , as long as there are no exposed nipples or genitals , and poses are not strongly sexualised .
--
Women in lingerie shown from behind and the text “ Strippers and Topless Waitresses ” ( Strippers Wanted Agency – 0030 / 16 ).
--
Advertisements for adult entertainment venues include : Crazy Horse Revue Pty Ltd ( 0361 / 16 ), Sin City Night Club ( 0285 / 16 ), Love and Rockets ( 0283 / 16 and 0336 / 16 ) and Penthouse Club Perth ( 0100 / 16 ).
--
Advertisements for adult products include : Adam and Eve ( 0084 / 16 )
Fashion and lingerie
The Board regularly receives complaints about fashion and underwear advertisements . The Board ’ s view on this is :
• It is reasonable for lingerie advertisers to depict women in the product they are selling , so long as the women are fully covered by their underwear and that they are not posed in a provocative manner or in a manner suggestive of sexual activity .
--
A number of advertisements for underwear brands which depict women wearing underwear , include : Capri Body Fashions – Hobart ( 0541 / 16 ), Bendon Ltd ( 0523 / 16 ), PVH Brands Australia Pty Ltd ( 0378 / 16 ), Bras n ’ Things ( 0339 / 16 and 0591 / 16 ), Honey Birdette ( 0338 / 16 and 0381 / 16 ) and Cotton On ( 0305 / 16 ).
• Advertisements for fashion which depict women in stylised sexual poses may be considered exploitative , but are not considered degrading if the women are shown to be confident and in control .
--
An email advertisement which included a gif of a woman appearing to remove her top and the text “ everything 50-70 % off ” ( Planet Blue – 0575 / 16 ).
• Advertisements for perfume which contain sexualised images of women that are highly stylised and consistent with high fashion images will not be considered exploitative and degrading where the woman is not posed in a strongly sexualised manner .
--
A woman in a black dress on a rug with a perfume bottle in her hand ( Coty Australia Pty Ltd – 0536 / 16 ).
--
A woman dancing at a nightclub , capturing the attention of a young man , ( Parfums Christian Dior – 0111 / 16 ).
36 Advertising Standards Bureau