Dannielle Miller from Enlighten Education, who I’ve run here before, has blogged on Channel 10 and its allegedly PG-rated show ‘So you think you can dance’. It brought to mind a clip I saw last week of Pamela Anderson on ‘Dancing With the Stars’. The male judge , totally beside himself, shouted: “All I could think about was sex, sex and more sex!” I don’t recall him saying anything  about her dancing ability. Maybe that’s irrelevant. Maybe she’ll win.

Read the rest of this entry »

Just because it’s almost International Women’s Day, doesn’t mean a woman shouldn’t be reminded of her rightful place.

She may have overcome innumerable workplace obstacles to get where she is today. She may be allowed to join the boys in the boardroom. But that doesn’t mean her primary role has changed. She is still valued for her ability to turn them on.

This role of catering for a man’s sexual fantasies is central to the Crazy Domain advertisement made by The Brand Agency in Perth. The ad depicts a male work colleague drooling over Pamela Anderson (ooh porn-star-as-office-seductress, how original) and her assistant. Both women are wearing tight fitting business suits with lace trimmed cleavage revealed.

One of the men fantasises about the two women cavorting in gold bikinis while milk (get it) is sloshed all over them. When he snaps back into reality from his dairy spraying spree, the assistant leans forward asking him if he would like “cream” in his coffee. Because even in real life, it’s the women who pour his beverages. Naturally he gets a face full of breast as she bends over him.

As a result of complaints, the Advertising Standards Board has told the company to remove the ads. The web hosting company is now complaining, blaming “feminist bloggers” for stirring up a fuss. Of course, no-one else cares less, just those crazy feminist bloggers. Go Feminist Bloggers.

Crazy Domains managing director Gavin Collins said the decision made “no sense and is completely un-Australian”. Because, you see, the Australian thing to do is to present women as imposters in the boardroom who distract men from very important work with their seductive ways, leading them down fantasy lane as it rains milk and cream.

I do agree with Gav though about the inconsistencies of the ASB in allowing other sexist ads such as recent one for Coke depicting a woman covered in chocolate and whipped cream and Lynx (who haven’t met a sexist stereotype they don’t like) with their airhostesses meeting every male need.

Professor Sandra Jones from the Centre for Health Initiatives at Wollongong University, has the best line: ” On the one hand they are saying they want to give consumers a voice and show advertisers boundaries, yet on the other they continue to dismiss complaints about these ads.”

Do it longer: sex drug ads dominate list of outrage

JULIAN LEE MARKETING EDITOR

December 16, 2009

THE company behind the longer lasting sex billboards has emerged as the advertising industry’s serial pest of the year after three of its ads made it into the top 10 most complained about ads of 2009.

Yet despite attracting 160 complaints, between them none of the ads fell foul of the self-regulatory advertising watchdog which decides if ads using sex or nudity as a selling point should be removed.

The 10 most complained about ads have generated 650 complaints so far this year, according to the Advertising Standards Bureau.

Complaints were upheld against just two of them; one for Target breached health and safety guidelines because it showed people getting in and out of a clothes dryer; another for Coca-Cola featuring pole dancers promoting casual sex was axed because it vilified women. Complaints about the other ads, including one featuring topless women, were dismissed.

The bureau chief executive, Fiona Jolly, said the figures were proof that the advertising self-regulatory system was ”robust”. ”It gives consumers a voice and lets advertising know about boundaries,” she said.

But industry observers said the bureau was sending mixed messages. ”On the one hand they are saying they want to give consumers a voice and show advertisers boundaries, yet on the other they continue to dismiss complaints about these ads,” Professor Sandra Jones, from the Centre for Health Initiatives at Wollongong University, said.

”It’s clear that they are not giving consumers a voice nor are they really showing advertisers the boundaries.”

Ms Jolly defended the decisions her board had reached on the sex ads, for Advanced Medical Institute, saying that it had banned some of them this year but just not those that attracted the most complaints. She said some people objected to the product itself – in this case a treatment for impotence delivered via the nose – rather than the ad, and so their complaints fell outside the bureau’s remit.

Next year, the bureau will ask consumers if the board is interpreting correctly a section of its code that says ads should ”treat sex, sexuality and nudity with sensitivity to the relevant audience and, where appropriate, the relevant programme time zone”. Billboards will receive particular attention because they do not discriminate in terms of audience or time zones.