10:52 am - 01/23/2013
British retailer Marks & Spencer was hit with complaints over a new ad campaign featuring Rosie Huntington-Whiteley in lingerie. The Telegraph reports that three digital outdoor advertisements, all promoting Rosie's own Rosie For Autograph line for Marks & Spencer, were described as "overtly sexual, explicit, degrading to women and reinforced sexual stereotypes of women" in seven complaints to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), the U.K.'s advertising watchdog.
But the ASA has spared the adverts (and British men's chance of seeing Rosie's fine figure on their way to work). In a new report, the ASA provided this levelheaded assessment:
We also considered that it was acceptable for advertisers of lingerie to show their products modelled in ads, provided they did so responsibly. We also considered that, because the ads were for lingerie, consumers were less likely to regard the partial nudity shown as gratuitous.
Sounds fair to us. Interesting, the ASA also acknowledged Marks & Spencer's claim that the Rosie For Autograph line was designed by a woman (ostensibly, Rosie herself) for women, "as opposed to being designed for the titillation of men."
( 1 more picCollapse )
Source
Rosie Huntington-Whiteley Ads For Marks & Spencer Called 'Degrading To Women'
British retailer Marks & Spencer was hit with complaints over a new ad campaign featuring Rosie Huntington-Whiteley in lingerie. The Telegraph reports that three digital outdoor advertisements, all promoting Rosie's own Rosie For Autograph line for Marks & Spencer, were described as "overtly sexual, explicit, degrading to women and reinforced sexual stereotypes of women" in seven complaints to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), the U.K.'s advertising watchdog.
But the ASA has spared the adverts (and British men's chance of seeing Rosie's fine figure on their way to work). In a new report, the ASA provided this levelheaded assessment:
We also considered that it was acceptable for advertisers of lingerie to show their products modelled in ads, provided they did so responsibly. We also considered that, because the ads were for lingerie, consumers were less likely to regard the partial nudity shown as gratuitous.
Sounds fair to us. Interesting, the ASA also acknowledged Marks & Spencer's claim that the Rosie For Autograph line was designed by a woman (ostensibly, Rosie herself) for women, "as opposed to being designed for the titillation of men."
( 1 more picCollapse )
Source
Not everything is degrading to women.
all my bras are solid colors because having big boobs means limited options when it comes to designs. ;[ (solids and polka dots seem to be the faves)
Edited at 2013-01-23 05:26 pm (UTC)
Cleo. Panache. Freya. Fauve. CurvyKate. Miss Mandalay. Fantasie
it's nice underwear
oh no, they're stereotyping the idea that women like to wear nice underwear sometimes instead of big pants! how dare they!
why don't we focus more on representing women as the fault in every situation e.g rape instead of how degraded they must be looking at an underwear ad
no one shit themselves when the sexy david beckham one came out
lol at titillation free underwear, I didn't know that was a thing now
She is sitting/standing in some underwear which I am assuming is what they are trying to sell, right? How else would they advertise it?
Edited at 2013-01-23 05:43 pm (UTC)