ASB: Brut ads ‘discriminate against women’
The advertising watchdog has upheld complaints made against video ads for men’s deodorant Brut Code which feature women’s chests.
It comes as the portrayal of sex, sexuality and nudity continues to be the dominant issue raised by complainants.
The four videos, which are downloaded onto users’ Bluetooth-enabled phones, show a woman wearing a t-shirt with the word “Code” and a code number on the shirt.
The camera gradually shows the face and torso of the woman and each woman takes off her t-shirt to reveal a bikini top. The camera focuses on the woman’s top half and each woman poses then winks.
Once the women have removed their top, text appears explaining what the particular ‘code number’ means. The code is meant to represent the “amusing codes that friends live by”, according to the Pharmacare Laboratories-owned brand.
They include:
Code #11 – “You can drive her car but she can’t drive yours”
Code #15 – “Never look at another man while eating a banana”
Code #72 – “A guy must always alert his mates to the existence of a girl fight”
Code #85 – “Always alert your mates to the presence of fine form”
The campaign is also on Twitter and Facebook.
Complaints made against the video ads pointed to the “objectification of women”.
In a response, Brut said:
The aim of the advertising material is to introduce this concept of codes that friends live by and to get the target market to reveal an entertaining code through the use of a blue tooth enabled mobile phone.
We dispute that these videos are in any way ‘strip shows’.
All the women in the advertisement are portrayed as attractive, smiling and happy people.
There are no sexual references or nudity.
All are dressed in clothing or tasteful bathing suits as you would see in shopping malls, on any beach, at a public pool or on TV in soaps such as Neighbours, Home and Away or Bluewater High.”
The Advertising Standards Bureau ruled that while the ads we’re limited to people with Bluetooth-enabled mobile phones and were unlikely to include younger children – it would be likely to include many children of high school age.
Also, the ASB found that there was no relationship between a woman in a bikini and the product advertised, ruling that the ad “did discriminate against women”.
The ads have now been removed by Brut.
Meanwhile, the ASB has launched an investigation into Lynx Dry TV ads which feature women getting wet, with the voice over stating “Girls look hot, wet. Guys don’t”.
Other recent rulings by the ASB include an in-house ad on American Apparel’s website, with complaints upheld due to the images being too “suggestive” and “sexualised”.
The ASB is currently finalising research into community perceptions of sex, sexuality and nudity in advertising.
Fiona Jolly, ASB chief exectuvie, said: “The portrayal of sex, sexuality and nudity continues to be the dominant issue raised by complainants. In 2009 this issue accounted for 40 per cent of complaints, rising from 25 per cent in 2008.”
Tim Burrowes founded Mumbrella in 2008. He worked on Mumbrella until 2021. At various points he was editor, content director and editor-at-large.
Linkedin
PC gone mad again, people are way to highly strung these days and needs to relax. If the shoe was on the other foot and it was a female deodorant brand and objectification of men was the talking point not a single person would have a problem. Grow up.
User ID not verified.
can you link to the ad?
User ID not verified.
Well said Pat … if you don’t like it, don’t download it! Easy
User ID not verified.
the ASB should view that the few complaints that are made and the subsequent forced removal of the campaign is not always in the sentiment of the masses who view it. Have a look at the success of zoo magazine- a primary target is the younger “high school” boys and its cover to cover full of bikini clad women! who are the ASB trying to protect? Mothers who dont like their sons growing up too quick?
User ID not verified.
Pathetic decision. Where were all the women complaining about men being objectified in the Diet Coke ads?
User ID not verified.
our industry is at the mercy of a very vocal moral minority. the ASB only needs 1 complaint to investigate and pull an ad. it’s ludicrous
the irony is a relatively tame Brut/Lynx spot could be banned from running in programs like Underbelly that glamorise drugs, crime and of course tits & ass.
Underbelly is just as much a “product” to PBL as Lynx is to Unilever
User ID not verified.
Are you people serious?
One of the ads concerned advocates that it is “fair” or perhaps a god-given-right to share a women around your circle of friends for their mutual pleasure. If you have ever talked to a woman about how this feels you would know that this experience is visual gang rape to the one on the other end.
When this ad is aired during teenage and under prime time during a Saturday morning music video show, you have to wonder what ideas they are receiving about the value of the oposite sex and the sense of entitlement it is creating. If you can’t see the problem with this ad, perhaps you are equally capable of the same acts which have come to light over recent years regarding sportspeoples “off the field affairs”.
And we wonder how gang rape happens?
User ID not verified.
@ Sensible – So by your reckoning the male workers in the Diet Coke ads are being visual gang raped by all the office women who are checking them out? Are you equally outraged by that? Hmmm, I didn’t think so. And besides, when did this politically correct ‘visual rape’ crap start? There’s no such thing.
User ID not verified.
Dear Dave,
If you want to ogle a woman, that’s your business. If a woman wants to ogle a man, that’s her business (aside from most likely causing discomfort to the guy being ogled, but that’s another matter).
What we’re talking about here is the idea that a person is someone’s property to be shared. This is the clear message of the ad saying “share it round”.
There’s nothing new, novel, or even outrageous about sex selling. (Perhaps the outrage should be on the part of pharmacare that they paid some juvenile “creative” to come up with this crap) however when this crap is accompanied by a celebration of a culture which supports the idea that a woman can be “shared around” simply because a guy likes the look of her, and that is the entitlement of his friends, and his duty to them, I have a problem with that. Don’t you?
User ID not verified.
@ Sensible – I have a problem with anyone being physically ‘shared’ around against their will. I don’t have a problem with people of either gender pointing out someone they consider attractive to their friends which is what is depicted in the ad. I’ve pointed out attractive women to my male friends before and I’ve seen many occasions when female friends of mine have pointed out guys they consider attractive to their girlfriends. It’s what normal people do and I certainly have no problem with it.
User ID not verified.
I see your point, and I agree with you there, it’s just the idea of entitlement I have a problem with.
Aside from all that, I just don’t think it’s a very clever execution of what may have been an otherwise sound concept.
All the best.
User ID not verified.
it doesnt work…. i sprayed a whole can on and didnt score…
save ya munny guyz…
User ID not verified.
“Code 72” is a joke ripped off from How I Met Your Mother.
User ID not verified.
They haven’t been removed – they were on-air during the footy over the weekend.
They were pretty tame, but they were shit.
User ID not verified.
I was just looking into this campaign as background on a client pitch, and sexist or not, it’s just a shizen campaign. If you want to see tits on the internet, you don’t “like” your deodorant.
The “codes” aren’t funny either and lack any wit of flair. Most’ve been ripped from lads mags ala 2003.
The funniest part of this whole campaign is the Twitter account’s 8 followers – epic fail. To think someone got paid to set that up and develop the “social media strategy” makes me laugh more than any of the codes put together.
User ID not verified.
i love guys checking me out 🙂 giggle
User ID not verified.
It is so true. People don’t fully understand the effects of media. Luckily, we have organizations fighting against some of this advertising, but it is still getting worse. Focusing on one part of a woman’s body objectifies just that part and makes it seem as if that is the only part that matters. I suggest everyone watches Killing Us Softly about advertising’s image of women.
User ID not verified.
anyone know who the blone in the ‘spot and share’ ad is?
man she’s hot
awsome tits
User ID not verified.
Sorry girls who winge and sook. Big deal. It is the radical feminists who would be opposing any advertisement that depicts women as sexy. From my 40 years experience I understand most women I know or have ever known, they like to feel attractive to the opposite sex. (us guys) That is because they are normal women who don’t have hang ups. It is the gay and lesbian women who have become radical feminists morons, who complain. Get over it. Yeah what would happen if radical feminists ran the earth ? The human race would die out because gay women who don’t have normal God given relationships with men. Face it radical feminists. If all females were like you, the human race would die out because your views are wrong. You are the minority. Get lost radical feminists.
User ID not verified.