Woman elbowing snoring husband was domestic violence, says Ad Standards Board
The Advertising Standards Board has upheld a complaint that an ad for a sleep clinic depicted scenes of domestic violence, by showing a woman repeatedly hitting her partner in reaction to his snoring.
An excerpt of the complainant’s comments about the ad for Sleep Clinics Albury and Wodonga said: “In these sensitive times, I find this offensive as the woman’s behaviour demeans, humiliates, embarrasses and physically abuses her partner. Had the roles been portrayed in reverse, where the woman had sleep issues and the man elbows his partner and gets pushed out of bed, there would have been an out cry over violence against women.”
The ads cuts between different scenes of the man snoring whilst asleep and his partner’s reaction. When he dozes off in a cinema the woman elbows the man in the ribs, and at home she pushes him out of bed resulting in him hitting his head on the floor.
A voiceover narrates the scenes “On edge? Bruised ribs?… Slight concussion?… These are some of the symptoms which could lead to serious consequences. Public ridicule.”
The narration concludes “These too are symptoms which could lead to serious consequences… so save yourself and your loved one.”
The Ad Standards panel considered whether the ad was in breach with Section 2.3 of the advertising code which states ‘Advertising or Marketing Communications shall not present or portray violence unless it is justifiable in the context of the product or service advertised.”
The decision rested on the fact the man in the ad reacted negatively, as if he had been injured, when being hit in the ribs and the severity of concussion, referenced in the voice over. This suggested that the man was suffering due to the actions of his partner, subsequently appearing more like scenes of abuse as opposed to a slap stick depiction of violence.
The ruling stated:
The Panel considered that the depiction of someone being in pain and the suggestion that they could be suffering due to the actions of another person could not be considered a slap stick depiction of violence.
The Panel noted that there is significant community concern relating to the issue of domestic violence, and that a depiction of a woman physically abusing her partner was in contrast with this concern. The Panel noted that the basic premise of the advertisement relating to a snoring partner is a common scenario in many homes however the Panel considered that the depiction of the woman resorting to physical harm on her partner to address this common matter is not in line with prevailing community standards.”
The sleep clinic did not respond to the original complaint but said after the ruling that the ad had been removed.
it is definitely true that it is now far more acceptable to show scenarios that ridicule, humiliate and demean men in commercials than women and so on that front I welcome this ruling but from a bigger picture perspective…where does this end?
all humour is at the expense of somebody or something and in this 2019 of think sinned snowflakes, the logical conclusion is that humour and any edge at all is going to be driven out of not just commercials but our culture in general
Plus it’s just the laziest form of creative. The “Dad as Dickhead” trope has been around for decades in FMCG advertising, if the dad actually does exist in the family portrayed, and it’s usually driven by some brand manager’s rage against their own dysfunctional personal relationship all under the guise of hackneyed research saying the female partner drives all household purchase decisions.
It seems to me that the members of the ASB need more sleep. And a new job.
This topic is of great interest and this nuance is particularly good for our industry to learn. There is a difference between obvious humour at the expense of someone, and when it becomes a stereotype or where we are in what I call ‘Diversity Oversteer’ where we allow women to do things that men could never get away with. The criteria has to apply equally to both genders and we should expect the same treatment of men as women expect. Swapping out the gender is the perfect way to test if the humour is done right.
In this case if it was more obvious slapstick it would likely have been approved by the standards board, but even so I’m wondering if women would be happy to be depicted this way even in fun. We should have the same expectations of both genders.
Well said.
I always thought people laughing was the test to see if humour was done right. If we move to a world where we have to swap the genders to see if something is appropriate people sex lives are going to get really complicated. As long as both parties are comfortable I don’t understand why men and women can’t act and do different things for and to each other. From the male perspective is just being a gentleman. If elbowing a snoring man to wake him is domestic violence then I’m battered husband.
This reaction on the part of the complainant is typical of the kind of shallow thinking, and frankly, unnatural response to the real world, which has become deeply entrenched in the minds of those who live under the shining bubble of political correctness as handed around by word of mouth.
“Oh, I will kill that cat if it pisses in my garden again” is not in any way an indication that the cat is in mortal danger; it is simply an indication that the gardener is pissed off.
My wife has elbowed me in the ribs many times in the past, not to injure me or cause me pain, but to let me know that she can’t sleep because I am fast asleep and SNORING!
Domestic violence is abhorrent, a far worse situation and a much graver problem than either snoring or being dug in the ribs to let one know how annoying it can be.
The complaint, in my opinion, is bullshit, and the action of the Ad Standards is an indication of PC adherence rather than actual discernment.
I wonder how many cases of domestic violence both in Australia and worldwide – and regardless of gender – involve snoring? I would imagine the answer is none. The panel could have done well to consider this context when coming to its decision.
Oh FFS… Ad Standards, you never cease to amaze at just how irrelevant you have become.
https://nypost.com/2019/03/13/woman-shoots-boyfriend-for-snoring-loudly-cops/
Upholding equality and saying no to domestic violence, Well done Ad Standards Board. Not feeling sorry for the ad folk that claim the fun police pulled the stop sign. There are numerous humorous angles; family violence isn’t funny. Connecting with changing community values is a critical role of marketers and advertisers. Just because it might have been funny 10 years ago, doesn’t mean it’s acceptable today.
Couldn’t have said it better. I might just add a FFS for emphasis though.