Children in Need bare ad

[BelleCurve]

just seen the ad for children in need fundraising. last year they did a thing with female celebs being photographed bare faced. Now in the ad, the woman goes without make-up and then strips in the office.

I bet the beeb thought that was a good idea as it will be "empowering"

[wrenno]

I am so with you (and I work at the BBC)! I hated the 'barefaced' campaign last year and am really pissed off to see that they're doing it again - it makes me so mad that it's meant to be 'empowering' for women to go without make-up (um, surely that's what loads of normal women do everyday... the naked female face isn't exactly an affront to nature) and I hate the way it relates everything back to women's appearance (e.g. all these pointless celebs praised for being 'brave' for not wearing makeup... but then simultaneously and hypocritically praised for still managing to look 'beautiful' without make-up... as if the way the look is the only important thing about them!). So patronising and demeaning. So Daily Mail! Grrrrrr!

On that note, I might send a grumpy email to the beeb... always worth contacting them, they have a duty to respond to all 'contacts' so they should actually get back to you... Let's start the mass protest here!

[BelleCurve]

and the idea that you can/should be sponsored to be nekkid in the office? yuck

[Darkesteyes]

You are bloody joking. I would have thought that with the sort of publicity the BBC has been getting in the past 2 years they wouldnt have done something like this.

Sponsored to be naked in the office? Hmmm i can see that this is going to be used to harass and bully women in the name of charity.

[specialsubject]

not big on Children In Need, full stop. Not because it is irritating (it is) but because of the massive overhead. Same as Comic Relief.

donate directly. Never sponsor or be sponsored.