Kingsmill Fruit and fibre advert complaint

[ZigZagWanderer]

This may have been mentioned before but I would like to know how I go about making a complaint about an advert that I have found inappropriate. I really think it exploits teenage girls.

everlong

no its not true.

Because ugly people don't make good TV. Especially in HD.

Spotty teenagers will put people off the cranberry spiked bread.

mutny if the actress was short, overweight with stumpy little legs men wouldn't letch as much would they. If at all.

I have never heard anything so awful. Maybe they picked her because she was the best out of those that went for it. So they should only employ unattractive children? Really?

i am so shocked at what i have read.

The boy was hardly the epitome of ugly.

Some people are inexplicably seeing 'sexy', where most people are seeing two children.

I wonder what the ladies in feminism would think of this too.
I only came here to ask a question, not to be told that I'm sexualising an advert myself (when the ad is already sexualised using a young girl) implying that I'm the one with the dirty mind ( not the makers of this ad).

i think you have issues.

So (what you consider to be) pretty girls should be passed over for jobs because it may come across as too sexy?
The same advert with a 'less attractive' girl is ok?

I don't think peados are really that selective. And I am shocked at the 'it would be ok if she was ugly' attitude.

Using a young girl = sexualisation... Just like that??

Seriously?

Some people are inexplicably seeing 'sexy', where most people are seeing two children.

Exactly.

This is possibly the most ridiculous thread I have seen.

"Why did they use an attractive girl then?" - because she's an actress - they tend to be attractive. Because people prefer looking at attractive people. Always have,always will.

And considering a young person to be attractive doesn't automatically mean you find them sexy and are a dirty paedophile either.

Just to add that I'm a feminist (hairy legs and everything ) and I don't have a problem with this ad.

no witchety using a young girl everlong defines as attractive = sexualisation just like that.

You say one thing and someone twists it to mean another.

yes ok.

Virginia its not representing what girls wear, isn't it these images that girls live up to in the first place. An ideal dress code for leering men and I bet it wasn't a female that wrote that advert.

Zigzag you asked a question and got your answer. It is you who has perceived the girl to be sexualised. The majority think you are being unreasonable. So in essence,you are annoyed that people don't agree with you.

I'm sure everyone in feminism will agree with you though.

*these images on tv

because dads and mums all over the world for years have been saying "your not going out dressed like that" to teenage girls.

its a normal thing in many households

I know let's ban skirts then nobody would get raped...

Alisvo oh ok, the AIBU majority? Most people on here can't post without jumping on the AIBU bandwagon just to remain popular. Thanks for that.

Those clothes ate NORMAL it's what teens wear, or try to!!

Does it matter if a man wrote it?