To feel vindicated that John Lewis has pulled its awful ad with the boy in the dress trashing the house?

[Clymene]

I wrote to the ASA and complained. I said the ad was misleading (as into insurance will cover wilful damage), sexist (with a boy rampaging through the house and destroying his mother and sister's things, and sexualised.

I also called John Lewis and told them I hated it and why.

They've withdrawn it.

GOOD

He would have been directed

He’s not that young he can’t follow instruction

@Benjispruce5

Children copy the adults around them so if his mum likes to dress in a glam way he may be copying that behaviour. If his mum is a mechanic, he may imitate her in overalls and wipe oil on his face.

It's not the dress though is it? It's the strutting, the sashaying down the stairs, the throwing glitter from atop the kitchen table.

Women who 'dress in a glam way' do not act like this, that is a sexist caricature of femininity. Most women, even those who dress in a glam way, are just going about their lives.

@Clymene

Ah you would be wrong though. I called John Lewis and a woman told me that deliberate destruction - if it was done by children- was covered if you took out the additional accidental damage policy.

OMG
That's like saying I can buy puppies, poison them and get a pet pay out. (Yes people this is an growth industry in insurance fraud)

JL will have to do an audit of individual phone calls going back before the ad.

I think you’re looking too deeply. I don’t associate the dress with the behaviour.

@Thefartingsofaofdenmarkstreet I was replying to @Helleofabore

@Benjispruce5

Children copy the adults around them so if his mum likes to dress in a glam way he may be copying that behaviour. If his mum is a mechanic, he may imitate her in overalls and wipe oil on his face.

So a ‘glam’ mum walks around pouting, strutting like a model with their shoulders back and chest put looking poutingly into the camera directly, trailing fingers along balustrades and doing a weak knee fall against the wall?

And this is just being glam? This is not a caricature of a woman posing for the male gaze? Just what every woman does when they put on a glam dress?

Really? You don’t see the connection?

I didn’t say that. You asked who children are mimicking when they play with lipstick. I’m not talking about the boy in the ad. A mum might put lipstick on and make a kiss action towards her child or make a kiss sound.

And why do you think women act this way when they are ‘glam’? Not because movie stars have been posing this way for decades and decades? Why?

I am thinking about this ‘too deeply’? Do you understand there is always a different audience with children in ads and film to the obvious one?

@Benjispruce5

I think you’re looking too deeply. I don’t associate the dress with the behaviour.

You literally just said

Children copy the adults around them so if his mum likes to dress in a glam way he may be copying that behaviour.

You are contradicting yourself at every turn.

Let's face it, if the boy wasn't wearing a dress he wouldn't be moving around in that way would he?

@Benjispruce5

I didn’t say that. You asked who children are mimicking when they play with lipstick. I’m not talking about the boy in the ad. A mum might put lipstick on and make a kiss action towards her child or make a kiss sound.

You cannot see the connection here. Yes, I know children copy their parents and what they see around them. This is not a kid blowing a kiss. This is a full on performance.

Look, you obviously will not give any further thought.

I stand by my comments that if I saw a child doing this performance I would be quite worried about where they got the idea it was appropriate behaviour for a child.

[quote SolasAnla]**@Clymene

Ah you would be wrong though. I called John Lewis and a woman told me that deliberate destruction - if it was done by children- was covered if you took out the additional accidental damage policy.

OMG
That's like saying I can buy puppies, poison them and get a pet pay out. (Yes people this is an growth industry in insurance fraud)

JL will have to do an audit of individual phone calls going back before the ad.[/quote]
Yes I know. I would imagine they will audit their calls. I checked because I thought it was beyond unlikely.

People poison their puppies??!

And I would be very worried about a director who has the background this director has shooting such an ad and which audience he was shooting it in mind for.

If a child puts on a superhero costume and pumps out their chest, is that not depicting an unrealistic sexist stereotype? If the character in the as was a girl in a superman costume and she acted the way I mention, would you feel moved to complain about sexism? It’s just a child experimenting with different characters.

I meant yes I know as in I was agreeing with you SolasAnla. I know bugger all about insurance but I thought it was unlikely that the behaviour would be covered.

Incidentally, even if you take out the accidental damage add on glassware etc is specifically excluded.

It’s just a child experimenting with different characters.

Are you saying this boy is experimenting with different characters?

Specifically what character would you call this?

I’m trying to see what you mean, have watched the as several times and don’t see sexy. I see a child dressing up.

@Helleofabore

It’s just a child experimenting with different characters.

Are you saying this boy is experimenting with different characters?

Specifically what character would you call this?

Yes, which 'character' is the boy experimenting with?

The as is being directed obviously but if I saw a boy dressed like that and dancing about ( trashing aside) I’d think he was being a dancer. I used to dance about in front of Top of the Pops. So what?

In what instance is it ok for any child to emulate ‘glam woman caricature of sexy behaviour to capture the male gaze’ in a TV commercial?

Because it is just dress up?

@Helleofabore

In what instance is it ok for any child to emulate ‘glam woman caricature of sexy behaviour to capture the male gaze’ in a TV commercial?

Because it is just dress up?

It’s not

Which is why the agency needs better controls over who directs

Not everyone sees what you see just as you keep telling me, that others disagree with how I see it.

There is a difference between a male pumping out his chest, to look more powerful and a female. It is done to focus attention on a female chest and make breasts appear larger.

It’s not sexy though @Helleofabore. You think it is and perhaps there are reasons for that?

I’m referring to your previous comment. I think you may have some issues around sexualisation but don’t project them into others.