John Lewis Ad Pulled for Sexist Stereotyping Writ Large

[LittleWingSoul]

www.theguardian.com/business/2021/oct/27/john-lewis-pulls-controversial-advert-for-being-potentially-misleading?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

It first ran on 11 October and featured a young boy dressed in his mother’s makeup, dress, jewellery and heels, marching around his home smearing paint on the walls, kicking shoes at lamps, throwing an umbrella at a vase, spilling a glass and throwing glitter into the air.

Viewers had been concerned about a range of issues to do with the ad. One Telegraph writer went as far as to say the 60-second advert “represented a terrifying snapshot of all that’s wrong with Britain right now”.

Judith Woods suggested it had been “dreamed up by Generation Rent, who have no idea – no concept – of how much blood, sweat and toil grownups put into buying a house and making it nice”.

A Daily Mail writer called it a “stupidly provocative and divisive advert” that had failed to hit its mark and had instead indulged in “sexist stereotyping writ large

Dreadful advert on so many levels. I can't imagine how anyone with even a modicum of intelligence could have approved it.

The article goes on to say:

Writing on Twitter, Isabel Oakeshott had also complained that the depiction of a boy wearing a dress meant the department store was guilty of delivering “crass cultural lectures”.

Another viewer said the “young boy being the centre of attention for trashing everything while his sister obediently sits and paints in a corner is sexism encapsulated in sixty seconds”.

The main thrust of the reason it was pulled is that the advert is misleading in what JL's life insurance will actually cover, but I'd be so interested to see the nature of all the complaints for the "crass cultural lectures" were. The not so subtle "Let Life Happen" tagline is a very equality index virtue signalling isn't it!

I was disappointed that it was pulled under misleading advertising rules, as JL insurance doesn’t cover deliberate damage.
I would rather it had been pulled for misogyny. But at least it is now consigned to the bin.

it was pulled for being misleading, implying intentional damage is covered by home insurance.

Has anyone got a link to the advert? I know it’s been pulled but I haven’t seen it and can’t find it to watch. I’ve read about it and horrified and would like to see what they actually thought was acceptable

I'm glad it's been pulled - virtue signalling, misogynistic shite.

I prefer this version - watch to the end.

twitter.com/blablafishcakes/status/1453396857649090560

Mn pulled a post on this as it was a 'goady bin fire'

Aside do you work for JL?

[quote Pinkfairylights]I'm glad it's been pulled - virtue signalling, misogynistic shite.

I prefer this version - watch to the end.

twitter.com/blablafishcakes/status/1453396857649090560[/quote]

[quote Pinkfairylights]I'm glad it's been pulled - virtue signalling, misogynistic shite.

I prefer this version - watch to the end.

twitter.com/blablafishcakes/status/1453396857649090560[/quote]
Very funny

I think Supernanny need to use it as the intro to their next series.

Love it

@Dinosauria No I don't work for JL, but I am partial to a mooch around and a cheese scone in the cafe...

I saw that thread. Didn't realise it had been deleted. Was "goady bin fire" the actual phrase used?!

[quote LittleWingSoul]@Dinosauria No I don't work for JL, but I am partial to a mooch around and a cheese scone in the cafe...

I saw that thread. Didn't realise it had been deleted. Was "goady bin fire" the actual phrase used?![/quote]
Yes, did make me

Good. This advert sent out awful messages and misogyny, but JL were too busy patting each other on the back for being so 'progressive' when they were actually just being regressive.

[quote Pinkfairylights]I'm glad it's been pulled - virtue signalling, misogynistic shite.

I prefer this version - watch to the end.

twitter.com/blablafishcakes/status/1453396857649090560[/quote]
That's brilliant!

Still can't believe he will likely have been given direction to look the sister dead in the eye before he pauses and destroys her things and drops the paint all over the carpet.

As I said somewhere else - I was as surprised as anyone else to learn that JL home insurance covers you for giving birth to an entitled twat of a child.

@Pinkfairylights the ending to that is worth watching the cringe again

Judith Woods suggested it had been “dreamed up by Generation Rent, who have no idea – no concept – of how much blood, sweat and toil grownups put into buying a house and making it nice”.

This is a very weird take. Generation rent is usually used in the context of those who became adults post 2007 and have been stuffed by rapidly rising house prices, climbing rent and a lack of housing stock despite wages not climbing at the same rate. It's not that they don't know what 'grownups' do, it's that they haven't had the same opportunities.

It's not a term for people who prefer to rent over buy, as if that's the end goal.

Yes I agree that is an odd choice of descriptor in this context , @ClaudiaWankleman

The stuff that was being damaged had no relation to whether the home was rented or bought. It sounds like a really snobby statement to me..

If the boy had been podgy, shaven headed and wearing poorly fitting sportswear there would have been an entirely different reaction to the advert.

The fact he is wearing a dress means his destructive behaviour and disregard for his mother and sister is ignored.

A metaphor for life I think.

[quote Pinkfairylights]I'm glad it's been pulled - virtue signalling, misogynistic shite.

I prefer this version - watch to the end.

twitter.com/blablafishcakes/status/1453396857649090560[/quote]
Now that I can get on board with.

Even though the adverts been pulled I think it’s actually done it’s job of getting people talking about John Lewis home insurance. I didn’t even know they did home insurance before we started talking about this advert.

I wonder what the reaction is within JL, whether they see it as a success and whether people have got in trouble!

@BrumBirth

Even though the adverts been pulled I think it’s actually done it’s job of getting people talking about John Lewis home insurance. I didn’t even know they did home insurance before we started talking about this advert.

I wonder what the reaction is within JL, whether they see it as a success and whether people have got in trouble!

The misnomer that all advertising is good advertising - is just that.

Not only would I not buy their home insurance, but I will not buy anything from JL

(I'm not sure they'll miss me!! 🤣)

I’ve read articles saying it’s only bigots that have complained and that it’s essentially the same advert as the one they did several years ago but with a girl dancing. I’ve watched both and they’re really not the same at all although both reinforce gender stereotypes IMO

@ClaudiaWankleman

Judith Woods suggested it had been “dreamed up by Generation Rent, who have no idea – no concept – of how much blood, sweat and toil grownups put into buying a house and making it nice”.

This is a very weird take. Generation rent is usually used in the context of those who became adults post 2007 and have been stuffed by rapidly rising house prices, climbing rent and a lack of housing stock despite wages not climbing at the same rate. It's not that they don't know what 'grownups' do, it's that they haven't had the same opportunities.

It's not a term for people who prefer to rent over buy, as if that's the end goal.

Yeah, I thought that was really crap too. Blaming Generation Rent for the opportunities that have been taken away from them.