anyone else disgusted by Ryanair's "red hot crew" adverts? and by the fecking Guardian for carrying it?

[Hatwoman]

today's Guardian - takes up more than half a page - a women in fecking underwear - with her thumb pulling her knicker elastic down. I expect it from ryanair tbh - and I knew the whole thing about their calendar but I'm appalled at the Guardian for carrying it

Me too. Was wondering about complaining to Guardian. As you say, don't expect any better from Ryanair but I do expect better from Guardian.

The Guardian isn't in any kind of position to be refusing ad revenue at the moment.

It was the thumb in knickers bit that really got me too

it's truly awful isn't it? I'm sure the Guardian does draw the line somewhere when it comes to ads - just a shame that casual misogyny is on the "ok" side of the line.

I thought the same, Ryanair I expect to be sleazy but I was a bit to see it in the Guardian

Not seen it ( not a great G. reader) but the arguemnt re not refusing revenue, JLK2, is a bit weak, if you don't mind me saying?? It's a sort of "Quelle Surprise."

I don't have great expectations of the Graundiad, so the running of the advert confirms a sort of maley/liberally inconsistent thinking re 'sexism=horrible but we'll get a bit of money out of it/suits us right now' approach.

So yes, quelle surprise from the Guardian, I'm afraid.

Ryanair is just so classy innit, here is another fine service they are thinking about providing...
goodmenproject.com/newsroom/porn-on-planes/

Last Virgin air ad vile too.

When I contacted their press office for a comment, was told it 'referenced' 70's images of sexy independent women. Methinks the only thing it references is that 70's autobiography written by two flight attendants titles 'Coffee, Tea Or Me'.

I agree with Pan

I'm not remotely surprised that the Guardian condones sexism.

It's always been on the "racism is morally horrible, but sexism is OK" side of the fence.

Sexism is totally socially acceptable now, far more than it was 20 years ago IMO.

How many of us fly Ryanair? Does anybody here deliberately choose to not fly with them because of Michael Ryan and his toxicity?

It's becoming more challenging to put money where our mouths are these days. I'm interested in the point at which economics/convenience collides with principle or even opinion.

Did the Guardian really run it? Amazing.

Advertising Standards Authority:

www.asa.org.uk/Complaints/How-to-complain.aspx

Viewing: General Sections » 04 Harm and offence » Rules

"4.1
Marketing communications must not contain anything that is likely to cause serious or widespread offence. Particular care must be taken to avoid causing offence on the grounds of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, disability or age. Compliance will be judged on the context, medium, audience, product and prevailing standards.

Marketing communications may be distasteful without necessarily breaching this rule. Marketers are urged to consider public sensitivities before using potentially offensive material.

The fact that a product is offensive to some people is not grounds for finding a marketing communication in breach of the Code."

The let out clause there is "prevailing standards"

The prevailing standards are that the objectification of women is normal, not really offensive and just a bit of fun. Only a few humourless/ jealous/ fat feminists and prudish/ fanatical/ outdated religious people object.

So that's why the ASA will tell us all to fuck off when we complain. Though it's still worth complaining as the more people who do, the more obvious it becomes what a useless bunch of bastards they are.

Oh the ASA are rubbish, but it would still mean that RyanAir would have to answer the charges.

Yes and I feel it's time for one of these...