EE 'not her problem' campaign against sexism in football

[Truthlikeness]

Was very pleasantly surprised by this campaign ahead of the Euros. Squarely placing the responsibility on men to resolve sexism in football, and a great advert showing what female footballers go through.

I agree with the message in the advert, however it could easily have been a message I don’t agree with, I don’t want companies foisting their beliefs on me.

Advertising needs funding, and I can't see the current government funding an ad campaign like this so we do need companies to get involved.

If EE is sponsoring the Euro 2022 championships, then it's appropriate for them to fund this. What I'd be more impressed by though is if they could suspend the accounts of anyone found using an EE signal who commits online abuse.

THIS

Bloody brilliant. And for all the previous posters being sanctimonious about whether EE should do the advert - for gods sake, finally someone is saying the message loud and clear don’t push back on it!!! It doesn’t matter who says it just that it’s said. Loudly.

And yet they aren't doing anything about the abusers, rapists and racists that known to play the game.
If these groups actually gave a shiny shit they they would refuse to sponsor teams that had these players in the squad.

Just another corporation thinking they can tell people how to live. Honestly I think the reality that the mens game is expected to subsidise the womens and that the womens demands attachment to the mens fosters sexism more than anything.

How about doing something original not provided and payed for by men?

The problem is as this thread shows - sexism isn't just a man's problem. Men are at the root cause of sexism but women do not help by saying that ee shouldn't be moralising adverts because it's a strawman argument. I think the ad was well placed given ees involvement re sponsorship.

If ee don't do it ? Who do we expect to do it ?

Diddums you are a little lost. Don't worry you turn left three times you will find your way home.

pitchforksandflamethrowers

but other than an advert EE are not doing anything either.

@FrippEnos I mean is visual representation at a major sporting event that this behaviour isn't ok, which isn't nothing. It may mean nothing to you, but it doesn't mean it's nothing.

Not doing anything would be literally not doing anything (which currently is where we are). You can argue it's effectiveness sure, but if it makes one person pause and think ah, then actually it's served it's purpose and has been effective.

pitchforksandflamethrowers

But is the company is actually doing anything.
Its like the England squad taking the knee in support of BLM and then going to a country with shocking human rites for the world cup.

Its just virtue signaling, it may work with one or two people but until these companies take a stand against sexism, racism etc. by not supporting the teams that allow these people in the squads and turn them in to heroes there is little point to what they do.

I don't think the message is very clear actually. Most of it seemed to be about bad/difficult things faced by women footballers. We didn't actually see any sexist hate did we? I totally agree with the message and if EE are sponsoring the tournament I think it's very appropriate for them to do an advert about sexism but this didn't seem to make its point very well

Sorry but corporations need to limit any social warrior impulses to anonymous donations to chosen charities.

Otherwise we will all end up having to follow a partyline to access everyday services. China is mass engineering social credit as a population control, capitalist corporations would love similar power.

Corporations can prove themselves good citizens by providing quality service at as low price as possible.

I’m delighted to see a company spending its billions on trying to tackle sexism.
Hope it gets screened at the men’s games too. It’s on billboards on the tube too- excellent.
As a GC woman the more the word SEXISM can be used and understood, the more we are naming the problem.
Its not perfect but it’s a fantastic start.

To everyone saying companies should shut up, who else is going to be funding these initiatives?
Who else has ever funded them before?
I’d love to have unbranded anti-sexism campaigns too- but without corporate cash there haven’t been any that can afford to put ads on public billboards and repeatedly on prime time TV.
So I’m not going to look this gift horse in the mouth. Men are the problem. It names that fact. Its a brilliant start.

I agree. A mainstream campaign coming right out and saying sexist abuse is caused by men and can only be stopped by men is more than I've seen before. It caught my attention.

Someone needs to say it, why not them?They are a company who provides a vehicle for social media who are pointing out the craziness that occurs on social media. They are sponsoring an event that is likely to increase sexism so they getting in first and pointing out it's unacceptable. They are also targeting the right people for once!

I say good for them, I hope they are (one of) the first of many. And I would absolutely love it if this advert gets sent to sell their clients, but I think that might be a hope too much.

Google for the gillette razor vawag ad, it did serious damage to their brand tag.

The last 30 seconds of this ad are low key, using known (liked) faces so not likely to ever get the same reaction and EE is not a "manly" product brand, rather a generic service provider.

SolasAnla

The gillette add was very badly though out, starting from negative tropes to telling men this is what you should be.

If it had gone in with positives and said this is what you are and what you are doing and promoting further movement in that direction It wouldn't have had the backlash.

At least this one has a 'we are men and we are against it' moment.

Agreed the backlash was that the tone of the ad was you are a man and therefore a bad person.

My objection to the tone of this ad is that there are a number of mini-story lines which the men involved in the ad would be foolish to act out. Eg. You are Jordan Henderson agent and received the script which scenes are you going to advise him not to be filmed doing. How about the first image, him with his mouth open?

We can say that starting to push out the message stop VAWAG is a good thing.

It is.

But the images in the first section centered VAWAG by women not women playing football. Then we are told that internet harrassment happens and 'we are men and we are against it'.

I don't understand the first half of the ad. Are they listing things that are women's problems? Never seen so many horrific injuries and just generally it was confusing. Why could a penalty be a problem?

I don't understand the first half of the ad. Are they listing things that are women's problems? Never seen so many horrific injuries and just generally it was confusing. Why could a penalty be a problem?

They’re listing problems that the women will have to deal with. They have to deal with their injuries, with children, with their period, with penalties - all things they will have to solve. They don’t need to solve sexist hate. That’s the point. I’m confused as to how you can’t see that a penalty could be a problem?

And I’m glad they showed the injuries. Football is a beautiful game but it’s also bloody and people do have a temper on the pitch! It’s a contact sport. Why should women be portrayed as lovingly swanning around the pitch giving each other hugs? It takes dedication and passion. There’s shouting and shoving and accidental studs to the legs. There’s massive comraderie too. (Not as much diving as the men though!)

It’s an advert showing the real game and I like it.

It is a contact sport.
Part of its origins trace back to village against village melee in fair days. Think throwing a football into the middle of a drinkers pub and saying whoever gets it into the local parish hall wins free drink for a year.

The game is physical and a lot of the rules are designed around preventing dangerous playing.
Even non-human contact eg sliding across ground can cause bruising and remove a strip of skin, balls can hurt too. And in studs on boots and tackling and bodies colliding at speed and it can hurt and cause serious damage by accident.

The phrase play the ball not the man is about one team setting out to hobble(by injury) the other teams best players.

The penalty would be a problem as the individual members of both teams at compeditive level have worked long and hard to get to play and a refs decision can be the difference between loosing a player or even a win or a loss. At times the decision will be disputed due to a difference of opinion on the facts (but sometimes it ego). Women will be just as compeditive as the men and they want to win so argue the decision.

I felt a bit muddled and thought at first it might be showing why trans women shouldn’t play with women because it would lead to ‘problems’; then thought it might be showing a mixed match with men (without their faces) being rough and violent because of sexism.

Now I after understanding from all your posts that it means on line sexism, I also have the impression the women in matches are violent towards each other.

It's worth it for the last image on screen.

Line of male footballers looking straight to camera

Stood in front of them a line of female footballers looking straight to camera

Not one of the female footballers reaches shoulder height on the males.

Saatchi and Saatchi team thought that through really well!

As for the 'violence,' come off it. It's sport. It always hurts! Training hurts, let alone bloody competition. And it's part of a wider campaign that EE are pumping a lot of money into. THAT is what they are doing

www.campaignasia.com/video/ee-tackles-online-sexist-abuse-in-campaign-telling-men-its-their-problem/480101