Calvin Klein ad banned for objectifying women

[ArabellaScott]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-67933321

'The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) found the ad was likely to cause serious offence by objectifying women.
The regulator ruled the "image's composition placed viewers' focus on the model's body rather than on the clothing being advertised".
It also noted by focusing on FKA twigs' "physical features", it had "presented her as a stereotypical sexual object".
"We therefore concluded the ad was irresponsible and likely to cause serious offence," it said.

Defending its advert, Calvin Klein said it had been similar to those it had been releasing in the UK for many years

Waah, we've been massive misogynists and sexualised women for YEARS why are you complaining about it now? Whines clothing company.

Yes, exactly, pronouns. It's not what I'd call a convincing defense. 'We've always been pervy sexists'.

They've got a sexy bloke in their other one though. It did the rounds in my office the other day but I can't paste the link here unfortunately because Android doesn't let me copy links out of my work apps into my personal apps.

Ok I did the legwork:

I don't mind a bit of objectification, to be honest.

Objectification is probably OK, as long as it's equal opportunities objectification.

I didn't mind the pictures at all, really. They were nice shots of woman with model good looks but not conventionally so, entering early middle age, in really good shape without being any of stupidly thin, improbably buxo, or anything stereotypically model-ish body wise.

sorry, typos, '... a woman...', '...buxom...', etc.

Pleasantly surprised and glad tbh although it feels like such a random decision given the swathes of similar advertising past and present. A bit too much side-boob is way too generous of a threshold for sexual objectification in advertising.

There are several different theories of objectification. The philosopher Martha Nussbaum developed the theory and said that objectification is not always a bad thing. It seems that the ASA are using the Dworkin/MacKinnon version of the theory or more likely they don't really understand what objectification really means.

That lad dancing about in his knickers has something Gene Wilder about him. Facially. Unless Willy Wonka was actually ripped AF I guess.

I'd like to read that if you had a link or could point me towards it? I rate Nussbaum.

This maybe?

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-objectification/

I find it ridiculous tbh, when haven't women been objectified. Good if this starts something, but I doubt it

At least Calvin Klein are equal opportunity objectifiers.

I'm glad about this ruling as they didn't ban the pictures of the other lady (can't think of her name) who was actually wearing CK underwear only the 1s which were basically a borderline soft porn shoot that didn't even have the fig leaf of well its the underwear that we're showing as she wasn't wearing anything except a half off shirt

I thought he looked like an early Barry Manilow, which was off putting. Plus he had his socks and shoes on. Well buff though if you like that sort if thing. Not keen on white undies on men.

All Calvin Klein adverts objectify the male and female models in them. That is, and always has been, their way.

This particular advert was banned because it’s basically soft porn.

Are we talking about the same advert?!

The model is only 35 - nowhere near middle age!

And you can quite clearly see in the advert that she is very, very thin - hollow upper arm and protruding collarbones…

I've wondered about the role of AI in modelling in the future and whether that would be a good thing. Because fashion models sell their bodies, self-objectify to carry out their work and are represented in an image as an object of desire, which teaches us to objectify ourselves and others. Could AI modelling be less dehumanising as it doesn't involve a human selling their body to start with? An AI generated image could still encourage objectification of course. Is the problem purely sexualised imagery? Or is objectification inherent when humans advertise 'things'?

Well it's no e to see the reasoning for banning it written out like that.

But I agree with others they treat the men the same way. I remember it was a Calvin Kline add I saw in my earl teens with a male and female in it and that's when I realised I was bi. It's always been very sexual pictures

I do think there's a difference between showing someone in underwear to sell the underwear and showing someone is naked underneath a very artistically draped shirt. I'm old enough to remember when they were the risqué photos behind the peanuts and now they are tried as mainstream advertising.

If she'd been wearing the shirt to exercise in to prove it moved with her and didn't flash anything then it could be compared to the other advert.

Had to watch that twice....you know just to really properly consider the issue of objectification in ads.....honest.

Brings back memories of the Diet Coke ads from the 90s and that Levi's ad from the 80s.....good times! Maybe we just need more equal and representative objectification. 😀