Feeds

back to article Lingerie-clad she-devils romp past watchdog

The Advertising Standards Authority has rejected a complaint that an Agent Provocateur video featuring a pack of lingerie-clad she-devils menacing another woman is "disturbing and misogynistic". The vid first appeared on the company's website last November to punt its Soiree 2011-2012 collection. The ASA summarises that it shows …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

Think you should over tweet a link to the video. it is international womens day after all.

0
0
Silver badge
Thumb Up

\m/ -_- \m/

I've always expressed the opinion that there's not enough death metal in advertising.

7
0
Silver badge
Thumb Up

Porn

That's what it is, and I'm shocked. Thank you Reg for bringing it to my attention.

21
0
Bronze badge

Re: Porn

Needs further *vigorous* scrutiny...

5
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Porn

I'm all in favour of pr0n and scantily clad women, but I firmly believe that they have their time & place. I strongly disagree with the casual nature of Page 3, Nuts, Loaded, etc. and I think they should only be on the top shelf and available to 18+. Those newspapers with some up-skirt shot on the front are a disgrace.

I actually complained about the latest Figleaves campaign which featured very large posters of very attractive women in lingerie. I don't believe I'm a puritanical prude, but I simply don't believe that that amount of flesh should be on display all over the place. My complaint was rejected (I was one of four complainants) on the grounds that the adverts weren't within 100m of a school. Does this mean that the ASA thinks children only live within 100m of every school?

If you need to get your rocks off then all manner of filth is but a click away (separate subject). There isn't any need to have it on display everywhere; it simply cheapens and devalues.

18
24
Childcatcher

Re: Porn

you're fucking kidding me, right???

9
4
Anonymous Coward

Re: Porn

Erm, no, I'm not.

2
3
Silver badge

@Scott 26 - Re: Porn

Half kidding. No I wasn't shocked and yes I was pleased that El Reg helpfully provided me a link. Whether it is porn or not is a matter of taste and sensibilities - it's fairly mild but it's the nearest thing to porn that I've seen for a while. I would not expect to see such an ad before 22:00 on UK television.

It's interesting to note that the single complaint was that it was 'disturbing and mysoginistic', not that it was overly sexual. Given the nature of the complaint I think the ASA got it right.

1
0
Silver badge

Re: Porn

"I don't believe I'm a puritanical prude, but I simply don't believe that that amount of flesh should be on display all over the place."

I've got some bad news for you...

21
3
Silver badge

Re: @Scott 26 - Porn

I seem to have erroneously presumed that Scott 26 was responding to my post. I really will have to do better.

1
0

Re: Porn

This may come as a shock but there is more pornographic content available on the internet (outside of the Reg site) but I'm sure if you try you can find it.

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Porn

I agree keep the porn itself on the top shelf, 'you must be this high to read it', but nudity & people in

lingerie?, why make a big deal about it?

What's wrong with children seeing someone without clothes or in underwear?

We are all born naked, so why care if your naked or someone else is?

Parents take their sons/daughters in with them to opposite sex changing rooms when they are young without any complaints (well there shouldn't be complaints).

I have two young boys, I wouldn't let them watch porn, but see nudity? no problem with that, it wont scar them, if anything it will make them a more balanced person without unnatural hangups caused by a prudish nation

21
0

Re: Porn

Nudity ain't the problem. It's nude (or nearly-nude) people doing sex-related stuff which is the problem.

2
5

Re: Porn

don't believe I'm a puritanical prude, but I simply don't believe that that amount of flesh should be on display all over the place.

Burqas for everyone then...

5
3
Anonymous Coward

Re: Porn

I agree, but the models are invariably in sexually suggestive poses (the ASA also agreed on that point) & that's not something my wife or I do in front of the children.

1
3

This post has been deleted by its author

Paris Hilton

@GitMeMyShootinIrons: re: *vigorous* scrutiny

I'm sure the ASA are already hard on to that!

1
0
xyz

Re: Porn

>>that's not something my wife or I do in front of the children....

...and if you did you'd be up to your g-string in social workers

3
0

Re: Porn

Ehe... what children?

1) these garments aren't for children (there aren't any in the video either)

2) lingerie of that kind is supposed to enhance your... eh... 'relationship' with your (consenting adult) partner which I think works very well

3) the clip is a teaser to delve further into the website and to let ppl know about the products (which according to the feedback it has on a technology-oriented website seems to have worked)

So stop being a little girl.

Instead look closer at the garments. That pink gown with the red lace looks gorgeous. They also have a black see-through high waisted pleated palazo pants in their collection which i also find very sexy. And there are other items. Unfortunately these products are for the more fortunate amongst us (3000 euro for the kimono gown alone).

I'd say to the creator of this clip/site/idea.: mission succeeded! ;-)

4
0
Silver badge

Re: Porn

"sexually suggestive poses ... & that's not something my wife or I do in front of the children"

Thanks, AC - I now have a mental picture of you and your lady wife adopting "sexually suggestive poses" whenever the kids aren't around. I can do without that.

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Porn

"that's not something my wife or I do in front of the children."

I do hope that doesn't mean you let them go first....

1
0
Thumb Up

Clearly fictional?

This doesn't happen all the time?!

2
0
Thumb Up

But am I really sad?

When my first thought was "Is that the same house they used in the Baskerville episode of Sherlock?"

4
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: But am I really sad?

No. My thought was along similar lines, but "It looks like part of that house that's featured in a whole bunch of TV programmes and films."

And short hair, stringy nonsense and boots just aren't to my taste. The only thing provoked was my disappointment.

2
0
Silver badge

So for all you guys out there...

If this was a video where a man was at home alone and half a dozen men suddenly appeared in his home (dressed in tight, revealing clothing), chased him down, locked him in a room with them where they simulated gay sex in front of him before finally pinning him to the ground, all leaping on him to kiss him all over before a final scene suggesting he'd been 'converted'.... You'd all like that too, yes?

9
8

This post has been deleted by its author

Coat

Re: So for all you guys out there...

Some of us would, yes.

I tend to prefer my naked flesh to be of the female variety, but you know, whatever rocks your boat. And I'm quite sure there are a few gay commentards who don't enjoy the sexuality portrayed in this video, as well.

How about you calm down, maybe watch a few ads you enjoy, and try to not be all stoplikingwhatidontlike.jpg?

Coat, for obvious reasons.

17
1
Devil

Re: So for all you guys out there...

Yeah, why not!

Sounds like fun!

:P

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: So for all you guys out there...

I'd really need to see such a video before reaching any conclusions... maybe a couple of times, just to be sure. I guess you meant "half a dozen GORGEOUS men..." too right?

7
0
Bronze badge

Re: So for all you guys out there...

No I wouldn't. But all I would do is not bother watching it. I wouldn't make any form of complaint to the ASA or any other body about it. I wouldn't even bother posting a comment saying saying "If this was a video where a woman was at home alone ..."

13
2
Silver badge

Re: So for all you guys out there...

We'd all like that if we were gay men with a liking for tight revealing clothing on other men.

I assume that Agent Provocateur know their target market and have designed the advert to appeal to them.

3
0
Paris Hilton

Re: So for all you guys out there...

Funny you should ask that... most of the women I know wouldn't want to watch a video full of guys, and not because they're all lesbians.

Most of them are straight and they still all agree that the female figure, especially when scantily clad, is that much more aesthetically pleaseing that the male figure. Something to do with curves being in the right places, and my gender generally being about as shapely as a slab of steak!

You can proffer as much equality as you like, end of the day women are prettier to look at than men!

11
0
Silver badge

Re: So for all you guys out there...

Ah yes, the endlessly old "why don't you calm down" comment, suggesting that the person you're talking to (over the Internet) is somehow hysterically wound up. Or alternately, you could just recognize that I'm pointing out that were it a male who was being run down by other males, being forcibly kissed and turned gay, a lot of men would suddenly feel differently about the ad. Nothing wrong with pointing out double-standards, is there? Not all men would dislike the ad that way, but a lot would.

1
12
Trollface

Re: So for all you guys out there...

Yes, some men would be offended. And I'd tell them to shut up, because they could take it. Or, if they couldn't, they'd beat me up, which is quite frankly preferrable to reading pseudofeminist whining about non-issues.

10
0
Bronze badge

Re: So for all you guys out there...

Didn't Julian Clary make something like that?

Anyway, I'd see no problem with a gender-flipped version of this. It would need some serious camp but sure.

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: So for all you guys out there...

Like it? maybe not..

Laugh at it? maybe...

Be offended? definitely not...

BUT then again I would NOT be a target consumer SO my opinion would not matter

4
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: So for all you guys out there...

(re Dr Insanity)

This was confirmed by boffins several years ago. I don't have the reference on hand, but I'm sure El Reg reported it salaciously.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: So for all you guys out there...

> ... a lot of men would suddenly feel differently about the ad. ... Nothing wrong with pointing out double-standards, is there?

There is a huge difference between not liking an advert and finding it objectionable.

By changing the gender of the participants you would be changing the target audience. I, personally, would no longer find it remotely interesting and would not bother watching it. So I would feel different about it. I would not, however, find it objectionable.

There are no double standards involved and none of the responses to your original post have implied that there are.

6
1
Bronze badge
Pint

Re: So for all you guys out there...

I wouldn't see it as problematic, which is what you're implying. You're implying that there are double standards here, and there aren't.

2
0
Gold badge

Re: So for all you guys out there...

That's David Beckham's next ad, isn't it?

1
0

Re: So for all you guys out there...

If there were a video with men acting this out I'd be pleased. I don't think I'd enjoy watching it myself, not that the original particularly does anything for me, but I'd be pleased that I live in a free society.

4
0
Gimp

Re: So for all you guys out there...

Not all of us, but I'm sure certain fellas would, and good for them :)

No effin idea about women's opinions.

1
0
xyz

Re: So for all you guys out there...

which is why "everyone loves a lesbian" was such a hit on Mongrels....yup there are double standards. linky...www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5zsxfhAh6Q

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: So for all you guys out there...

> I assume that Agent Provocateur know their target market and have designed the advert to appeal to them.

Well at least in part they've got that wrong.

Some of their stuff is really gorgeous (and some naff). As an occasional customer I saw this ad when it was first released (OK, I'll happily admit to be a total perv too, I'll just be an anonymous one). I loved the nighty the heroin or victim of the ad is wearing, but I can't see how this would promote the product. I showed the ad to the lovely lady I would have bought it for, she too liked the nighty but found the ad distasteful. So there they go one lost sale.

I can't imagine this was an advert that would have been shown on telly. So anyone who is likely to have seen this advert is watching it deliberately. Personally I find it hard to believe that anyone would go to the AP website if they were likely to be offended by sexual matters. It would be like going to nudest beach and complaining about the lack of clothes being worn. So anyone finding it offensive probably set out with the intention of being offended. Is it distasteful? yes probably, but then so much is, its supposed to be a spoof horror film, so presumably is supposed to be distasteful.

As to complaining that you see flesh in an underwear advert how else and they going to show you what they are trying to sell you? Or show undy adverts be reduced to the total b*&^%cks that inundate the TV advertising feminine hygiene products. "Our product doesn't look appealing so we though we'd show you some total dross about women looking happy instead"

3
0

Re: So for all you guys out there...

@ Condiment: yeah... especially not on a technology-inspired site like El Reg?

The first thing I thought was: WTF is that doing here?

0
0
Thumb Down

Re: So for all you guys out there...

I would stopped the clip or closed the page... complain about it? no

1
0

Re: So for all you guys out there...

don't think I would give much of a shit TBH.

0
0

Re: So for all you guys out there...

see just as much flesh in perfume adverts on telly during daytime hours (think Dior)

Point as stated, dont go to anne summers website and complain about the buzzy toys they have,

dont go to underwear sites to complain about showing underwear.

As for the "target Audience" things, how many perfume ad's sell the sex angle of the fragrance?

All of them, yet perfume isnt as sexy as underwear

0
0
Trollface

No, that'd be disgusting.

But if it was a ton of women ... that'd be coooooool.

0
1

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.