Calvin Klein ads featuring Lara Stone ordered to be taken down in Australia - Telegraph

Quote:

A Calvin Klein Jeans campaign image shot by photography duo Mert Alas and Marcus Piggott, has been pulled down from billboards in Sydney and Melbourne after the Advertising Standards Bureau received around 50 complaints. 'The overtly sexual images depict model Lara Stone - the Dutch born wife of David Walliams - fooling around with a group of half naked guys in what looks like a public basketball court. Curiously, she doesn't seem to be wearing any jeans, or underwear, but also doesn't seem to mind so much. It's likely the aggressive facial expression of the 'look-out-guy', chewing on a matchstick has given rise to feelings that there is an air of intimidation about the whole scene. Explaining their decision to order the removal of the ads the Board said they 'considered that the image was demeaning to women by suggesting that she is a plaything of these men. It also demeans men by implying sexualised violence against women. Whilst the act depicted could be consensual, the overall impact and most likely takeout is that the scene is suggestive of violence and rape.' Calvin Klein Jeans has made quite a name for itself over the years with highly sexualised campaign imagery starting way back in 1981 with a 15-year-old Brooke Shields asking "You want to know what comes between me and my Calvins... nothing?". In 2009 Steven Meisel's commercial for the brand featuring Natasha Poly had to be re-cut for the US to tone down its risqué nature. But has this campaign overstepped the mark? Let us know what you think.

Quote:

Outside a branch of Tesco in central London on a cool Friday evening, 30 people in pyjamas, nightgowns and fluffy slippers have gathered to campaign against lads' mags. All are members of the activist group Object and they are here to take part in the monthly Porn Versus Pyjamas campaign. They dart down the dairy aisle, through the frozen foods section, before coming to the display of lads' magazines, which they mark with their own slogans. FHM is put in a paper bag emblazoned with: "For Horrible Misogynists", while Maxim is hidden behind the phrase "MAXIMum Sexism". The women start a conga-line through the supermarket, chanting "Hey, ho, sexist mags have got to go", alerting security guards to their presence. Eventually they're ushered out, but not before depositing pamphlets, entitled Porn v Pyjamas: Why Lads' Mags Are Harmful, in customers' baskets. Their campaign began earlier this year, after Tesco ruled that customers wouldn't be allowed to shop in pyjamas because this could make other people feel uncomfortable. Object bit back by accusing some Tesco stores of ignoring the voluntary codes of conduct that suggest lads' mags should be covered up and repositioned on the top shelf, alongside pornographic content. Object was set up in 2003 to challenge the sexual objectification of women. It has enjoyed some notable successes. Its campaign Stripping the Illusion brought an end to strip clubs being licensed in the same way as cafes and karaoke bars, a policy that had allowed the lap dancing industry to grow by 50% in 10 years. And in 2008 it launched Demand Change, along with the group Eaves Housing for Women, to raise awareness of the realities of prostitution. The Tesco demonstration is part of its Feminist Fridays campaign – monthly events where activists protest against lads' mags and other forms of sexism. After being ejected from Tesco, the demonstrators spend three hours outside the store, distributing 1,500 leaflets. "Lads' mags are an example of the mainstreaming of pornography," says Anna van Heeswijk of Object. "The whole tone is of complete contempt [for women]. They are made up of photographs that come straight from pornography and would have been thought of as hardcore 50 years ago. But now the boundaries have been pushed to such an extent that they are considered an appropriate part of lads' mags and soft porn." Earlier this year, the actor Danny Dyer, then the agony uncle for Zoo magazine, suggested that a jilted male reader could "cut your ex's face, so no one will want her". "They have jokes about incest and pornography, about trafficking, about rape," says Van Heeswijk. "What's harmful is that this is considered a normal part of the mainstream media." Object's online co-ordinator, Silvia Murray Wakefield, feels lads' mags reflect the fact that "mainstream media culture is becoming more sexist; with pole-dancing and pornographic references appearing on daytime TV". In 2006, as a result of Object's lobbying and campaigning, a voluntary code of practice for the display and sale of lads' mags was drawn up by the Home Office, the Periodical Publishers Association and the National Federation of Retail Newsagents. But the group would like stronger regulation. A Home Office report in February stated that magazines such as Zoo and Nuts should be made top-shelf and have age restrictions on sales to stop the "drip, drip" of content that is sexualising boys and girls at an increasingly early age. At the same time, there were signs the industry was dying out. Figures released earlier this year by the Audit Bureau of Circulations saw FHM's circulation fall by 15.2% year-on-year. Sales of Zoo, Loaded and Nuts all dropped by between 20 and 30% year on year. But, says Alison Dear, Object's Feminist Fridays coordinator: "The reduction in the sale is not necessarily due to less sexism, but rather that a lot of publications have moved on to the internet, which is the same thing, but worse." Since the launch of Feminist Fridays, several stores – including some Tesco and WH Smith branches where actions have been held – have moved their display of lads' mags to the top shelf. But as long as the magazines are to be found on the lower shelves, it looks like the protests will continue.

Lads' mags: the great cover-up | Life and style | The Guardian

And just who the fuck do you people think you are to tell me I'm being demeaned? If I am it's by the bunch of fucking nannies trying to tell me what I can and can't see.

__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.

I think putting FHM in the same basket as Maxim, let alone Zoo, Loaded and Nut is unfair to FHM or even Maxim.

Zoo, Loaded or Nut, as far as i can tell, ARE soft porn stuff - like Daily Mirror or whatever are those daily news Sun-lookalike are called. I suspect that, if they are dying down, it's because you can now get some real porn for free on the net.

FHM is more like the male equivalent of Marie Claire and any other female glossy you care to name - Speaking of which, I find "Marie Claire" and the like extremely sexist. If this is what women think of themselves and what they think of men, no wonder the sexes don't get along...

As to the Calvin Klein campaign, it doesn't look like a look-out guy, more like a superposition of 2 different pics - As to the scene, yeah, maybe they should have made it more obviously consensually orgiatic

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.

Quote:

Speaking of which, I find "Marie Claire" and the like extremely sexist. If this is what women think of themselves and what they think of men, no wonder the sexes don't get along...

I always wondered to what extent that was reality and how much of it was an idealised Sex and the City vision of things, kind of like a female equivalent of the articles in Playboy. After a while you get totally paranoid: am I the only person in Paris that owns nothing with "Marc for Marc Jacobs" on it/can achieve "bed hair" without having to spend 380 euros on styling products/has never attempted to tittivate a sagging relationship by coming to bed dressed in whipped cream? No wonder they all look drained and emaciated.

As for the ad, hell, if that's demeaning then sign me up to be demeaned. (" Calvin Klein has once again caused a stir with a provocative advertising campaign, this time featuring an apparent rape involving a short, fat political science student with cankles...")

__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.

I never looked at Playboy magazines for the articles so I cannot comment... But, yeah, the Sex and the City stuff feel right: The way women think they'd like to be/behave... Or the way female editors think women ought to be/behave...

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.

I had to look up 'cankles.' Never heard of them. I hope I am immune to the heavy cuing I encountered that is supposed to make them a reason to indulge in disdain.

Example:

I mean, talk about obsessively missing the point....

__________________
"Neither man nor nation can exist without a sublime idea."
Fyodor Dostoyevsky, 1821 - 1881
QOTD

My BLOG: Things Have Changed

I can't tell if that's an attempt to photoshop them in or out...

__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.

Doesn't matter. The point is what is circled, and what isn't.

That is, if i found it necessary to inscribe anything on that photo, it would be something like "bottoms down! Yummmmm!"

__________________
"Neither man nor nation can exist without a sublime idea."
Fyodor Dostoyevsky, 1821 - 1881
QOTD

My BLOG: Things Have Changed

Originally Posted by Benjamin

That is, if i found it necessary to inscribe anything on that photo, it would be something like "bottoms down! Yummmmm!"

Shouldn't it be 'bottom up! Yummmmm'? ..

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.

A pair of knickers can do that to you? How do you get through Tesco's without outraging public decency in the clothing aisle? I can't take my eyes off the horrible photoshopping. Sure, she's taking her pants off, but she also looks like the not-entirely-rejuvenated Imhotep from The Mummy and it's scaring me.

__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.

Originally Posted by Zichao

A pair of knickers can do that to you? How do you get through Tesco's without outraging public decency in the clothing aisle?

Weeeellll.... I do like underwear shops for women... Always get the imagination flowing...

And it's the fact that she is removing her panties in a very specific way. Normally I prefer to be the one removing them but, with a bending forward like that, I don't mind (if I am being behind)...

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.