>Here’s an interesting article by Lauren Rosewarne that discusses the Advertising Standards Board’s decision to remove the Calvin Klein ad discussed in the previous post. Rosewarn makes the point that this is an unusual decision by the ABS as they decided to ban it after agreeing it’s ‘overall impact’ did ‘suggest rape’. Making that kind of moral judgement is apparently a first first for the usually free and easy ABS.
And, as the writer goes on to explain, there are so many other good reasons to ban this ad including that it is overtly sexual and so inappropriate content for a public billboard.
But in an effort to appear cosmopolitan and secular, and to underline that she is not in the Christian wowser camp, Rosewarn piffs at those who might object on grounds that the ad hints at sexual assault and says that it doesn’t do women any favours to ignore the fact that many of us desire and consent to group sex. It’s a slightly less irritating argument than the ‘it’s Art’ nonsense that’s been circulating but still misses the point.
A comment which appeared under the article summed it up so well, I thought I’d post it here and leave it at that:
Abigail Bray :