This Instagram advertisement features a black and white image of a woman from behind. She is standing with her hands on her hips and is wearing a garter belt. Her buttocks are exposed. The caption with the image states, The ultimate bondage babe, KUKURO,
selling fast online
A sample of comments which the complainant/s made regarding this advertisement included the following:
This is a sexualised, sexually objectifying image of a woman to sell a
product. The woman's face is not shown, just a sexualised representation of her body. Her body and sexual appeal are therefore treated as representing her whole self and defining her worth. I object to this image because images that sexualise and
objectify women, and determine a woman's value based on her sexual appeal and physical attractiveness.
The Panel noted the complainant's concern that the advertisement sexualises and objectifies the woman pictured.
The Panel viewed the advertisement and noted the advertiser did not respond.
The Panel considered whether the advertisement was in breach of Section 2.2 of the Code. Section 2.2 of the Code states:
Advertising or marketing communications should not employ sexual appeal in a manner which is exploitative or degrading of any individual or group of people.
The Panel noted the complainant's
concern that the advertisement sexually objectifies women by depicting a woman without showing her face, and that therefore her body and sexual appeal are treated as defining her worth.
The Panel first considered whether the
advertisement used sexual appeal. The Panel considered the woman is depicted from behind wearing only a g-string and suspenders. The Panel considered that the advertisement did depict sexual appeal.
The Panel then considered
whether the advertisement used sexual appeal in a manner that was exploitative of an individual or group of people. The Panel considered that it was clear from the advertisement that the product for sale was the lingerie, not the woman, and that the
woman was not depicted as an object or commodity. The Panel noted that the woman's entire body is depicted and that the Wonder Woman pose is a position of power. The Panel considered that the advertisement is promoting the brand Honey Birdette as well as
the lingerie, and that the depiction of the woman and the focus on her body is relevant to a brand which makes products for the female body and promotes the empowerment of women.
The Panel considered that the depiction of the
woman without her face shown was not an attempt to suggest that she is an object or available for purchase, but rather was a creative choice relating to the theme and style of the photograph. The Panel considered that some members of the community may
consider the depiction of a woman without her face shown, focusing instead on the lingerie being promoted, to be suggesting her worth is related to her body only. However the Panel considered that most members of the community would not have this
interpretation of the advertisement, rather that is is portraying a lingerie product in a sexualised manner. Overall the Panel considered that the advertisement did not employ sexual appeal in a manner which is exploitative of the woman.
The Panel then considered whether the advertisement used sexual appeal in a manner that was degrading of an individual or group of people. The Panel considered that the woman is depicted in a powerful pose, and is standing with her
shoulders back and head held high. The Panel noted that the image was sexualised with the depiction of the woman also showing her buttocks and between her legs from behind. However the Panel considered that the depiction of a woman wearing sexualised
lingerie in this promotion for that style of lingerie was not a depiction which lowered the woman in character or quality. Overall the Panel considered that the advertisement did not employ sexual appeal in a manner which is degrading of the woman.
The Panel determined that the advertisement did not employ sexual appeal in a manner which is
