Two recent cases from Ad Standards have sparked debates over the portrayal of sex, nudity, and violence in advertising. The community panel’s decisions to uphold complaints against the Honeytoon and K Klub advertisements highlight the ongoing tension between creative freedom and community standards.
Content Warning: This article displays overly sexualised images that depict sexual violence. It also discusses sexual violence.
Honeytoon Comic Faces Backlash for Sexual Violence
The first case (0228-24) involved an internet ad by Honeytoon, an online comic archive, featuring an illustrated comic of a man and a woman on a horse. The dialogue included sexual innuendos, culminating in the woman’s distress upon realising the man’s intentions. A complaint described the ad as depicting a vivid and disturbing scene of sexual assault, which appeared on Twitter several times.
The Ad Standards Community Panel reviewed the complaint and upheld it, finding the ad in violation of Sections 2.3 (Violence) and 2.4 (Sex, Sexuality, Nudity) of the Australian Association of National Advertisers (AANA) Code of Ethics. The panel concluded that while it is not clear precisely what is happening in the
cartoon, the most likely interpretation is of unwanted sexual contact, which constitutes sexual assault. Furthermore, the portrayal of such an act was deemed unjustifiable in promoting the advertiser’s product, regardless of its adult nature.
The panel also determined that the advertisement treated sex and sexuality insensitively, given the disturbing nature of the interaction depicted. Despite the advertiser’s failure to respond, the decision required the advertisement to be discontinued.
K Klub Store Window Ad Deemed Inappropriate for Public Spaces
The second case (0224-24) centered on a window display by K Klub, a business in the adult industry. The advertisement featured four still images of women in revealing lingerie; some posed suggestively with poles. A complaint from a community member raised concerns about the exposure of such sexualised imagery to children, given the store’s location on a busy street frequented by school students.
While the advertiser initially updated and changed the images, the Ad Standards Panel still found that three of the four images breached Section 2.4 of the AANA Code. Images 2, 3, and 4 were considered overtly sexual, involving pole dancing and highly revealing attire. The panel emphasised that while the business’s nature justified some level of sexual imagery, public displays required greater sensitivity due to the broad audience, including children, who would inevitably see the advertisements during the day.
The advertiser did not respond to the results of the enquiry, but Ad Standards noted that the images have since been removed.
Public Impact and Industry Response
Both cases underscore the importance of context and audience when designing advertisements that contain sexual content. While advertisers in adult industries may appeal to mature audiences, the broad reach of certain mediums (like social media and public spaces) necessitates careful consideration of community values and standards.
shEqual, the movement for equality in the advertising industry argues that the way advertising portrays womens and girls has only become more and more sexualised over time. Despite some brands arguing that images of this nature is empowering, the organisation calls it “dangerous”.
“Sexualisation and objectification cause society to view women as less capable and less intelligent, and it makes men more tolerant of sexual harassment and violence,” the organisation states. “Women are more likely than men to be shown wearing revealing clothes or simulating sex acts, being dominated or portrayed as objects or animals. Women’s bodies are digitally altered to remove blemishes, lengthen legs, reduce waist and hips, and increase bust size”.
“This encourages people to view women as objects while also creating unrealistic ideas of female attractiveness and increasing body dissatisfaction”.
The Australian Association of National Advertisers (AANA) has also introduced stricter regulations to address these concerns, banning ads that include overtly sexualised images or harmful gender stereotypes. The updated Code of Ethics, which took effect in February 2021, aims to ensure that advertising in Australia reflects modern community standards. Fundamental changes include prohibitions on the focus on body parts when irrelevant to the product, restrictions on overtly sexual imagery in public spaces, and limitations on violent content where children may be exposed.
AANA commissioned Ipsos to gauge public sentiment on these issues, revealing that the majority of Australians support banning harmful gender stereotypes and de-sexualizing advertisements.
These changes aimed to reduce discrimination and the promotion of unrealistic beauty standards, which are seen as particularly damaging to young girls.
With the Honeytoon and K Klub ads both being discontinued, these cases serve as reminders to advertisers about their responsibility to align creative content with the sensitivities of the public, particularly when it comes to depictions of sex, nudity, and violence.
