Would you like to counter my argument rather than resorting to childish cliches?
Actually I'd rather you don't, whatever counter-argument there maybe for "children shouldn't be sexualised" I don't want to hear it.
Would you like to counter my argument rather than resorting to childish cliches?
Actually I'd rather you don't, whatever counter-argument there maybe for "children shouldn't be sexualised" I don't want to hear it.
She is a teenage girl though and that is when you discover your sexuality and experiment with fashion and pushing the boundaries.
It is just a representation of teenage girls doing what teenage girls do.
Just like the young boy was depicted as being an annoying sod towards his sister.
Would you like to counter my argument rather than resorting to childish cliches?
Actually I'd rather you don't, whatever counter-argument there maybe for "children shouldn't be sexualised" I don't want to hear it.
I don't understand how she was being sexualised though. Should we just ban teenage girls from wearing skirts altogether, just in case?
Regardless of the fact that it's a Daily Mail article the advert is highly inappropriate. Children should not be sexualised, end of.
You do realise that the actress is actually 18, and that is how some school girls do actually dress these days.
The advert is one of the most realistic ones I have seen. Most are over-dramatised to flog the product.
I don't understand how she was being sexualised though. Should we just ban teenage girls from wearing skirts altogether, just in case?
The media should stop encouraging girls to become sexually active at such a young age. In fact, the media has a lot to answer for when it comes to sexualisation of women in general. Women of all ages are encouraged to go to ridiculous extremes in order to be sexually appealing to men who are made to see women as objects to be conquered.
Adverts like this not only perpetuate this view but encourage children of a school age to think this way too.
The media should stop encouraging girls to become sexually active at such a young age. In fact, the media has a lot to answer for when it comes to sexualisation of women in general. Women of all ages are encouraged to go to ridiculous extremes in order to be sexually appealing to men who are made to see women as objects to be conquered.
Adverts like this not only perpetuate this view but encourage children of a school age to think this way too.
Oh behave, girls act like that at that age because they want to, not because they have seen it on an advert.
You're meant to be a 23 year old male according to your profile. I cannot believe that someone your age is saying things like this.
The media should stop encouraging girls to become sexually active at such a young age. In fact, the media has a lot to answer for when it comes to sexualisation of women in general. Women of all ages are encouraged to go to ridiculous extremes in order to be sexually appealing to men who are made to see women as objects to be conquered.
Adverts like this not only perpetuate this view but encourage children of a school age to think this way too.
You really think this is going to sexualise children or make them have sex from a young age? This is a short skirt, something women have been wearing for years and years,
Would you like to counter my argument rather than resorting to childish cliches?
Actually I'd rather you don't, whatever counter-argument there maybe for "children shouldn't be sexualised" I don't want to hear it.
Nope, sorry still not buying the act, but knock yourself out, others will buy it.
You really think this is going to sexualise children or make them have sex from a young age? This is a short skirt, something women have been wearing for years and years,
A short skirt on a TV advert, in which they will have had to make sure she didn't flash anything.
The Mail must be in a terrible bind, on one hand it's been raging against the sexualisation of children for sometime but on the other hand has images of actual children in far more dubious situations on its website.
I see Mumsnet has returned as the bastion of feminist and parental opinion.
If I had the power the ASA would be forced upon receiving a complaint to refer it to 1000 randomly selected people. If 501 people return saying that they find the advert offensive then only then should it be banned. They'll probably trot out the usual line of the ad having the 'potential to cause widespread offence,' which falls apart when you look at how few actually complain.
Would you like to counter my argument rather than resorting to childish cliches?
Actually I'd rather you don't, whatever counter-argument there maybe for "children shouldn't be sexualised" I don't want to hear it.
Weird thing to say. I don't see where the poster was advocating the sexualising of children at all.
Like it or not school girls DO wear such things, you see it every day round here. Maybe it's just part of them being a rebellious teenager, I don't know as I am not female.
Like it or not short skirts are a fashion item, they have been for many years, and teenagers (especially girls) are notoriously fashion conscious.
Besides, the girl in the advert is 18, hardly a child anyway.
A short skirt on a TV advert, in which they will have had to make sure she didn't flash anything.
Mums better make sure there little ones do not venture outside, all those short skirts they will see, it can only lead to teenage pregnancy and heroin addiction,.
and then there`s the daily mail photos last week celebrating the "womanly curves" of a fifteen year old girl.
Thirteen.
The ad is a bit 'hey, look at this schoolgirl's legs' but then so is the mail article, dressed up in OUTRAGE. Have a good long look so you can be properly outraged.
It's an absolute disgrace - using 'look, aren't schoolgirls sexy' to get people to buy a loaf of bread? FFS what on earth is happening to this country?
I bet Jimmy Savile would have loved that if he was still alive.
It's an absolute disgrace - using 'look, aren't schoolgirls sexy' to get people to buy a loaf of bread? FFS what on earth is happening to this country?
I bet Jimmy Savile would have loved that if he was still alive.
The girl was eighteen, that would be granny porn to Sir Jimmy.
It's an absolute disgrace - using 'look, aren't schoolgirls sexy' to get people to buy a loaf of bread? FFS what on earth is happening to this country?
I bet Jimmy Savile would have loved that if he was still alive.
It's an absolute disgrace - using 'look, aren't schoolgirls sexy' to get people to buy a loaf of bread? FFS what on earth is happening to this country?
I bet Jimmy Savile would have loved that if he was still alive.
Funnily enough, that's not the effect the advert had on me.
Comments
Would you like to counter my argument rather than resorting to childish cliches?
Actually I'd rather you don't, whatever counter-argument there maybe for "children shouldn't be sexualised" I don't want to hear it.
She is a teenage girl though and that is when you discover your sexuality and experiment with fashion and pushing the boundaries.
It is just a representation of teenage girls doing what teenage girls do.
Just like the young boy was depicted as being an annoying sod towards his sister.
I don't understand how she was being sexualised though. Should we just ban teenage girls from wearing skirts altogether, just in case?
"outraged"
* expected to find link to Daily Fail *
Oh, there it is.
Same scenario with me and my dad over me wearing mini-skirts and kinky boots in the 60s!
Nowadays I try to keep my legs covered up where possible.:(
*sighs with nostalgia over the days when I had lovely shapely legs*
If anything this commercial just wants to make me wear a short skirt even more.
"defiantly hitching up her mid-thigh length skirt to strike a provocative pose"
Let's face it, Padraic Flanagan was obviously knocking one out when he wrote this piece.
I bet the mail journo had a hard on while writing this, getting to stare at skimpy schoolgirl uniform and mock outrage, got this is their wet dream.
The advert is one of the most realistic ones I have seen. Most are over-dramatised to flog the product.
The media should stop encouraging girls to become sexually active at such a young age. In fact, the media has a lot to answer for when it comes to sexualisation of women in general. Women of all ages are encouraged to go to ridiculous extremes in order to be sexually appealing to men who are made to see women as objects to be conquered.
Adverts like this not only perpetuate this view but encourage children of a school age to think this way too.
You're meant to be a 23 year old male according to your profile. I cannot believe that someone your age is saying things like this.
You really think this is going to sexualise children or make them have sex from a young age? This is a short skirt, something women have been wearing for years and years,
The outraged would become apoplectic!!!
Nope, sorry still not buying the act, but knock yourself out, others will buy it.
I see Mumsnet has returned as the bastion of feminist and parental opinion.
If I had the power the ASA would be forced upon receiving a complaint to refer it to 1000 randomly selected people. If 501 people return saying that they find the advert offensive then only then should it be banned. They'll probably trot out the usual line of the ad having the 'potential to cause widespread offence,' which falls apart when you look at how few actually complain.
Weird thing to say. I don't see where the poster was advocating the sexualising of children at all.
Like it or not school girls DO wear such things, you see it every day round here. Maybe it's just part of them being a rebellious teenager, I don't know as I am not female.
Like it or not short skirts are a fashion item, they have been for many years, and teenagers (especially girls) are notoriously fashion conscious.
Besides, the girl in the advert is 18, hardly a child anyway.
Mums better make sure there little ones do not venture outside, all those short skirts they will see, it can only lead to teenage pregnancy and heroin addiction,.
Thirteen.
The ad is a bit 'hey, look at this schoolgirl's legs' but then so is the mail article, dressed up in OUTRAGE. Have a good long look so you can be properly outraged.
I bet Jimmy Savile would have loved that if he was still alive.
The girl was eighteen, that would be granny porn to Sir Jimmy.
She's 18, far too old for Jimmy I am afraid.
Funnily enough, that's not the effect the advert had on me.