EU parliament agrees to enforce PC-friendly advertising

[Tribun]

Spiegel Online

EU Parliament Calls for Less Sexism in Advertising

Members of the European Parliament on Tuesday voted in favor of a report which calls on advertisers to stop portraying men and women in tradition gender roles.

MEPs want to see fewer housewives in advertising.
European lawmakers are concerned that the way women and men are portrayed in marketing and advertising is making it more difficult to dispell old-fashioned ideas of traditional gender roles.

Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) on Wednesday adopted a new report that calls on member states to make a greater effort to monitor how gender is portrayed in advertising. Constant images of women in the kitchen while men clean their cars outside are reinforcing sexist stereotypes, the study argues.

The non-legally binding report, which was drafted by Swedish MEP Eva-Britt Svensson, also calls on EU institutions to monitor the implementation of existing European laws on sex discrimination.

"MEPs call on the EU institutions and member states to develop awareness actions against sexist insults or degrading images of women and men in advertising and marketing," the lawmakers said in a statement after adopting the report by 504 votes in favor, 110 against and 22 abstentions.

The report also called on the media and advertising to set good examples from a gender perspective.

Before the vote, Svensson told the German news agency DPA that people are often not aware of how much they are influenced by advertising. "When women and men are portrayed in a stereotypical way the consequence may be that it becomes difficult in other contexts to see women and men's resources and abilities in areas other than those of the traditional gender roles."

Honestly...as if they don't have better things to do.

[Kanastrous]

Maybe they really don't.

of course, if they are going to go after 'traditional gender roles' in advertising as being problematic, what they really need to be doing is kicking in the doors of Muslim households to confiscate headscarves, abayas, burkas, Qurans, and any other visible signs of gender discrimination...

..in the interest of hitting gender discrimination, where it makes a real difference.

[General Zod]

Because forcing people to walk on eggshells is such a great way of ensuring equality.

[dragon]

Hum so would a commerical of the women cleaning the car be fine then. Sounds good to me I am always trying to convince my wife to the clean the car while I cook.

[Darth Wong]

At least the goal is laudable, even if this particular method seems like a waste of time. That's more than I can say for things like the US Congressional inquiry into Janet Jackson's boobie flash.

[Vendetta]

Maybe they really don't.

They probably don't. This kind of trivia is essentially all you can get any two European nations to agree on.

[Stargate Nerd]

ghetto edit - of course, if they are going to go after 'traditional gender roles' in advertising as being problematic, what they really need to be doing is kicking in the doors of Muslim households to confiscate headscarves, abayas, burkas, Qurans, and any other visible signs of gender discrimination...

Yes when in doubt blame it on the Muslims. Because Islam's great influence makes Europeans wanna be sexist.

[General Zod]

Yes when in doubt blame it on the Muslims. Because Islam's great influence makes Europeans wanna be sexist.

They certainly aren't helping gender equality by trying to get EU nations to give Sharia law special exemptions or otherwise bend over backwards to accommodate them. So why not go after one of the biggest offenders?

[Kanastrous]

Yes when in doubt blame it on the Muslims. Because Islam's great influence makes Europeans wanna be sexist.

They certainly aren't helping gender equality by trying to get EU nations to give Sharia law special exemptions or otherwise bend over backwards to accommodate them. So why not go after one of the biggest offenders?

Because if you are an offender due to your precious religious beliefs, you for some reason should get a pass.

Because oppressing women - just for being women - is honorable and maybe even laudable, so long as you are doing it on the instructions of some 'holy' book.

[Kanastrous]

ghetto edit - of course, if they are going to go after 'traditional gender roles' in advertising as being problematic, what they really need to be doing is kicking in the doors of Muslim households to confiscate headscarves, abayas, burkas, Qurans, and any other visible signs of gender discrimination...

Yes when in doubt blame it on the Muslims. Because Islam's great influence makes Europeans wanna be sexist.

No, because Islamic sexism and oppression of women presently receives a general pass thanks to European concepts of religious tolerance that didn't take such retrograde primitivist behavior into account, when they were formulated.

[Stargate Nerd]

Yes when in doubt blame it on the Muslims. Because Islam's great influence makes Europeans wanna be sexist.

They certainly aren't helping gender equality by trying to get EU nations to give Sharia law special exemptions or otherwise bend over backwards to accommodate them. So why not go after one of the biggest offenders?

I have never seen a single continental European nation bend over backwards for Muslims by allowing the enforcement of Sharia Law. That's afaik a solely British abomination.

Also Muslim backwardness only affect Muslims, European don't even regard them as their peers, to suggest that they would be influenced by the Muslim community into sexism is nothing short of hilarious.

No, because Islamic sexism and oppression of women presently receives a general pass thanks to European concepts of religious tolerance that didn't take such retrograde primitivist behavior into account, when they were formulated.

Maybe if the European governments spend as much time trying to integrate their Muslim communities as they spend trying to make them feel out of place, the increased willingness of European Muslims to integrate into modern European society would take care of sexism all by itself without even necessitating Nazi confiscation methods.

Because oppressing women - just for being women - is honorable and maybe even laudable, so long as you are doing it on the instructions of some 'holy' book.

You clearly are an informed individual.

[General Zod]

Maybe if the European governments spend as much time trying to integrate their Muslim communities as they spend trying to make them feel out of place, the increased willingness of European Muslims to integrate into modern European society would take care of sexism all by itself without even necessitating Nazi confiscation methods.

I suppose it's never occurred to you that just maybe it's the Muslims who aren't putting out the required effort? All I ever hear about Muslims in Europe is how much <group x> wants special exemptions for their archaic religious practices.

[Kanastrous]

No, because Islamic sexism and oppression of women presently receives a general pass thanks to European concepts of religious tolerance that didn't take such retrograde primitivist behavior into account, when they were formulated.

Maybe if the European governments spend as much time trying to integrate their Muslim communities as they spend trying to make them feel out of place, the increased willingness of European Muslims to integrate into modern European society would take care of sexism all by itself without even necessitating Nazi confiscation methods.

Seems to me, the effort should be made on the part of arrivals, to integrate into their new place of residence, rather than expecting their new nation of residence, to make the effort for them.

Because oppressing women - just for being women - is honorable and maybe even laudable, so long as you are doing it on the instructions of some 'holy' book.

You clearly are an informed individual.

If you'd like to inform me some more, please don't hesitate.

[Tatterdemalion]

of course, if they are going to go after 'traditional gender roles' in advertising as being problematic, what they really need to be doing is kicking in the doors of Muslim households to confiscate headscarves, abayas, burkas, Qurans, and any other visible signs of gender discrimination...

Any particular reason forcible confiscation of all religious paraphanlia, including on private property, should only be applied to muslims?

[PeZook]

That's nice, but advertising is a symptom, not a cause of the problem. In fact, a shitload of ads are targetted at the "Middle aged, independent, self-reliant woman of success", rather than the "Happy housewife with a bucketload of kids". The latter shows a lot when selling cleaning products or shit like vitamins for kids. Why? Because it's the women who make the purchasing decision in most of these cases. And the best thing? These kinds of ads sell those products.

The ads are just targetted at their audience: if an ad is sexist, it's probably because the people who the producer thinks are likely to buy the product are sexist themselves, and changing the ad will not make them respect women any more. They'll just buy the beer which shows big breasted women fawning over the manly man holding the bottle. Of course, the goal is laudable, but they're handling it backwards.

[His Divine Shadow]

Maybe they really don't.

They probably don't. This kind of trivia is essentially all you can get any two European nations to agree on.

And the end result is just more people who think the EU is a broken entity that should be scaled back to just being about free movement and trade in europe and stop all this political and ideological stuff.

[Tatterdemalion]

That's nice, but advertising is a symptom, not a cause of the problem.

You're quite possibly right, but I'm not sure I'd dismiss the idea that just because the media is pandering to an already existing bias, that they don't in so doing reinforce that bias. For example, is a news venue that goes out of it's way to sensationalise violent crime contributing to a perception of an increase in violent crime? Or is it merely pandering to a public that buys up stories of violence? Or is it both?

[PeZook]

You're quite possibly right, but I'm not sure I'd dismiss the idea that just because the media is pandering to an already existing bias, that they don't in so doing reinforce that bias. For example, is a news venue that goes out of it's way to sensationalise violent crime contributing to a perception of an increase in violent crime? Or is it merely pandering to a public that buys up stories of violence? Or is it both?

That's a good point, but unlike news, ads are always designed in direct response to market research, making them more responsive to changes in attitude. Especially since most companies don't give a fuck about how they sell their product: If tomorrow, men started being the group which predominantly deals with housekeeping, you'd see a violent turnaround in ads for cleaning products

More to the point: asking nicely for ads to change won't do shit. Even if it's a self-reinforcing spiral, the companies which ignore that call are going to outperform those who don't.

[Dooey Jo]

I suppose it's never occurred to you that just maybe it's the Muslims who aren't putting out the required effort? All I ever hear about Muslims in Europe is how much <group x> wants special exemptions for their archaic religious practices.

Have you considered that your information may be coloured by the cultural climate of not taking kindly to them Muslims, that seems to exist in America? Blaming the integration problems on them is a huge oversimplification, of the kind you see the xenophobic far right-wingers make. The fact is that you can be (and likely will be) discriminated against for having an Arab-sounding name, so it's no great wonder many of them feel like they're not part of the community. This discrimination applies to all of them, which can be compared to the minority that do cause trouble.

That's nice, but advertising is a symptom, not a cause of the problem.

Not exactly. Advertisers like to actively reinforce and even create stereotypes that they can more easily target. I don't know if it's a conscious decision on their part, but it wouldn't surprise me if they have rooms full of people discussing what fears and insecurities they can use this week.

[...] Why? Because it's the women who make the purchasing decision in most of these cases. And the best thing? These kinds of ads sell those products.

That's not all they do. They also sell the idea that you have to do these things to be a good housewife, and if they can, that everyone should want to be one. Why? Because if people want to be good housewives, they will do what you tell them to, which is to buy their shit. Much like the lot of the cosmetics and fashion advertising industry is based on convincing people they are fat pigs. Advertisers love the status quo, because it means they don't have to change their strategies.

[Kanastrous]

of course, if they are going to go after 'traditional gender roles' in advertising as being problematic, what they really need to be doing is kicking in the doors of Muslim households to confiscate headscarves, abayas, burkas, Qurans, and any other visible signs of gender discrimination...

Any particular reason forcible confiscation of all religious paraphanlia, including on private property, should only be applied to muslims?

If there are Christians, Buddhists, Jews, etc on EU turf who are treating their women in the same mode as the orthodox Muslim norm, I should think the same policy would properly apply to them, too.

[The Guid]

I would like to point out the focus on "degrading" treatment in advertising. Perhaps you think degrading people in advertising is right and proper. I don't and applaud Sweden's efforts to get its own very sensible laws spread throughout the EU.

[General Zod]

I would like to point out the focus on "degrading" treatment in advertising. Perhaps you think degrading people in advertising is right and proper. I don't and applaud Sweden's efforts to get its own very sensible laws spread throughout the EU.

The obvious problem is how do you define "degrading"? I can see things that have obvious sexist or racist connotations being banned, but this smacks of how obscenity laws in the US are handled. Unless the guidelines are incredibly clear and well written I can see this being very messy.

[Stargate Nerd]

Seems to me, the effort should be made on the part of arrivals, to integrate into their new place of residence, rather than expecting their new nation of residence, to make the effort for them.

As an American, it is understandable that you'd expect all nations to be as welcoming to minorities and (legal) immigrants as the US, what you don't know though is that (continental)Western European nations go out of their way to deny you the chance to integrate into their society. The discrimination that takes place is systematic and pinning the failure of 4th generation immigrants to integrate into the greater society on individual rather than enforced government policies is again nothing short of hilarious.

If you'd like to inform me some more, please don't hesitate.

While I hate to be defending Islam here, honor based concepts are hardly part of the religion and more Middle Eastern/African and Asian cultural clutter.

[Dartzap]

he discrimination that takes place is systematic and pinning the failure of 4th generation immigrants

Can you give some examples of this? Are you talking about France and its riots?

[Tatterdemalion]

If there are Christians, Buddhists, Jews, etc on EU turf who are treating their women in the same mode as the orthodox Muslim norm, I should think the same policy would properly apply to them, too.

Define an orthodox Muslim for me. Because if an 'orthodox' muslim is any muslim that would be affected by a wide-scale legal banning of "headscarves, abayas, burkas, Qurans" then that's probably going to be 99% of Muslims in Europe. What you're essentially proposing by banning the Islamic holy book is making a criminal out of every Muslim in Europe, and I don't think Europe's prisons could take the vast influx of convicts nor would the result be worth it for what is, in itself, a victimless crime. The Quran contains just as much good old archaic hate as the Bible, but simply owning the thing shouldn't be a crime.

Likewise, I fail to see how simply banning headscarves would make muslim women more free (in fact what you'd essentially be doing is punishing the women for the discrimination hoisted upon them by their culture), nor how you would enforce such a ban. What constitutes a headscarf? Any piece of fabric that covers the head? If so shouldn't all female headwear be banned? Anything less all-encompassing and you'll just see women trade one hair-concealing garment for another I imagine.

I don't particularly think you've thought this through. First off I'd appreciate you showing us just why muslims and Islamic practices present such a gaping problem to Europe that they can only be solved by effective criminalisation of the religion, and why this quite severe and resource-intensive path is the best way to solve it.