According to The Australian Advertising Standards Bureau, the print and bus ads sparked many complaints. And the AASB notes: “The image is a large image on buses and is therefore able and likely to be seen by a very broad audience, including children.”
Posters of the young topless model were removed from 23 stores in New Zealand over the weekend, though as of right now, she can sill be found on the Supré website. Questions: Is this half-naked model too sexy for a teen brand? Or is everyone overreacting? Kids are exposed to a lot these days, from Rihanna singing about S&M, whips and chains to Lady Gaga dancing in a bra and underwear and Nicki Minaj’s ass-centric carrer. Is a jeggings ad really anything to get worked up about?
Maybe. Because there is something about watching the commercial that feels uncomfortable. The model rubs her buttocks, licks her lips, bends over to swish her rear in the camera and then falls back onto a bed — all universal signals, invitations for coitus. Not exactly the right message for teenagers. Apparently the AASB rejected claims by Supré that the ads target the 18-35 age group: “The board strongly disagreed and noted that the Supre brand is attractive to, and very popular with, teenage and pre-teen girls.”
Tricky stuff here. As a fully-grown woman who read Anaïs Nin and sang along to “Like A Virgin” on the radio as a teenager, I bristle at the idea that organizations need to protect young women from a model’s not-really-naked body. For centuries, females have been treated like frail and delicate creatures, and now, in 2011, are a teeny-tiny bit of sideboob and a flat tummy really going to destroy civilization? Does a sexy ad incite rampant wantonness? (And if so, so what?)
Tween Clothing Brand Ripped Over Girl’s Topless Ads [AdWeek]
Chainstore Axes Topless Adverts [New Zealand Herald]