Female Masturbation Ad Gets Banned

accurist_crotch.jpg

An ad for London-based Accurist watch company which ran in Glamour and showed a near naked woman reclining in a chair with her left hand in her crotch above the tagline, "Me Time," was banned by the Advertising Standard Authority which deemed it sexually suggestive and likely to cause serious or widespread offense to readers. Accurist, apparently not having seen their own ad, denies the ad has any association with masturbatory imagery. One reader who complained seems to think masturbation is somehow offensive and demeaning to women. It seems both sides are having difficulty facing reality with Accurist plainly denying a near naked woman with her hand between her legs might possibly be interpreted as sexual and the complainer refusing to admit we've progressed beyond the pre-Kinsey world where masturbation was taboo.

Of course, this doesn't mean masturbating women in ads is a good thing but let's not mince words. In the ad it looks like she is. And, there's nothing wrong with masturbation which is certainly not demeaning to women.

Accurist has a series of these ads on its website including another crotch grab ad.

by Steve Hall    Jul- 6-05   Click to Comment   
Topic: Campaigns, Creative Commentary   

Enjoy what you've read? Subscribe to Adrants Daily and receive the daily contents of this site each day along with free whitepapers.



Comments



Comments

I think it's sexy, provocative, and perfect for the fashion industry. Now if this were a NYC 2012 ad and it was Lady Liberty with her legs spread wide waiting for the time to tick down till we don't get the Olympics, that would be another story. laf.

Posted by: bucky on July 6, 2005 10:48 AM

"Where's the Beef?" er... Where's a better pic/vid? of the ad?

Posted by: GP on July 6, 2005 11:59 AM

After I print that ad out, it's me time.

Posted by: Bob on July 6, 2005 3:27 PM

If loving female masturbation is wrong, I don't wanna be right.

Posted by: Larry Flynt, Jr. on July 6, 2005 5:18 PM

Are you insane?!!!? Women are constant used as sexual props to sell items. Men will do and say anything to sell a product. I can't think of one person who would say it is ok for a women to sit there and masterbate will thinking of a watch. Women again are the props for the insanity men perpetrate.

Posted by: Charles White on July 6, 2005 7:47 PM

I guarantee that if ANY company used pornographic ads that were specifically released on adult sites the products would sell like hotcakes. You know it and I know it.

Why advertisers still waste their time with 'suggestive' ads that are bound to be banned for being sexual in any way is beyond me. Put a box of Kleenex on Tera Patrick's box and you've just doubled your sales.

Hell! I'd buy tampons from Tera Patrick. Who's kidding? I'm not.

Posted by: Paolo on July 6, 2005 8:42 PM

Hey Charles-

You're right, women are used as props in ads. Men are, too. I highly doubt anyone held a gun to the model's head and said, "Pose like you're masturbating to sell this watch ro die." She knew what she was doing when she signed the contract. I'm all for women's rights, blah, blah, blah. I'm also all for women who are comfortable enough in their own bodies to do an ad like this. She's an attractive woman and the photography is great. The only insanity around here your comment. Relax.

Posted by: instantpop on July 6, 2005 10:42 PM

I'm surprised no-one commented on the one thing that is demeaning to women....she's a friggin skeleton!

Posted by: freak on July 7, 2005 12:27 AM

The thing that bothers me about these ads is not the objectfication, rather these ads use a tired old trick to sell the stuff.

Slathering pages with sexy nakedness seems a bottom-of-the barrel "strategy" something to be pulled out when you've got no ideas.

Posted by: Von K on July 7, 2005 10:08 AM

Who cares, it's hot!

Posted by: Hah on July 7, 2005 1:32 PM

LOL i didnt even know the ad was for a watch and i'd never heard of that brand of watch. i have now.

dm

Posted by: Dario Meli on July 7, 2005 3:22 PM

i think that is a little hypocritical for them to say about that image if you see half of the ads posted in there magazine or any other magazine for that matter i cant believe that they were trying to stop controversy by not posting in but in fact they just caused more kind of ironic isnt it haha

Posted by: Mark Gorham on July 10, 2005 2:37 PM

The attractiveness of the ad is in its scarcity value because masturbation is a taboo. Why not use the image of a woman or men masturbating in many other ads and pretty soon it will lose its appeal. It will then be commonplace and not subject to such narrow mindedness.

Why not an ad of a creative director of an ad agency being original. Now that would have scarcity value!

Posted by: RJ on August 14, 2005 4:40 AM

Good actions, advertising and pros and cons of the publicising of masturbation. Seeing it, first was humorous, a little exciting, not provocative. Second: Like, it happens, so get used to it! Third: choosing female, oh yes, they do it too. And finally: This does not change my masturbatory habits, I am old, but not beyond erection years yet. But my methods are nothing to write about.. straight Jacking.. If you read this, I hope you enjoying your habit, in your frequency, and at your own pace.. Peace... Scott

Posted by: Scott on September 18, 2005 2:12 PM

comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your

Posted by: John on October 10, 2006 8:44 AM

Welcome to Female Masturbation Taboo blog!
http://women-masturbation.thumblogger.com

Posted by: Prezzenter on December 16, 2007 8:14 PM

I looked in the 'advertisement' tab on Accurist's website. They have photoshopped her left arm out of the image. Actually I had preferred the masturbation version.

Posted by: buma on February 8, 2008 6:33 AM







Featured FREE Resource: