Honey Birdette fights against new lingerie regulation guidelines from Ad Standards
Global lingerie retailer, Honey Birdette have received an exclusive copy of the new lingerie regulation guidelines from Ad Standards Australia. The new standards, which will further limit lingerie advertising in all public spaces specifically and unfairly targets women, women’s sexuality and the gay female community.
Honey Birdette founder, Eloise Monaghan said the rampant double standards towards women and their sexuality are clearly reflected throughout the guide in which they utilize multiple advertisements from Honey Birdette alongside other brands in order to provide context for the new rules.
In one example Ad Standards compare an ad featuring a heterosexual couple and a lesbian couple alongside one another. The image which depicts a same-sex female couple embracing is called out for being inappropriate, while the image of Bras and Things ‘husband and wife’ kissing is considered appropriate.
Models standing to the side with their bottoms or torso pushed forward, their back arched with their eyes closed or sitting down with their legs apart are shown in the guide as unacceptable. Ad Standards now considers these poses to be highly sexualized stating that the models appear to be ‘Presenting’.
Ad standards have previously imposed guidelines regarding the censorship of nipples, however under the new stricter regulations even fully covered nipples adorned with pasties will be deemed unacceptable and highly sexualized as they draw attention to the breasts and therefore are not suitable in a public space.
High-cut bodysuits and G-strings are also considered to have high levels of nudity and would be in breach of the new regulations. Women in lingerie can also no longer appear in advertising alongside men in clothes.
In response to the new guidelines managing director of Monaghan stated: “This has to stop! Why are men allowed and women not allowed to show their bodies? Why are we teaching young girls and women to be ashamed of their bodies? The female form not a matter of vulgarity or indecency.
“The changes to these guidelines are a frightening development for the modern woman and Ad Standards should be ashamed of themselves. These standards are highly archaic and repugnant to all women not just across Australia, but globally.
“I won’t be silenced and let this go. We are here to empower women and we are going to continue to do that.”
Two weeks ago, Honey Birdette revealed their latest campaign, Red Alert. Featuring censorship banners across the front of every image, the campaign responded to claims that the Australian and Victorian Government were giving in to the radical views of a conservative Christian group who want to enforce stricter guidelines in advertising specifically targeting women.
Monaghan said the brand decided to launch a campaign to highlight the discrimination that women face for being exactly what they are; women.
Says Monaghan: “I certainly won’t let conservative fringe groups, (male politicians and female hating woman) blame women’s bodies for domestic violence and we are gearing up to create a movement with contemporary women and men around the world. Our bodies are not up for discussion, how “appropriate” our breasts are for display in lingerie advertising. Nor does lace underwear consent rape.”
Alongside this campaign, Honey Birdette launched a petition calling for customers to help protect women against double standards in advertising. The petition received 28,000 signatures in just a matter of days, while the conservative group lobbying against Honey Birdette have taken two years to collect 70,000 signatures.
Says Monaghan: “If Collective Shout think they have a voice, mine will be a viral speaker phone to every person out there. I have avoided this action, but they are now threatening what we stand for.”
Now that the new Ad Standard guidelines have been revealed, Honey Birdette will share the gender-biased and unjust regulations in a bid to highlight the gender disparity in current advertising censorship and reveal how they aim to strip away women’s rights and representation with regressive policies.
Says Monaghan: “Women should have the right to set their own boundaries and identities around sexuality. We need a revolution which allows women reclaim sexual independence and the gay female community freedom to express themselves as they wish, where they are not objects of gender-bias rules, ridicule, shame or the patriarchy.
“Help us reach 100,000 signatures and protect women from outrageous double standards in advertising.”
Sign the petition at https://www.honeybirdette.com.
Disclaimer: All signatures captured by this petition remain separate from the commercial operation of the Honey Birdette brand. They will not be used for marketing or commercial gain in any form or format. This petition has the sole purpose of bringing attention to and creating a counter movement to resist the regression of women’s rights in Australia and around the world.
7 Comments
…Highly sexualised images that reinforce problematic gender stereotypes and misogynistic attitudes about women, being used to sell underwear, and displayed to young kids at shopping centre windows.
We don’t show adult content to kids on tv, neither should they see sexualised women (but never sexualised men!) in shopping centres while getting the groceries.
Please don’t turn your problematic and objectifying advertising into a battle for freedom of speech. You can’t just assign your brand to a cause as it suits you. Think about what your imagery is telling little girls and boys about women’s bodies.
We seem to be going back the the 50’s and 60’s, people fought for the right for freedom of expression in the 70’s and it grew in the 80’s and 90, now, probably those same soldiers, want to go back.
While I don’t disagree with some of the changes, I do fear there may be no end.
100%
The fucking puritans always ruin it…
get the hell out of here.
Eloise Monaghan is using some desperate measures to grasp onto the meagre threads of legitimacy she thinks she might have to further exploit the female body for nothing more than her financial gain. She calls it “empowerment” but it is really a thinly veiled attempt at using aged old porn to sell stuff. There is nothing empowering about porn, for its users, its models or for the hapless victims who in this case has no choice but to view it emblazoned in every shopping center. There’s ample evidence from years of research that porn affects how men view women and breeds disrespect. Every parent will tell you they don’t want their kids to see these ridiculous ads and believe the lie about beauty that Eloise Monaghan preaches.
A personal response from an average person:
I am not a spokesperson for the public, but I can speak for myself and for my family. I am a 29-year-old woman, who is a Christian, a bisexual, a soon-to-be aunt, a university graduate with a Bachelor of Science in Psychology, a current university student in the arts and many other things besides, but I list these so that you have an idea of where I’m coming from.
Personally, when I go to the store for whatever reason, it is a public space, so, I like to feel comfortable. I’d like to think that it is a place where people of all ages, races, religions, orientations, and so on can go about feeling safe, secure, and at ease.
You’ve addressed body image for women. As a woman and a Christian, I choose to keep my body private. I don’t mind getting changed in an appropriate setting. I’ve even asked my all-female housemates if I can walk around the house in my underwear and they don’t mind. I can agree that when a girl starts to develop, she should be taught to love and appreciate her own body. She should be taught to feel confident. The Honey Birdette advertisements are similar to the porn I was exposed to as a child. When I saw these images of women and those on the front of many magazines, I compared my own body to other women’s bodies and, many times, I felt inadequate. I imagine that there are other young girls who would do the same.
You’ve shown all these images of other lingerie advertisements and I personally find most of them to be much the same. As a bisexual women, I can say that you’re adverstising is more racy than most. I can see what you mean though. Point taken. Restrictions, in my opinion, should, then, perhaps be stricter and more regulated.
When I see advertisements like those for Honey Birdette featured in public, as a bisexual woman, naturally, my body starts responding in a way that’s biologically technicianed to prepare a person to have sex. Do I want to have sex in public? No. Do I feel comfortable having my body respond like this in public? No. Does it matter that no one, but me will notice? It does to me. I don’t like feeling uncomfortable.
So, this is my personal opinion. Why should you care? The reason you should care is that the rights of every single individual matter.
What about the older generation who may just want all advertisements to show people in regular clothes? Well, perhaps you could restrict your advertisements to inside the shop alone if people feel uncomfortable enough to voice it.
Next, I am a soon-to-be an aunt and I have helped to look after many children within my family. I love kids! The image you portray of women’s bodies may have similar effects on these children as they did on me as I grew and developed. I don’t want them to go through any of that. I want to protect them from having the same confronting and confusing experiences as I did. I feel that a different approach would lead to better development around sexuality.
These advertisements are only ONE WAY to look at women’s bodies. You can look at women’s bodies in a textbook about human biology designed to provide information about the various functions of a woman’s body. This includes sexual education. You can look at women’s bodies in art. You can look at women all around you. They are people, after all, not just bodies.
If you have a sexual response to any of these, it is probably best for you to learn about that response when you aren’t feeling it, unless, of course, you intend to actually have sex. However, before having sex, you should be properly educated about what happens and why. This way you can make a decision about when, where, how, and so on.
Perhaps, you may think that I am being idealistic and naive, but is that really a bad thing? And, well, really, I feel like a lot of this should be common sense. Therefore, I am explaining this all as simply and as clearly as possible, so that, hopefully, there will be no misunderstandings.
Point close. I feel that restrictions on lingerie advertisements should be strict enough to ensure that people out in public can feel comfortable and, so, that children can grow and develop their own self-confidence and sexuality in a way that is healthy.
I hope you can appreciate that I am putting myself out there in order to drive a point. A lot of this information isn’t what I’d typically share about myself, but I want to put it out there because every voice matters, including mine, and there are others out there who probably have similar thoughts and feelings. I do, however, want to keep my privacy because there are real people out there with bad intentions and I’d rather avoid any worst case scenarios. If you have read all of this properly, thank you.
To personal response from average person: Whats fantastic, considered, well thought out and presented response that was intelligent, honest and reasonable. The more people there are like you the more hope there is for the world.
My personal response is as much as I love seeing women in lingerie and I believe in a company’s entitlement to market its products I do feel that boundaries should be observed in commercialising the sexuality of humans both females and males whether it’s presenting women as pornstars or men as human wallets.