"Please stop the world, I'd like to get off!"

I am about to have a huge whinge about the Advertising Standards Board (again). If you are tired of hearing these long-winded rants, please walk away now. (Dave, this includes you.)

Have you ever wanted to clench your fists and cry out, "GAHHHHH!" because the whole world has gone crazy (except for, of course, you)?

I cannot fathom the thinking or the motivation of the ASB. By now, it has become clear that the current system of self-regulation is absolutely useless, you would think if anything that now they would want to give the impression of functioning effectively and actually uphold some legitimate complaints. Nope, not at all. In fact, despite occasionally reaching the correct answer, when the Advertiser doesn't like the answer- that their ad campaign was a violation- the ASB reviews their decision and decides despite the fact that they originally agreed the ad was inappropriate, that it's actually okay now.

This particular case is of Rivers catalogue, with the heading "10 Deadly Deals", with a picture of a woman's legs coming out from under the couch. She is wearing fishnet stockings and stiletto heels. The highlight of the ASB report where they reversed their original decision was where they actually suggested the woman under the couch might be "searching for a lost wedding ring". Maybe the campaign should have been named something other than "10 Deadly Deals" if we weren't supposed to interpret the woman as dead...and being that Rivers sell clothing, and not couches and not women....what exactly was the correct interpretation here?

Another recent case, for Supre 'jeggings' (now there's a crime right there). These ads are of a topless young model wearing jeggings. Her hair is covering her breasts. Of course, these ads are displayed in the appropriate venue you would expect- the backs of buses. The ASB dismissed complaints for this ad, saying that a topless woman draws more attention to the jeans that are for sale. Funny, I thought when there was a topless woman around, attention was elsewhere.

Supre's response was that this ad was aimed at girls aged 18 plus. Because we all know only over 18's go outside without blindfolds on.

So you can see, my levels of grumpiness to those who are failing to properly regulate advertising in the public arena are slightly elevated.

Then, on top of that, THIS.

Sexpo.

I personally have no interest in Sexpo. I know there are adults who do. And if they are adults, then that is their call and nothing to do with me. Sexpo is R rated, for adults over 18 only. However, their advertising is once again, aimed at the general public.

I am aware of at least one Sexpo billboard that is up in North Perth, including a picture of a famous porn star, whose accomplishments include four awards for anal sex, I have since learned. I, along with others, have lodged a complaint with the ASB about this billboard, for all to see, not just the adults over 18 who might be interested in attending.

Of course, I can be sure that the ASB will take their sweet time responding to complaints, and they will get around to it sometime after Sexpo has come and gone. Maybe they will even say it needs to come down. But the advertiser will be ready to take it down anyway by then, the event is over. And the moral of the story is: Advertisers, do whatever you want, and put up whatever you want- because there are no repercussions at all, and the more offensive, the more everyone will take notice.

But my issue with Sexpo in the public sphere goes way past billboards.

Sexpo is planning a public demonstration to take place in the City, in the middle of the day, where they will see how many people they can fit in a bed with this accomplished porn star I previously mentioned, as well as various Penthouse Pets and pole dancers. In the workplace, displaying pornographic images or pin-ups is sexual harassment. But for all the office workers in Perth, once they have stepped out of the office for lunch- no protection anymore!

Can someone tell me how there are sexual harassment laws in the workplace, but not outside the office door? Why at work, a woman can strive for equality, to be taken seriously as someone who has something to contribute- but outside, be put back in her place, where it is now appropriate for others to ogle and make suggestive comments?

Or perhaps someone can explain how it is that Facebook deleted pictures of 'porn t-shirts' because they contained pornographic content, thus violating the terms of use, when facebook users must be at least thirteen- when anyone, even my small children, can walk down the street and see someone wearing the identical shirt?

Anyone?

Nasty religious folk discriminating against the poor Sex industry

Regular visitors of my blog will know that I made a submission to the Inquiry into Billboards and Outdoor Advertising, and how the Advertising Standards Bureau is doing their job of regulating billboards and advertising on bus stops, shop fronts, etc. (Short answer? Really really badly.) I was reading through some of the submissions, by various organizations and citizens and I came across this- a submission by Fiona Patten, from the Eros foundation and Australian Sex Party. I had no idea just how infuriating it would be...

First of all, she starts with the premise that the poor adult industry is so discriminated against, and they wish they could use outdoor advertising and billboards more, but they can't because the content of their advertisements draws too many complaints. She then describes the "enormous levels of frustration" experienced by the sex industry because of the "discriminatory attitudes" or anyone who dare complain. Blah blah blah big long paragraph about punishments for discrimination etc.

Then she proceeds to give the committee instructions on how to be fair, and if they are religious to put their beliefs aside. (Isn't that kind of a given, that the committee has to try to be neutral and put their personal feelings aside?) She then quotes statistics from the last national census, saying that 92.5% of Australians do not hold strong religious beliefs. Did she get that statistic based on the religions people had ascribed to in the census? No she did not. She personally determined "religious" based on the frequency of which people attend church. So if you don't go to church every week, your religious beliefs no longer count.

Fiona believes the remaining 7.5% "punch well above their weight" in terms of making complaints. That's an interesting assumption Fiona, but any evidence to support that theory, or is that based entirely on a hunch? Oh, also, you 7.5%, you use "shrill and righteous rhetoric" and lack the ability to think logically. Because anyone with a belief in God is an idiot.

Miss Patten also calls religious people to disclose their religious beliefs when making a complaint to the ASB, in case our religious beliefs have influenced our complaint. Should the sex party anti-censorship bunch also be asked whether their opinions are based on their beliefs too, and if so, should they be excluded too?

Apparently religion reflects "cultish behaviour" and attracts "unhinged" people. Oh, and then she shares one random anecdote about a moral campaigner tricking lots of people into doing something silly, and her conclusion: "These people are alive and well and complaining about billboards".

At some point, I have to wonder with discrimination, you know, that thing that Fiona Patten went on and on about and then listed the penalties for... Does discrimination only apply to the sex industry? Because from what I can tell, the leader of an Australian Political Party just lumped every person who has religious beliefs in together, as "cultish", "unhinged" and illogical, and hinted really obviously that religious people are noisy and should pipe down?

Back to Fiona and discrimination. Apparently against the adult industry, it's unfair. It's "an opportunity for people to get on their high horse". But don't worry, only unhinged people.

She then gives several examples of billboards that have been removed unfairly, and mocks the complainants. When a woman complained about a billboard for sexpo (featuring several barely clothed women in sexualised poses) on a school bus route, Fiona's response was that this woman demonstrated "inability and awkwardness" and "clearly needs help relating to her children", and then referred to "HER SHORTCOMINGS AS A PARENT" that made her defame Sexpo. Because the only reason anyone would make a complaint to the ASB is because they are too embarrassed to talk about sex with their kids. Yeah that's it.

Fiona suggests that if the ASB receives complaints regarding the same advertisement too close together, they should be viewed as collaborating and excluded. So what if people do collaborate? If a friend and I discuss an offensive billboard and both make complaints, are our opinions less valid? According to Fiona, complainants are "unreasonably biased".

Another sex industry billboard which was removed (probably the only two EVER) was defended by Fiona as she said the amount of breast shown was "no more than...on any of the Gold Coast Beaches that day". To provide a benchmark of what is reasonable according to community standards, she held as an example a magazine cover with a topless Paris Hilton on it. See? If a magazine in the porno section of the newsagency can get away with it, why can't a billboard that an estimated 250, 000 people see?

OH more on religious weirdos. Fiona reckons that Medical Experts say 10% of the community have some kind of mental disorder (could be perfectly accurate). But- wait for it- those who complain to the ASB COME FROM THIS TEN PER CENT. Because if you have a problem with women as sex-toys, or the general exploitation of women, or sexual themes and nudity in full view of children, you have a mental disorder.

Unsurprisingly, Fiona is against the instituting of another regulatory body in advertising, as the industry is already over-regulated as it is. Really, Fiona? A self- regulating industry with no actual authority to do anything but make suggestions is "over-regulating"?

I read a great article here by Caroline Norma from CATWA, who wrote about the Sex Industry furthering their own interests, with little regard for the women who work for them. While the industry wants to open more brothels, they have not made even one exit program for prostitutes who want to get out of the business. Interesting fact- Research shows overwhelmingly that people in prostitution suffer rates of post-traumatic stress disorder equal to that of war veterans.

So while I would love to feel sorry for the hard-done by Sex Industry who like to get rich by exploiting the less fortunate, I will refrain. I may go make some shrill and righteous complaints though, and pray my children don't ever ask about sex because darn it, my cheeks get so pink when someone mentions the s-word!

Oh and here's a little bonus- Fiona Patten getting wooped in an intellectual conversation about a how- to guide for paedophiles being sold on Amazon. (Fiona was for the book.) Scroll down to the bottom for the video.