Crispgate ads should be taken with a pinch of salt

Sunday Tribune, 2 May 2010

The young woman appeared to be playing rugby in her underpants. Her cleavage was spectacular. It looked like Peter Stringer and his bald twin were hiding down the front of her shirt. 'Are you staring at my crisps' read the legend. Of course I wasn't.
I was staring at her eyes. She had lovely eyes…
Hunky Dorys' latest billboard campaign had Ireland's tub-thumpers spluttering in indignation last week. Largo Foods has used scantily-clad female rugby players, like the one mentioned above, to promote its product. One poster says 'Tackle these' as a pneumatic woman legs it down the pitch. It could have been worse: it could have read 'I'm a hooker, maul me'.
Not since those paintings of Brian Cowen in his jocks appeared in the National Gallery has there been such a commotion over a picture.
Catholic group Iona decried it as "grossly offensive and demeaning to women". The advertising standards people received a number of complaints.
That bastion of Irish metrosexuality, the IRFU, was so incensed that it instructed its legal people to examine the claim that Hunky Dorys are 'proud sponsors of Irish rugby'. The ads were in "bad taste", it clucked.
Feminist TV presenter Anna Nolan was one of the few commentators who didn't believe the ads were sexist. She loved the campaign and was dismissive of those who were insulted by it.
So who's right: Nolan or the IRFU? Are the ads offensive? Every woman I asked last week gave the same response: WHO THE HELL CARES? There are more pressing matters to worry about. Like paying mortgages, etc.
For the record, I detest sexism. That cuts both ways, though. If these ads are off­ensive, then I should be offended by ads that use sexual stereotypes of men.
Am I offended by the Galaxy chocolate ad which features an oily gigolo dressed in a skimpy towel?
Or the Diet Coke ads. That window cleaner should have sued those ogling secretaries for sexual harassment. Shouldn't he?
Or the razor ads that promise to make me a babe magnet? I've been shaving for 25 years and still nothing's happened. Mind you, shaving with Gillette seems to have worked for Tiger Woods.
Or what about all the ads that show men as lazy and useless about the house? Or all the times I've heard the line "all men are bastards".
Am I offended by any of the above? Of course not. Why? Because I just don't care enough. Sexual stereotypes will always be used to sell products. That's life.
There are plenty of other ads that are more demeaning of women than the Hunky Dory ones. There's the Boots ads, for example. Why is it that when a group of women appear on TV they must be accompanied by 'Here Come The Girls'? The Boots ads portray women as stupid, vacuous and obsessed with make-up.
The ads for Gillette Venus razors are offensive too. 'I'm your Venus, I'm your fire ...' etc. None of the women I know are vain 'goddess' muppets like the ones portrayed in those ads. Thank God.
And don't get me started about the Bodyform ads with all those glowing models smiling through their periods…
What was really annoying and offensive about this non-debate about crisp ads was that there were other, serious women-related issues to get outraged about.
Last week, the governor of Mountjoy's Dóchas unit, Kathleen McMahon, resigned in protest over the state of the prison system. The plight of Ireland's women prisoners was overshadowed by the Hunky Dory story as the week wore on. That was truly offensive.
On Tuesday, we read that Mary Harney is still making a mess of rolling out the cervical cancer vaccine. After a year of dithering and spinning, Harney says the second jab will be administered while the nation's schoolgirls are on holidays. Many will miss out as a result. Harney's attitude to this issue is far more offensive than the sight of a model in revealing sports gear.
Some readers will criticise me for not taking a zero-tolerance line on this crisp ad. The problem is that knee-jerk responses to equality issues can sometimes do more damage than good.
Overuse of the sexist card lessens its impact. Mary Coughlan learned that when it backfired on her last February. She incorrectly accused Charlie Flanagan of being sexist when he criticised her abilities. She came across as a bully.
The disproportionate response to Crispgate will reinforce the false notion, in some quarters, that all feminists are humourless, prudish killjoys. Through their over-reaction, the offended parties have promoted the very thing they despise. The Hunky Dory ads got blanket coverage. The papers got to write prissy editorials and use the 'offensive' pictures over and over again. They should be more selective when sounding the alarm bells in future. The intention of these tacky ads is not nasty – it's to provoke a response. It worked.
If Anna Nolan says the campaign isn't offensive, then that's good enough for me. Is anyone prepared to call her a sexist?
The best thing to do with ads like these is to take them with a pinch of salt. And possibly some vinegar too.

dkenny@tribune.ie

May 2, 2010