See? Another prime example you pulled out the bag. Gambling for females only... what??? For them to omit to represent a small percentage of their customer base is a poor business decision - but that's all it is. Not sexism... end of.
Given what I've seen of gambling, I can see why there'd be a market for womens only gambling places. I'd wager that a lot of us are looking at this as men, and that's colouring opinions. What's that saying? “To the privileged, equality feels like oppression.”
What does it matter if it's online and therefore faceless? Surely the sex of the gambler is irrelevant? Calling it 'Pink Casino' and having pink and fluffy games is surely auto-sexism by females towards females?
I dunno. Maybe there's some chat functions and some women are tired of the relentless thirst that internet-born anonymity bestows upon the male gender? Edit: Reading that back made me realise it's probably a little sexist to say 'male' gender, when I've seen thirsty women too. Not directed at me, mind.
Maybe so but we don't have men only gambling sites. Can you imagine the uproar from the feminists if we did?
Utter tripe. Is it perpetuating gender stereotypes? Probably. Is it doing it in a "harmful" way. No. This isn't like the old days of the "not for girls" Yorkie adverts. PC Specialist have a demographic that is HUGELY male biased, why would they not focus their advertising budget there? THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT OF ADVERTISING - YOU TRY TO MAXIMISE YOUR RETURN. This works both ways - more girls (or should I say non males) that go out and buy gaming PC's or components, the more these companies will try to target them. Because regardless of where their social/ethical morals are, they WANT THE MONEY. They don't care if it's from me, or "Twilight" the vegan pansexual that identifies as a forest wisp.
I mean, I'd wager there are some men-only gambling sites. I wonder how strictly they enforce the gender thing, though. I imagine, if it was taken to court it'd fold pretty quickly regardless of which gender was being excluded. But I'm pretty sure I'm fighting a losing battle here. It doesn't seem sexist to me, but I'm a white man. I can have all the Yorkies, ten-bladed razors, and shitty body spray I want. I still don't disagree with it being banned.
And that's the beauty of opinions; everyone is allowed one - but I feel that the opinions of EIGHT people shouldn't be allowed to damage a company's business model.
I wonder how much of the PC Specialist 'largely male demographic' is buying PC's & parts for females to use...? THAT might tip the balance of their advertising. In late 1998, when my now wife wanted to buy her first PC, she went into PC World with her (now ex-) husband & HE was approached but the sales assistant... gender stereotyping isn't exactly new.
Who actually gives a monkeys? If they want to advertise exclusively to males, that's their right as a business. If they miss out on 12/13% of sales for failing to be gender inclusive, they'll soon adjust their advertising but it's entirely up to them and should be left so!
Simplest answer would be to concentrate the advert on the items you want to sell & leave customer & gender targeting out entirely.
I mean.. The ASA complaints system seems pretty fair. Detailed here; https://www.asa.org.uk/about-asa-and-cap/the-work-we-do/how-we-handle-complaints.html The gender guideline stuff is in this PDF; https://www.asa.org.uk/uploads/assets/uploaded/f39a881f-d8c9-4534-95f180d1bfe7b953.pdf We likely don't see sexism as easily because we are men. I think. I don't know that I've ever asked anyone's gender on this forum, which again, is probably a little sexist of me to assume that most people here are men. It was pulled because it depicts only men in a male stereotype - When there are quite a number of women also interested and involved in the field. The guidelines say to me that it is fine to advertise a product intended for one gender to one gender (Read: Oldspice advertised to men, Venus razors advertised to women) because that's the intention and, crucially, it's not saying "Only for <gender>". However, it isn't fine to advertise a product or multiple products to one specific gender because stereotypes say only that specific gender do that thing - When, in actual fact, that is not the case. They then tried to justify it by saying that the majority of their customers are men, but that doesn't fly because not only their customers see the advert. Unfortunately, although I think a lot of this stuff is kind of.. Kid-gloving it, it's been demonstrated many times that a lot of men will revert to sexism when not beaten over the head with the 'women are equal' stick.
If that's the case, why are L'Oreal/Tresemme/Herbal Essences adverts not being pulled then? I have hair. I use shampoo.
I stopped wearing hair entirely several years back due to the unfair gender stereotyping in the advertising of hair care products. Maybelline don't get my business any more either.
Because the product was designed and intended for women. No one is saying that you, as a bloke (Or attack helicopter, if that's how you identify) cannot buy this product. It's the same way Gilette's latest Stealth Bomber ten-bladed vibrating face slicer can be advertised only featuring men in the advert. Or how the lady with the billowing silk can advertise the Venus line of razors to women. They're designed for a specific market. Computers, though? There's no such thing as a mans computer or a womans computer. A computer is a computer. This advert, according to the ASA, was depicting a gender neutral item as being for a specific gender by only showing one gender using/being interested in said item.
I mean, if you want to stick a tampax in either of your downstairs body holes then go do either of those things then I don't believe there's anyone to stop you!
I don't agree with that. Hair is hair. Some women have fine hair, some men do. Some women have thick hair as do some men. Some women have coloured/dyed hair as do some men. Hair is hair... There is no such thing as gender specific shampoo. You can make it appeal to certain genders with advertising in order to maximise your market sales (as PC Specialist were wrongly prevented from doing) but there are no physiological benefits to one sex over the other for a given brand.
Hey, I'm no ASA complaints investigator. I'm just regurgitating what's in their guidelines. Although I was reading an AMA from some hairloss specialists the other day that suggested that different chemical responses were necessary for men compared to women, which is why certain hairloss products are targeted at specific genders. So perhaps there is some science behind it, but I don't know, I'm not a scientist. ASA states that enforcing a stereotype in the way that the PC Specialist advert did is not kosher. Much in the same way that it woudn't be kosher to advertise chocolate exclusively to women on the basis that women stereotypically love chocolate. The stereotype in shampoo adverts is washing hair, which last I checked is only a stereotype of people with hair, money for cleaning products and without dreadlocks. If there were no adverts from the same parent companies for men doing the same thing, then I imagine there would be grounds for complaints and pulling those adverts too.
