Teazers' response to the ASA

2009-09-30 13:40

To Whom It May Concern.

Please find below our response to the complaint about the Billboard situated on the corner of 12th and Rivonia Roads.

1.    The complainant states that the woman in the picture has a lustful look on her face

•    If she actually took the time to study the ad she would have established quite quickly that the woman in the ad has her eyes closed and this cannot even begin to be considered lustful. Peaceful is a more appropriate term.

2.    The complainant states that the woman in the Billboard is “touching herself between her legs”.

•    Once again had she taken the time to study the billboard she would have realized that the woman in the Billboard is quite clearly not touching herself unless resting her hand on the side of her leg constitutes such acts as insinuated by the complainant.

3.    The complainant states that children should be protected from such things.

•    Had this ad been put up by any other company other than Teazers would this complainant had as much to say and complain about. Children are exposed to far worse on the evening news than the sight of a beautiful woman lying on a billboard.

Ads and Editorial for body enhancing products show far more than this particular ad yet they run day in and day out.

The idea that we are harming children by placing this advert up cannot be justified simply by saying so. The complainant obviously has a moral vendetta to the way we operate a clean business and can try as hard as she likes but she will never be able to show one instance that Teazers has harmed a child.

4.    The complainant states that the ad objectifies woman.

•    Teazers has never in its entire existence objectified any woman. In fact the entire business is built on the idea that woman have power and through that are afforded the opportunity to strengthen their foundation in life in order to move onto bigger and better things.

Had the complainant taken any time to sit and think about what we stand for she would have quickly realized that Teazers empowers rather than objectifies woman and that sadly for her is the way we have always and will always portray woman.

5.    The second complainant states that the Billboard in question makes light of a situation a female athlete currently finds herself in.

•    This advert was created before the gender row came to light and its existence and publication is purely coincidental. Teazers is merely trying to assure our valued clientele that we have no inter sexed woman as is so common and disturbingly prevalent in the adult entertainment industry.

That said at least we tell the truth.

At Teazers we like to celebrate 100 percent woman and that is a guarantee we give our patrons.

We are thus trying to show that no false advertising is exhibited when putting up billboards or any other form of advertising.

6.    The first complainant states that the woman in the billboard is naked.

•    This is far from the truth as had she taken a closer look she is wearing a pair of beautiful shoes that probably cost more than the complainants car.

7.    The first complainant states correctly for the first time in her complaint that the woman in the billboard is covering her breasts.

•    We wish to thank her for the one astute observation made in her complaint as that is what would have constituted a valid complaint. The pose therefore does not show any form of nudity as expressed in her above comment and therefore does not warrant the time used to type this sentence.

Subsequent to reply to all aspects of the complaints I would like to please take note that the constant harassment my brand receives for every little complaint is totally unjustified and before any further complaints are considered please remember that the constitution of this country quite clearly states that I also have rights.

Freedom of expression.
-(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of expression,
which includes-
(a)     Freedom of the press and other media;
(b)     Freedom to receive or impart information or ideas;
(e)     Freedom of artistic creativity; and
(4     Academic freedom and freedom of scientific research.
(2)         The right in subsection (1) does not extend to-
(a)    Propaganda for war;
(6)         Incitement of imminent violence; or
(c)        Advocacy of hatred that is based on race, ethnicity, gender or religion, and that
Constitutes incitement to cause harm.

I as above have the right to freedom of expression through the press or other media unless I contravene the noted exclusions.

I challenge anyone to show me what the Billboard contravenes in order for my freedom of expression to be so grossly questioned?

Please in future consider the above before wasting my time with complaints that have no basis or foundation to even warrant a response.

I once again put forward that since the complainant number one obviously was not offended enough to take note of the advert in question so as to get her facts straight enough to put through a valid complaint.

This in itself means that the complaint is fundamentally flawed and does not warrant any further input from either party.

Complainant number two should stop jumping to conclusions that suit her closed minded side.

Next time Sun International, Clinique or any other company dare show more than a fully clothed woman I will consider sending so many complaints your email server crashes and your receptionist runs for the hills.

I am tired of my brand being attacked for needless and harmless advertising that everyone else seems to have the right to as long as the name Teazers is not attached.

Regards
Lolly Jackson

Add your view to this conversation - comment below