Impacts of Advertising that are unfriendly to women and men

Taking Belgium as a case in point, this study analyses, first, tolerance for Advertising unfriendly to women and men as expressed by advertising and marketing professionals, consumers and gender equal opportunity workers. Second, it compares which types of unequal gender portrayal raise concerns with which sector of respondents. Finally, it analyses the differences in adherence of the three sectors to the two main policy solution paradigms proposed in the 2008 European Parliament Resolution on ‘How marketing and advertising affect equality between women and men’. Results suggest a degree of tolerance that varies significantly according to sector, language, gender and age.

Key information on EU or National policies/legislation on women's' representation in advertisement:

Among other things, the article analyses the differences in adherence of advertising and marketing professionals, consumers and gender equal opportunity workers to the two main policy solution paradigms proposed in the 2008 European Parliament Resolution on ‘How marketing and advertising affect equality between women and men’. Results suggest a degree of tolerance that varies significantly according to sector, language, gender and age. Overall, respondents express more concerns regarding traditional sex roles in advertising than regarding nudity, unattainable beauty standards or gender stereotypes, and prefer gender-and-advertising literacy programmes and awards for Advertising that break through gender stereotypes over stricter ethical and/or legal regulations. These findings should prove useful to advertising and marketing professionals, national advertising regulatory bodies and policy makers.

Key stakeholders mentioned:

advertising and marketing professionals, national advertising regulatory bodies and policy makers

Bibliographic Citation:

Van Hellemont Corine and Hilde Van den Bulck (2012), Impacts of Advertising that are unfriendly to women and men, International Journal of Advertising, Vol. 31, No. 3, 2012, pp. 623-656

Format: pdf; 31 p.