Would this British advert cause controversy in the US?

This advert is shown at prime time, on national TV. It is for a brand of toilet paper.

It shows a female bottom, fairly close up. As the camera pans around, you can quite clearly see the female “parts” in between the cheeks, in sillhouette.

It doesn’t offend me at all (why would it?!), and its clearly not designed to be sexually provocative, but it just seems like a fairly explicit image to be shown at such a time, on a national station.

I was reading somewhere today that there was moral outrage in America over a media campaign by FCUK. The campaign featured perfumes called “fcuk Him” and “fcuk Her”, I think.

I always perceive America to be less liberal than Britain when it comes to TV, and I just wonder what the reaction would be to this British advert being shown in the US?

I was unaware of the “fcuk” campaign or any associated moral outrage, but I suspect the reaction to the toilet paper advert would include a loud and vocal contingent calling press conferences and announcing boycotts to having such imagery on TV. Someone would use the equivalent of “Won’t someone think of the children?!”

Other people wouldn’t care at all, or would see it as a positive step away from our national prudishness, but they wouldn’t be nearly as loud.

Cite? :smiley:

Well there are several different adverts, and I don’t think this is the one I’m talking about (I don’t have Quicktime), but this gives you an idea:


Apparantly, this series of adverts has drawn complaints…


I couldn’t find anything specifically about the advert showing the women’s bits in sillhouette - I got way to many porn site results. :slight_smile:

It would probably depend on when and where it were shown. Cartoon Network? That would get several “Pro-family” groups up in arms. HBO? Probably not so much.

Does HBO even show commercials? I doubt it would ever be aired on TV in the first place. Nuuuuudity is eeeeeeevil!

Actually, the commercial sounds rather gross, to me anyway. Then again, I’m completely disgusted by the toilet paper commercials that show clothed butts. It’s just…nasty. Especially with the announcer talking about getting a “clean feeling.” Ack. The tp commercials with the animated bear and his daughter, though, have to been the absolute zenith of toilet paper marketing.

You have the charmin adverts too? I thought it was just us guys!

The one with the Papa bear and the daughter bear and the tree and toilet paper? No, we’ve got that one. That advertisement concept has been around in the states for years, IIRC.

How dare you show female private parts on TV!

*Won’t someone think of the children???[\i]

I’m quite sure many in the US would be offended by seeing even the sillhouette of genitals, male or female, on broadcast TV. They would consider it “inappropriate” and worry that children would see it.

I dont know what happens to children when they see nudity, that makes people so afraid. Maybe it’s like feeding mogwai after midnight or something.

I’m suppose these same people would prefer that people be born blindfolded, to prevent an errent glance at Mom’s cootch.

And, I DEMAND a link the commercial in question!!! :wink:

Nazi Commie aliens with GIANT CLAWS OF DOOM.

Never mind the “naughty bits”; just showing naked butts on TV wouldn’t fly over here.

It nothing that hasn’t been shown on broadcast TV (remember NYPD Blue last season’s nude scene with Catherine Ross?). But commercials here tend to be on the tame side, except maybe on MTV.

One thing that surprises me whenever I happen to peek inside a ‘woman’s magazine’ such as Cosmopolitan, Elle, or even Redbook is how many of the ads show nudity - short of outright frontal nudity. Why is television relatively prudish when mass market print media isn’t?

I meant Charlotte Ross in NYPD Blue…I may have had someone else naked in mind when I posted.

It depends on what time of day it’s shown. Not too long ago during the day I saw a preview for Friends and they bleeped the word “ass”. That struck me as totally prudish. But of course they say all kinds of words on late night TV.

I went to the link provided and watched the commercial. If you “can quite clearly see the female “parts” in between the cheeks, in sillhouette.” then you either have much better eyes or a much better imagination than I do.

Even so, it’s only in the past couple of years that they’ve allowed underwear to be seen in commercials for underwear on U.S. TV. Actual nudity? Many years away.

But what’s up with the complaint on the other link that “the images might stimulate paedophiles.” That’s a leap of logic I can’t follow even in a twisted way.

Those links aren’t the commercial in question, I thought.

by the way, this thread may become a pile on for “americans are so uptight! geez”

but come on! useing softcore porn to sell toilet paper!? is that what america wants?

seriously tell me that if nudity was really allowed in comercials that it wouldn’t end up in each and every ad for men pushed to the limit of whats legal. you think a beer company would pass up that chance if it could? I don’t want tv to be like that. not really.

As I said, I couldn’t view the commercial in that link because I don’t have quicktime installed.

Trust me, if you saw the ad I’m thinking of, you’d know what I’m talking about.

Are there any BritDopers out there who can confirm what I’m talking about? I’m starting to think its just me seeing things! :slight_smile: