City Beach selling sexism to 12-13 year olds
A Collective Shout supporter notified us today of a pencil case found to be in a year 8 student’s possession.
While City Beach has a long history as a misogynist corporate offender – which is why they feature on our ‘Cross ‘Em off your Xmas list’ blacklist of corporate sexist offenders – even we were surprised that the store was now flogging porn-inspired pencil cases to 12-13 year olds. Keep your pens together – and promote sexism – for only $19.99!
Imagine what would happen if a teacher downloaded or decorated his office wall with the same images. But hypersexualised images on student’s school items are apparently exempt. These images are a form of sexual harassment for schoolgirls and re-enforce a message they receive daily from media, advertising and popular culture that they are merely objects for male gratification and pleasure. They are also harassing to female teachers.
UPDATE
News.com.au have picked up the story Provocative images on pencil cases cause a furore in schools
UPDATE
City Beach have announced that they are discontinuing the pencil case. This means they will not be ordering anymore, but will continue selling what stock they have at a discounted price. This makes the pencil cases even more affordable for young people to purchase.
Take Action!
Contact City Beach here.
Write a review of the pencil case on City Beach’s website here. Product now removed from City Beach’s website after receiving reviews like this and this.
Contact City Beach on Facebook and Twitter
See also ‘Does the Human Rights Commission really care about gender equality?’
19 Comments
This is absolutely unacceptable. In a workplace, this would not be allowed. How can this be allowed in a school, for children?
City Beach is disgusting.
As if sexual objectification on a t-shirt wasn’t enough! Now you can buy the pencil case! I’ve sent City Beach an email voicing my concerns, next step Anti-Discrimination Commission Qld who defines sexual harassment as “the display of clearly sexual material (such as photos, pin-ups or pictures) or reading matter (such as e-mails, faxes or letters)” – Imagine the uproar if a male teacher brought this pencil case to school!!! It would be incredibly creepy and he’d be called a paedophile – so why is City Beach allowed to market soft-porn to kids?
Porn on t-shirts… now this? And our society isn’t sex-saturated enough! City Beach this is the final straw. You’ve lost me as a customer.
This is so disgusting. It is pushing the idea to young males that women are just good for their sexual gratification. Women everywhere need to know their worth and stand up against this type of oppression!!!
Those pencil cases are ridiculous. I’m a teacher and if any student in my class had one, it would be removed from the classroom and sent to the principals office. It is blatantly porn for children. Diva all over again. That didn’t turn out so well for Diva! Surely City Beach management would have learnt from Diva’s mistakes??
I went into city beach today. I saw those pencil cases, along with 100 other things that horrified me. It seems like every brand has now caught into the represtenting-women-in-demeaning-ways-is-cool attitude. There’s no doubt those pencil cases shouldn’t be allowed at school, but when these pictures are normalised on t-shirts, what can the school do? The t-shirt made in this print was displayed behind the glass window out the front of the shop. I was so disgusted.
I’m pretty sure it’s been taken off their website now.
just as well.
take it out of stores too please!
What about the pornification of men? haven’t seen that on your website. City Chic currently have a “12 days of Christmas” promotion and there is a man lying there in just a Santa hat and what appears to be the corner of a pair of briefs. This is disgusting! This is a clothing brand that attempts to make plus-size women more comfortable with their bodies and they have a male model with a body that would make Adonis feel self conscious lying there with bedroom eyes. On the Facebook page for City Chic there are numerous comments by women ogling this man and some have even commented what they would like to do to him “in the bedroom”. Why do you kick up a stink when a woman is covered up barely when a man who has just as much (or little) covered up is perefectly fine. Surely what is good for thew goose is good for the gander.
Hi Matt, thanks for your comment.
We do not believe in equal opportunity objectification, however it is primarily women who are portrayed in this way. This is why the sexual objectification of women is our focus.
I couldn’t find the image you spoke of on City Chic’s facebook page, however I did find it on their website. I see your point but it does not even come close to the objectification of women used in advertising and products.
It is not men whose naked bodies are plastered on pencil cases and t-shirts in surf stores aimed at youth. It is not men’s semi naked faceless bodies featured on websites such as The Lynx Effect. Playboy is plastering their logo over mainstream products from energy drinks to girl’s jewellery, their core business is the objectification of women, not men.
To put this in perspective, take a look at Lynx’s facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/lynx and compare it to City Chic’s page: http://www.facebook.com/citychiconline Then take a look at City Chic’s website: http://www.citychic.com.au and then Lynx’s website: http://www.lynxeffect.com.au/lynxeffect.htm Compare them and you will see why our campaigns focus on women and girls.
“This is why the sexual objectification of women is our focus” So you aren’t for equality look a good person or group should be.
“I see your point but it does not even come close to the objectification of women used in advertising and products” So because it is less bad means it is not worth worrying about?
“It is not men’s semi naked faceless bodies featured on websites such as The Lynx Effect” you don’t rememeber the famous 1130 diet coke commercial (actually they made two) with an office full of women leering at this unknowing man? Also I take it you are also unfamiliar with the Twilight series and Taylor Lautner’s lack of shirts.
“Playboy is plastering their logo over mainstream products from energy drinks to girl’s jewellery” well at least we agree this is something Playboy advertising at girls is vile.
“To put this in perspective…” Once again you are justifying your misandry by going our stuff is worse, if you don’t want your stuff to exist then neither should exist, or are you ok with 1130 coke commercial
So all in all yes women are objectified and pornified in advertising, but so are men. It is no good cleaning up one side of the street and leaving the other side dirty, or once again are you ok with men being portrayed this way or is a little bit of sex in advertising ok?
Matt, you make a lot of accusations in your post. We are for equality, which is why challenging the sexual objectification of women and girls is our main focus. It does not mean we support the objectification of men at all. In your analogy you’re assuming both sides of the street are equally dirty, but even a brief look at the media and advertising landscape would demonstrate that this is not the case. Choosing a few relatively rare instances of male objectification and using these to accuse us of misandry is drawing a long bow. Yes, the objectification of women in our culture is worse, that is not misandry, that is reality. This does not in anyway justify the objectification of men. Are you really suggesting we direct our campaigning resources away from say, Lynx’s website full of semi naked faceless women, City Beach’s pornographic pencil cases and t-shirts, girl’s underwear with sexualised slogans and instead challenge City Chic for their one image of a man? If the objectification of men and boys were to become more prolific in our culture, then the nature of our campaigns may well change to reflect this.
Regarding the Coke commercial, I have a vague recollection of it, but it existed way before Collective Shout had begun as an organisation. I remember not liking the ad and our members may well have made complaints about this ad in the past. Anyone, including yourself is free at any time to share campaign ideas on our community page, as well as submit complaints to the advertising standards board about individual advertisements and products. We encourage everyone to make their voices heard about the issues concerning them. If you feel strongly about City Chic, then you might like to contact them and also make a complaint to the advertising standards board. http://www.adstandards.com.au
You people force us to go to school all SNIP day. There is no freedom. You regulate what we wear, what we say, what we can and can’t do. We are prisoners. Sure, this can be seen as offensive, but I’m going to be as offensive as I can be when I say SNIP. This has happened because we have no freedom in the first place, so we do what we can to have some morsel of… I don’t know… Fun? Happiness?
If your offended, then kick us out of school. It’s simple. But oh wait, we don’t want to be there in the first place. So that’s no threat at all. Give us an option.
Hi Mike, it would have been great if you could have shared your opinion on this issue without the abuse. Unfortunately I’ve had to edit your comment.
Just a suggestion.
These pencil cases are selling for $2 each. Someone should buy all of them, then burn them in front of one of their stores.
Yes technically you would be financially supporting a horrible company, but you would take the rest of them out of circulation and a fire or some other type of destruction of these items could gain publicity.
lol… nice one Luke.
I am a primary school teacher myself and this pencil case is pretty crass. Definitely not appropriate for school use.
SNIP This is soccer mum’s with NOTHING to do at their finest. Why don’t you all get a life instead of trying to ruin fun for the younger generations?
Hi ‘Wow’
There are many people concerned about these issues, not all of them are parents. Some are single, some are even teenagers who are sick of this stuff marketed towards them.
It is interesting to read the comments included on your blog. The ignorant ones talk about how we are taking away the freedom, fun and rights of young people by trying to reduce their exposure to sexualised images. I don’t think they understand or care that constant exposure to such material creates (over time) a change in thinking and beliefs which ultimately effects behaviour. Behaviours that result not in freedom and fun but abuse, relationship breakdowns, addiction, mental health problems, disease and in some cases death. The insidiousness is that this all happens slowly over time. Look at our society. 50 years ago we would never have witnessed many of the things we do now in movies and on TV. Violence and sex in the media is now common place. This change has happened as each new generation has cried out for more freedom and fun to be able to do what they feel like doing. Sex feels good and is usually fun so therefore why not plaster it everywhere and do it all the time? What not teach our kids to do it at younger and younger ages? This is the type of mentality that has slowly resulted in what we see today with shops being allowed to sell sexualised pencil cases and other stuff to children. The truth is that sex, in its right place is great , but we should not let what feels good dictate to us what is best for our health and well being. If we want our kids to grow up to be able to live responsibly, not just according to their feelings but also with maturity and thoughtfullness, then we need to protect them, guide them and teach them. This means, NOT leaving them to their own devices and the devices of their friends and peers. Well done Collective Shout, I think you are doing a great job!
Totally agree with Steve, these things happen and get worse overtime if people cant take a stand for whats right now what hope will they have in another 50-70 years i dread the thought of what things will turn into if not addressed and changed now