Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Paddy Power Transphobic Ad,

24567

Comments

  • #32
    wonderfulname
    Registered Users Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭wonderfulname


    Azure_sky wrote: »
    Leaving out the transphobia and sexism for a moment, I'm offended because it's such a crap ad in general. It's an insult to the intelligence of the viewing public.

    I'm inclined to agree, I don't think this will work. The Hunky Dory ads were actually quite intelligently designed, they, however crudely, spawned genuine debate with regard the nature and outcome of feminism; whether it meant being able to do what you please dressed how you please, or the removal of objectification from society. Models from the ads appeared on television, well spoken, well endowed, and well versed, to argue the former, it was a marvellous campaign.

    This on the other hand, kind of missed the point with this kind of advertising, they went to far, it isn't about offending everybody, it's about getting people talking, and there isn't really a discussion to be had here, there is no "pro" side that you can actually point to and say that's a worthwhile and fair argument.


  • #33
    Shakti
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,153 ✭✭✭Shakti


    'Crispin Porter + Bogusky' have been ditched by 'Groupon' for this effort during the superbowl, I think PP will be doing the same.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVkFT2yjk0A


  • #34
    wonderfulname
    Registered Users Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭wonderfulname


    I wouldn't focus too hard on the poor performances of Crispin Porter + Bogusky, they're seriously outnumbered by by brilliant campaigns, when you're trying to do more than just stand-alone advertisements it's pretty much guaranteed that some will fail to deliver, it's not an exact science, the fact that so few have bombed is actually a testament to them.

    Having said that I still don't know what they were thinking here.


  • #35
    Slang_Tang
    Registered Users Posts: 188 ✭✭Slang_Tang


    baraca wrote: »
    Don't see anything wrong with the ad tbh, Transphobic?? lol.

    If you see transphobia as such a laughable concept, then of course you're not going to be able to see it when it's right in front of your face.


  • #36
    Aurongroove
    Registered Users Posts: 876 ✭✭✭Aurongroove


    While the main subject of the ad is transgendered ladies I believe this ad is not an example of transphobia.

    the ad has no positive or negative transgendered social commentary, it has no anti transgender motifs, it treats the transgendered ladies no differently then the other ladies who appear in the ad and it employs transgendered ladies to actually appear in it....


    The only actual issue I have with the ad is how lame the humour is.

    Imagining I were TG I would be rolling my eyes at the ad-makers for having the idea of TG as a 'guessing game symbolic of gambling' and pulling it off so poorly. The confused narrator shouting 'dog' after a delay was tasteless (not offensive: crap comedy), The hot dog in the background was almost so bad, that if the commercial was better I would've applauded them for the great use of anti-humour.

    IMO the ad shows a poor talent/competence for humour but not xenophobia or transphobia in the slightest.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,764 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Aurongroove wrote: »
    While the main subject of the ad is transgendered ladies I believe this ad is not an example of transphobia.

    the ad has no positive or negative transgendered social commentary, it has no anti transgender motifs, it treats the transgendered ladies no differently then the other ladies who appear in the ad and it employs transgendered ladies to actually appear in it....


    The only actual issue I have with the ad is how lame the humour is.

    Imagining I were TG I would be rolling my eyes at the ad-makers for having the idea of TG as a 'guessing game symbolic of gambling' and pulling it off so poorly. The confused narrator shouting 'dog' after a delay was tasteless (not offensive: crap comedy), The hot dog in the background was almost so bad, that if the commercial was better I would've applauded them for the great use of anti-humour.

    IMO the ad shows a poor talent/competence for humour but not xenophobia or transphobia in the slightest.

    Were you watching the same ad as me?

    Comparing trans women to horses and dogs is not transphobic or offensive?

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #38
    Aurongroove
    Registered Users Posts: 876 ✭✭✭Aurongroove


    the stallion and mare comparison was a metaphor. for example other animal metaphors used in every day life might include "fox" "bear" "tiger" "dragon" and "kitten".
    It also wasn't an offensive metaphor since
    A: it was a horse racing venue, thus that's why the narrator chose 'that animal' for the metaphor
    B: there are no negative connotations associated with metaphors involving male or female horses collectively. The subject matter being the targets sex was clearly implied.

    i.e. 'are you a raw or a ewe?'

    As for the dog, yes I believe that was just **** humour. as was the hot dog in the background for TG lady no.1.
    If any section of the ad was offensive it was that. but again, it was more just an example of crap humour.
    If for example 'dog' was a derogatory or slang term for transgendered ladies, then yes it would be offensive, but as it currently is it's just a not funny none entity at an attempt at being funny.


  • #39
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,764 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Aurongroove wrote: »
    the stallion and mare comparison was a metaphor. for example other animal metaphors used in every day life might include "fox" "bear" "tiger" "dragon" and "kitten".
    It also wasn't an offensive metaphor since
    A: it was a horse racing venue, thus that's why the narrator chose 'that animal' for the metaphor
    B: there are no negative connotations associated with metaphors involving male or female horses collectively. The subject matter being the targets sex was clearly implied.

    i.e. 'are you a raw or a ewe?'

    As for the dog, yes I believe that was just **** humour. as was the hot dog in the background for TG lady no.1.
    If any section of the ad was offensive it was that. but again, it was more just an example of crap humour.
    If for example 'dog' was a derogatory or slang term for transgendered ladies, then yes it would be offensive, but as it currently is it's just a not funny none entity at an attempt at being funny.

    Just to point out that it's very much your opinion that it is not offensive. It is not a 'fact' that it is not offensive. I find it very offensive. Many many trans, lgb, heterosexual and cisgendered people find it offensive. There have been numerous discussions on YouTube, Facebook, the cheltenham site and twitter. The reaction has been hugely negative. While you are not personally offended please note that many others are.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #40
    Azure_sky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,131 ✭✭✭Azure_sky


    This is why I don't post here anymore...


  • #41
    Shakti
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,153 ✭✭✭Shakti


    wonderfulname wrote: »
    I wouldn't focus too hard on the poor performances of Crispin Porter + Bogusky, they're seriously outnumbered by by brilliant campaigns, when you're trying to do more than just stand-alone advertisements it's pretty much guaranteed that some will fail to deliver, it's not an exact science, the fact that so few have bombed is actually a testament to them.

    Having said that I still don't know what they were thinking here.

    I'm onboard with your other posts,
    But with respect who should we blame? They've made an exact science out of humiliating people, comparing people to animals and getting away with it, the people who created this have examined transgender community issues in the minutia with a manipulative cynicism bordering on criminal IMO. I lay the blame for this squarely at the people who created it and the people they created it for.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Aurongroove
    Registered Users Posts: 876 ✭✭✭Aurongroove


    mango salsa wrote: »
    Just to point out that it's very much your opinion that it is not offensive. It is not a 'fact' that it is not offensive. I find it very offensive. Many many trans, lgb, heterosexual and cisgendered people find it offensive. There have been numerous discussions on YouTube, Facebook, the cheltenham site and twitter. The reaction has been hugely negative. While you are not personally offended please note that many others are.

    you don't need to tell me that my opinion is my opinion. I know my opinion is my opinion. I've already taken note that other people are offended by the ad in OP because I've read the other posts in the thread, seen the ad, and looked at some of the steam it had built up.

    What you havn't done is try to counter my opinion.
    Responding as you did with "your opinion is your opinion" can either be read as:
    An admittance that you cannot counter my opinion, and hit the emergency exit "well that's what you think"
    or

    you were not aware that the reason I posted my opinion was because maybe I was hoping for a well reasoned rebuttal of my opinion, by someone with another opinion so that my opinion can change, grow or prove itself to be sound.
    If you would like to provide me with an actual reply then please do but responding to an opinion by saying "that's an opinion" is offering no new information.


  • #43
    wonderfulname
    Registered Users Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭wonderfulname


    Azure_sky wrote: »
    This is why I don't post here anymore...
    ^This is the biggest disappointment of this form, trans discussion had just started to liven up here again and all...
    Shakti wrote: »
    I'm onboard with your other posts,
    But with respect who should we blame? They've made an exact science out of humiliating people, comparing people to animals and getting away with it, the people who created this have examined transgender community issues in the minutia with a manipulative cynicism bordering on criminal IMO. I lay the blame for this squarely at the people who created it and the people they created it for.

    In all fairness they don't compare people to animals in the way you're implying, Italian stallion, fine filly, these are normal turns of phrase, the problem here is more that the wrong animal comparison is being made, and I do agree that some thought went into making that comparison, and other elements of the advert.

    I never said the companies should not take blame, just that it doesn't make sense to make Crispin Porter + Bogusky out to be bad at what they do over this, given that they're quite the opposite, doing so has a bit of a witch hunt air about it...

    Who should we blame? Crispin Porter + Bogusky for making it, Paddy Power for running with it, the ASA for not setting clear precedent when previous transphobic ads cropped up, the government for not legislating for equality, allowing transphobic sentiment to appear acceptable, society for being generally crap... I could continue, my point is, there's two camps of blame for this kind of thing, those immediately responsible and wider society for having very fuzzy morals. Crispin Porter + Bogusky overstepped a line that is very hard to see when you're anyway removed from it, not excusing it in any way, but surely it's evident even from this thread that the ad is part of a bigger problem.


  • #44
    Slang_Tang
    Registered Users Posts: 188 ✭✭Slang_Tang


    Guys, if you wanna complain, the email address for Paddy Power's PR & Media Manager is krobertson@paddypower.com.

    I sent an email already. I have an account with them, so we'll see if they respond.

    I personally wouldn't contact the ASAI, because I think the intention was to garner as much attention as possible, and I don't want to help them do that (but that's just me). It's a joke that backfired badly, though. The reaction on their blog was disastrous for them.

    *Mods, if I'm not allowed give out emails, feel free to remove it. The link is here.


  • #45
    Shakti
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,153 ✭✭✭Shakti


    wonderfulname wrote: »
    ^This is the biggest disappointment of this form, trans discussion had just started to liven up here again and all...

    Quite,
    In all fairness they don't compare people to animals in the way you're implying, Italian stallion, fine filly, these are normal turns of phrase, the problem here is more that the wrong animal comparison is being made, and I do agree that some thought went into making that comparison, and other elements of the advert.

    Comparing women to horses in whatever vernacular, and treating Ladies Day at Cheltenham like a breeders fair is unacceptable no matter what the context full stop that is my position to be clear.
    I never said the companies should not take blame, just that it doesn't make sense to make Crispin Porter + Bogusky out to be bad at what they do over this, given that they're quite the opposite, doing so has a bit of a witch hunt air about it...

    I dont think its a witch hunt there are three clearly responsible CPB, PP and Sky.
    Who should we blame? Crispin Porter + Bogusky for making it, Paddy Power for running with it,

    Yes
    the ASA for not setting clear precedent when previous transphobic ads cropped up,

    Lets hope they set one now, this is also about bringing pressure on them to do so.
    the government for not legislating for equality, allowing transphobic sentiment to appear acceptable,

    U.K. policy.
    society for being generally crap...

    No now that would be a witch hunt.
    I could continue, my point is, there's two camps of blame for this kind of thing, those immediately responsible and wider society for having very fuzzy morals. Crispin Porter + Bogusky overstepped a line that is very hard to see when you're anyway removed from it, not excusing it in any way, but surely it's evident even from this thread that the ad is part of a bigger problem.

    I do get your point and this is the main reason I even intoduced the topic to this forum, why is acceptable to treat people like this? we no longer consider it acceptable to treat other minorities in this way, and lets not forget the elephant in the room that is the systemic acceptability of the abuse of women and their rights and the almost pathological fear of the feminine.


  • #46
    foggy_lad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,373 ✭✭✭✭foggy_lad


    I don't get so angry and upset when I see worse gay joke adverts on the television, is this reaction not just a bit OTT from some trans people? after all the more this is discussed and thrashed about the more publicity the company are getting which makes the advert well worth the money in their eyes.

    I say if you find the advert offensive then don't watch it and let the ASAI know you think it is offensive and why, you could also write to Sky and let them know what you think of their decision to use this advertisement.


  • #47
    Aurongroove
    Registered Users Posts: 876 ✭✭✭Aurongroove


    Shakti wrote: »
    Comparing women to horses in whatever vernacular...(ed) ...is unacceptable no matter what the context
    this in my opinion is nonsense and is strong evidence of over sensitivity.

    there are plenty of 'vernacular's where comparing people to animals is completely acceptable, and metaphors happen all the time.

    if I called you a 'tiger' would you be offended? If I called you a 'fox' would you be offended?

    If you're offended by metaphors then you don't understand metaphors. There are other things in the ad one could possibly be offended by, but this is complete nonsense.


  • #48
    baby and crumble
    Registered Users Posts: 8,512 ✭✭✭baby and crumble


    People need to STOP dismissing the opinions of trans posters on this thread. Seriously guys. If someone says they are offended, then they are offended. Neither you, nor I, nor anyone else gets to tell them they are wrong, ok? I've already started infracting people, I will keep going. Take a debate on the semantics of metaphors, descriptions and the nature of offense over to humanties, or I will lock this thread.


  • #49
    foggy_lad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,373 ✭✭✭✭foggy_lad


    baby and crumble wrote: »
    People need to STOP dismissing the opinions of trans posters on this thread. Seriously guys. If someone says they are offended, then they are offended. Neither you, nor I, nor anyone else gets to tell them they are wrong, ok? I've already started infracting people, I will keep going. Take a debate on the semantics of metaphors, descriptions and the nature of offense over to humanties, or I will lock this thread.
    What about the opinions of non-trans posters? do our opinions not count for anything?


  • #50
    baby and crumble
    Registered Users Posts: 8,512 ✭✭✭baby and crumble


    foggy_lad wrote: »
    What about the opinions of non-trans posters? do our opinions not count for anything?

    Yes, of course. However, since the subjects of the ad are trans females, then as cis-gendered posters we can have opinions about the add, and even disagree with other posters, but NOBODY gets to tell someone that they shouldn't be offended. That's the issue I am having on thread at the moment.

    If I as a lesbian am offended at someone calling me a rug-muncher, if a straight woman tells me not to be offended, then that's not ok, because they don't know what it's like to be a lesbian. Same applies here.


  • #51
    foggy_lad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,373 ✭✭✭✭foggy_lad


    baby and crumble wrote: »
    Yes, of course. However, since the subjects of the ad are trans females, then as cis-gendered posters we can have opinions about the add, and even disagree with other posters, but NOBODY gets to tell someone that they shouldn't be offended. That's the issue I am having on thread at the moment.

    If I as a lesbian am offended at someone calling me a rug-muncher, if a straight woman tells me not to be offended, then that's not ok, because they don't know what it's like to be a lesbian. Same applies here.
    Fair enough, I will just steer* clear of any trans related threads then as they always seems to end up in a fight and I prefer to make love not war. As other posters have done I think it is time to un-subscribe from LGB&T threads here for the sake of my sanity.


    * My use of the word steer is not an attempt to compare any trans person to a cow


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    wonderfulname
    Registered Users Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭wonderfulname


    Shakti wrote: »
    Comparing women to horses in whatever vernacular, and treating Ladies Day at Cheltenham like a breeders fair is unacceptable no matter what the context full stop that is my position to be clear.
    Maybe it's from being a culchie and a bit of a racing fanatic, but filly and mare would be words I hear quite frequently from women referring to other women, even themselves, granted most of them are in the racing or hunting scenes, but it is perfectly acceptable terminology and no malice should be understood of it. Also, Ladies Day is a bit of a self submitting breeders fair anyway but that's another conversation...
    Shakti wrote: »
    I do get your point and this is the main reason I even intoduced the topic to this forum, why is acceptable to treat people like this? we no longer consider it acceptable to treat other minorities in this way...
    It's really a matter of time and perseverance, women, minority races and LGB people are all at various points in a process of becoming equal and accepted, so are trans people, just much further behind in it. Acceptable is relative though, and you'll notice one hell of a lot of people don't find this acceptable.
    Shakti wrote: »
    ...and lets not forget the elephant in the room that is the systemic acceptability of the abuse of women and their rights and the almost pathological fear of the feminine.
    Please elaborate, or is that off topic?
    Pacifist Pigeon wrote: »
    Also, in what since do you mean "breeder"? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that a derogatory term for a straight person?
    In this context it means someone who breeds animals. Consider the topic at hand before making accusations...


  • #53
    Shakti
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,153 ✭✭✭Shakti


    I realise highlighting these issues isn't going to make me many friends or get me invited to any parties etc. but the vehemence to censor and erase on these pages is as good as any evidence I could ever argue.

    I began to ask each time: "What's the worst that could happen to me if I tell this truth?" Unlike women in other countries, our breaking silence is unlikely to have us jailed, "disappeared" or run off the road at night. Our speaking out will irritate some people, get us called bitchy or hypersensitive and disrupt some dinner parties. And then our speaking out will permit other women to speak, until laws are changed and lives are saved and the world is altered forever.
    Audre Lorde

    unapologetically


  • #54
    apache
    Registered Users Posts: 2,350 ✭✭✭apache


    this is the first time i saw that ad!
    i am not offended by the piss taken out of me by degoratory comments towards me as a lesbian or a woman. i understand though i do have a acquired sense of humour! sure even lesbians here find the word lesbian offensive!

    i don't post here anymore because everything is taken offence at and you dare not challenge a trans person or holy god will strike you down :rolleyes:

    however even i found the ad a bit much towards trans people. but in saying that if it was a piss take about lesbians i would laugh. but thats me. the problem here is trans people take absolute offence at any little comment and when an add like this crops up which in my opinion is a bit out of order its a case of sighing and "here they go again" which really does yourself no favours. a classic example would be the no nonsense insurance ads. they are hilarious yet still offence was taken.

    you should choose your wars wisely. battles are fought. wars are won.


  • #55
    deirdre_dub
    Registered Users Posts: 1,229 ✭✭✭deirdre_dub


    For those of you, friend and foe alike, who were wondering where I am . . .

    I'm not getting drawn in. The "opinions" of some people around here about the non-existence of transphobia mean as much to me as the "opinions" of some straight folk about the non-existence of homophobia.

    Those of you who respect me will know how I feel, and I thank you for your support and good wishes. Those of you who don't - I'm not going to waste my time defending my feelings or writing about painful experiences.


  • #56
    Shakti
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,153 ✭✭✭Shakti


    deirdre_dub wrote: »
    For those of you, friend and foe alike, who were wondering where I am . . .

    I'm not getting drawn in. The "opinions" of some people around here about the non-existence of transphobia mean as much to me as the "opinions" of some straight folk about the non-existence of homophobia.

    Those of you who respect me will know how I feel, and I thank you for your support and good wishes. Those of you who don't - I'm not going to waste my time defending my feelings or writing about painful experiences.

    I respect that Deirdre,
    Just to say though before I was a member here I used to read these Boards and your posts and others like Links were a lot to do with why I joined up.


  • #57
    deirdre_dub
    Registered Users Posts: 1,229 ✭✭✭deirdre_dub


    Shakti wrote: »
    I respect that Deirdre,
    Just to say though before I was a member here I used to read these Boards and your posts and others like Links were a lot to do with why I joined up.
    Like many, I miss Link's writings here. But I can completely understand where she is coming from. You cannot discuss transphobia with those who deny it.

    Us trans people know it exists, we know its nature, we live with its shadow every day. The cis community can be broken up into three groups - those who also know that transphobia exists, those who deny it exists, and those who are open enough to be educatable. I don't see any people in that third category here.

    So I don't need that kind of waste-of-time grief. What I do need is to see a strong trans community, and that is why I'm sticking around, to see what I can do to help bring that about.


  • #58
    wonderfulname
    Registered Users Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭wonderfulname


    Ah Deirdre, we're more than that, don't get cynical due to another one of these threads!


  • #59
    Beruthiel
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 42,362 Mod ✭✭✭✭Beruthiel


    wonderfulname wrote: »
    Maybe it's from being a culchie and a bit of a racing fanatic, but filly and mare would be words I hear quite frequently from women referring to other women, even themselves, granted most of them are in the racing or hunting scenes, but it is perfectly acceptable terminology and no malice should be understood of it.

    So does that mean I'm a feminist nazi for pointing out that calling a woman a filly or mare is in fact, highly insulting?
    I certainly see it as such.
    I most definitely do not see it as acceptable terminology.
    As for you hearing a woman referring to another in this fashion, ignorance is no excuse and does not make a thing acceptable. Some people don't engage their brains.


  • #60
    floggg
    Registered Users Posts: 5,820 ✭✭✭floggg


    I skipped over some of the comments do apologies if I'm repeating anybody. A couple of things though

    1. I don't think a majority group can tell the minority they are being too sensitive if they take offense. A cis-gender person has never had to walk in the shoes of a trans person and experience all that goes with it. It's a bit hard therefore to tell the trans person that they aren't entitled to their reaction without knowing how the ad makes them feel, the vulnerabilities and insecurities it touches upon or the experiences it reflects.

    Until you can see the ad from their perspective I don't think you can fairly judge their reaction.

    2. I imagine trans people would find the ad highly offensive in that it implies that a trans woman is not the same or is different to a cis-woman. That's contrary to any sort of attitude of acceptance and equality.

    3. I imagine the ad is further offensive from the perspective that it encourages people to "spot the trans woman" and single her out. Rather than focusing on equality and accordance it encourages us to highlight differences. In circumstances where trans people have been the victims of violent and often fatal abuse just for being perceived as different I think it's an offensive and dangerous game to play to encourage people to pick them out in this manner for amusement and ridicule.

    4. If you replace the word "transgender woman" with "Jew" or "Protestant" I wonder people be so indifferent about it - especially in a society where Jews or Protestants routinely faced prejudice and intolerance. I would be surprised if people didnt see the offense caused in those circumstances quite clearly.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    deirdre_dub
    Registered Users Posts: 1,229 ✭✭✭deirdre_dub


    I phoned Paddy Power's Dublin office before lunch, and was in touch with a marketing and PR executive. At the time I phoned, there was a meeting in London about the ad. I gave them my email address, and I expect to be updated when there is news.

    Apparently our long-suffering TENI national development worker, Vanessa Lacey, had quite a weekend fielding calls from upset people about this ad. :(

    I would encourage anyone who believes this ad to be wrong to phone Paddy Power. Ask for the marketing department. The more the merrier - we want to get them to a place where they will never ever even think of doing something like this again. If they spend the day fielding calls from people they've hurt, directly or indirectly, they will shudder the next time an ad person presents them with a transphobic (or any other kind of phobic) ad.

    The good news is that they have, apparently, received quite a number of calls about this. But, as I said, the more the merrier.

    The number is 01 404 5900. Try and be polite and civil. And don't worry if it's too much for you to do - the person I was talking to sounded quite humbled by the response he was hearing to the ad.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement