nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Paddy Power Transphobic Ad,

Shakti

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XZ5MOB3nww

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Captain Graphite

What a bizarre ad! I'd love to know who in the Paddy Power marketing department sat down and thought that was a good idea, and that it wouldn't offend anyone.

Don't suppose it's any consolation that the TG ladies were described as being beautiful?

deirdre_dub

Captain Graphite wrote: »

Don't suppose it's any consolation that the TG ladies were described as being beautiful?

Um - not all of them were. And, no, it isn't a consolation to be considered a beautiful target of such a sick game.

OP - I'd consider that not only is the ad frightfully transphobic, it is also misogynistic, as it reduces femininity to a (sick) beauty contest.

actuallylike

deirdre_dub wrote: »

as it reduces femininity to a (sick) beauty contest.

emm, welcome to advertising. Hunky Dory's anyone?

Shakti

Captain Graphite wrote: »

What a bizarre ad! I'd love to know who in the Paddy Power marketing department sat down and thought that was a good idea, and that it wouldn't offend anyone?

I think its pretty obvious that they set out to offend, they have a rep for it and probably why they give millions of euro to these people to offend on their behalf.....

Crispin,Porter,Bogusky

Shakti

deirdre_dub wrote: »

OP - I'd consider that not only is the ad frightfully transphobic, it is also misogynistic, as it reduces femininity to a (sick) beauty contest.

Sure is and does Deirdre,
We both know whats going on here we've seen it often enough if its not west of Ireland politicians trying to make a name for themselves its some sadvertising type using our bodies and lives as vehicles for their agendas, its a deeply sickening cynical process.

Azure_sky

Wow props to Paddy Power. Lets use the must vulnerable, misunderstood, and down trodden group in society to make money. Of course so many men will being laughing at that ad with their mates....and when they're alone they jack off to trans porn....

Shakti

Making sure its offensive

L.Jenkins

I am hoping this advertisement will be long buried before it even gets a chance to air and is used as an example of the down right ignorance that's still present.

Fenian Army

deirdre_dub wrote: »

Um - not all of them were. And, no, it isn't a consolation to be considered a beautiful target of such a sick game.

OP - I'd consider that not only is the ad frightfully transphobic, it is also misogynistic, as it reduces femininity to a (sick) beauty contest.

Just on this point, it's about ladies day at cheltinham, women dress up and win prizes for best dressed etc, it essentially is a beauty contest. So I don't see how the ad itself is misogynstic.

Transphobic it may be.

Shakti

ItsThatManAgain wrote: »

I am hoping this advertisement will be long buried before it even gets a chance to air and is used as an example of the down right ignorance that's still present.

Aired three times yesterday on Sky soccer saturday, how many million have seen it do you think?, which was the whole point including the controversy IMO.

L.Jenkins

Well by that fact, then alot of people have seen it. I'm only hoping the video comments on the PP blog is an mirror image of the majorities sentiment towards it.

It's absolutely shameful, that such BS is allowed on TV anyway.

Shakti

Pacifist Pigeon wrote: »

Didn't transgender/transvestite people agree to participate in this advertisement?

Where do you think they stand?

What exactly is transphobia?

Looking at the word, it would appear to be a blatant fear and/or hate of people who are transgender/transvestite.

How exactly does this advertisement display such phobia?

This debacle reminds of the the controversy involve Ryanair's "suggestive" advertising, which apparently was a debasement to women. I mean these people (say women, transgender/transvestite people, gay people, etc..) choose to get involve in these advertisements - if they thought that what they were doing would offend others, why did they get involved?

Next you'll be saying that Monty Python or Little Britain sketches involving men who dress up in women's clothing are transphobic (would you regard the "I'm a lady", sketch from Little Britain as transphobic?).

Oh right this is the part were we get involved in a long drawn out protracted debate with you, to detract from the OP, sorry not buying it

Shakti

ItsThatManAgain wrote: »

Well by that fact, then alot of people have seen it. I'm only hoping the video comments on the PP blog is an mirror image of the majorities sentiment towards it.

It's absolutely shameful, that such BS is allowed on TV anyway.

Quite,
Pity the Levinson Enquiry didn't extend to advertisers.

Azure_sky

Here's the youtube video if anyone wants to flag it. I flagged it as abusive/hateful against vulnerable people.

Oh and how do we use the ignore function on here again?

Shakti

Pacifist Pigeon wrote: »

Well really, I'm just asking questions, so...

I know what your doing, so please.......

L.Jenkins

Pacifist Pigeon wrote: »

Ignore me, please. Because clearly every single post I've ever posted against transgender people is inherently transphobic, both on this account and on my former account (Killer Pigeon). Because I'm just out to get transgender people. I'm an ignominious troll...

Please...

Well, what if they were told their appearence in such an advertisement was based entirely on a different premise altogether. With contractual agreements, their hands maybe tied so to prevent them taking any action.

It almost seems we trans people should be guilty by association.

L.Jenkins

Lets just stick to the topic at hand please.

TheMilkyPirate

Pacifist Pigeon wrote: »

Didn't transgender/transvestite people agree to participate in this advertisement?

Where do you think they stand?

What exactly is transphobia?

Looking at the word, it would appear to be a blatant fear and/or hate of people who are transgender/transvestite.

How exactly does this advertisement display such phobia?

This debacle is sort of like the controversy involve Ryanair's "suggestive" advertising, which apparently was a debasement of women. I mean these people (say women, transgender/transvestite people, gay people, etc..) choose to get involve in these advertisements - if they thought that what they were doing would offend others, why did they get involved?

Would you regard the Monty Python or Little Britain sketches involving men who dress up in women's clothing are transphobic (would you regard the "I'm a lady", sketch from Little Britain as transphobic?).

Note: I haven't really expressed an opinion on this thread yet, just remember that before you reply to my post. Really, I'm just asking questions here. Attack the post, not the poster and all that jazz...

+1, I doubt anyone here will respond to your post though PP.

Don't see anything wrong with the ad tbh, Transphobic?? lol.

Shakti

Pacifist Pigeon wrote: »

Or what you think I'm doing...

I've chatted to you before on this (through my former account - Killer Pigeon). You seem very ready to brand people before you realised what they were actually trying to get across (I think it was the thread regard Sweden and sex-change). Read back on those post, then you'll understand my standpoint (i.e., I'm not transphobic).

Now, back to the topic at hand...

Okay 'its all about you', there I've said it happy now,

L.Jenkins

Ladies and Gentlemen, quit the snipping please.

L.Jenkins

Well if you want a little more indepth analysis of the video, then here it goes. First the commentator describes Transwomen and Ciswomen as Stallions and Mares. That's more of an undue poke at the entire female spectrum.

Secondly at 0:20, referring to a Ciswoman as a dog and at 0:23 referring to a Transwoman as 'well you figure it out'. Doesn't necessarily paint women in any positive way at all. As for Ladies, while some women may enjoy it, I don't see how voting on the best dressed actually does anything for a womans self-esteem as a whole.

L.Jenkins

ItsThatManAgain wrote: »

...It almost seems we trans people should be guilty by association.

L.Jenkins

One more post from me on this thread outlining one or two things. This is why a few trans members have left. Constantly defending ourselves when such transphobic shíte is brought up and aired on TV, then having to dissect why and how it's derrogitory and transphobic.

Being a trans mod, it kind of backs me into a corner somewhat too. This kind of debate gives or has given some past trans members the feeling that we no longer have anywhere safe to discuss topical issues that affect us and on the other hand, if I go passing out infractions and closing threads, then that gives the impression that Transsexuality isn't up for debate and one should get on with it.

The whole point of this thread is Paddy Powers píss poor advertising campaign and not some Transphobic slight of hand. Neither does the appearence of Trans People in the ad make it okay to dismiss any idea of transphobia.

So, I'm giving one last warning from this post onwards, discuss the video or I'm closing the thread for now.

Shakti

baraca wrote: »

+1, I doubt anyone here will respond to your post though PP.

Don't see anything wrong with the ad tbh, Transphobic?? lol.

Joined Boards 12 years ago and your first posting in the LGBT forum welcome,
Why do you think the ad isn't transphobic?

wonderfulname

Not only is that very clearly transphobic and misogynistic, it's so ridiculously out there on so many levels I get the sneaking suspicion they're baiting for complaints - i.e. free publicity. That ad has to be intentionally designed to offend, it wouldn't make it on air were it not.

It doesn't even clearly advertise them, I've watched it twice now and all I can remember is Cheltenham and Facebook, obviously the branding isn't meant to be in the ad itself...

Seriously, do people just like claiming others are overly sensitive for the sake of it? If it was just "stallions and mares", in-out jokes and long sausages before the watershed (seriously, they fit all that in in about 2 seconds), with no minority trodden on in it's path, you'd probably accept it as fair that the ASA should look into it, but as soon as it's about people someone has to insist they're wrong.

Even the tagline at the end is "let's hear it" with their Facebook details, I mean what is that if not "come at me brah!".

jaffacakesyum

Bit of a strange ad! I don't mind offensive ads cos I don't get offended easily but this one wasn't even clever or funny

Like others have said, it just seems set out to intentionally offend and provoke a response. I wouldn't get too caught up in it to be honest

baby and crumble

Okay, mod number two stepping in here folks. This thread has settled in the last few posts but let's just get a few reminders from the charter in.

6. No trolling or flaming. This means posting something that you feel will incite anger and/or abusive posting. This is usually thinly veiled insults. Starting up threads for the singular purpose of inviting such flames is also discouraged. It is the moderators discretion to decide whether a poster is trolling or flaming.

7. Abusive language that is homophobic/transphobic will not be tolerated and the persons posting it will be banned from the forum. Saying that transgender is a choice, saying that trans surgeries are cosmetic, or calling trans people "a man/woman who thinks they are a woman/man ", will result in an immediate infraction and/or ban, as these things aren't "opinions", they are falsehoods rooted in transphobia.

8. Keep things civil. No name calling, personal abuse, unneccessary aggression, snide comments, or backseat moderating.

13. This forum is welcome to everyone regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity to discuss LGBT issues. We do however insist that people who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender have the right to be treated with dignity and respect and that the forum be treated as a safe space for LGBT people. If you contribute to a thread you are expected to be willing to learn about the issues involved, and listen to what is said by members of the community/ies involved.

This means no bitching, no name calling, no sniping at each other, no insults, and no-one gets to tell the trans members of the board that they are wrong or whatever for being offended by the ad. If they are, they are. By all means debate the points, but anyone dismissing the feelings or opinions of trans posters WILL get infracted.

Shakti

Ironic thing is to be Trans in this world you have to be the least sensitive, thick skinned type of person just to make it through the day or a television program or a newspaper or a magazine or a job interview or puberty or intimacy etc. etc. etc.
Easily Offended? most people have no idea how uneasily offended trans people have to be,

Azure_sky

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.

L.Jenkins

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.

TV requires very little interaction on the viewers part and giving media free reign to do as they please doesn't help things.