Actions Speak Louder Than Words How the Reclame Code Commissie Regulates Gender Ideology in Dutch Advertising

Actions Speak Louder Than Words How the Reclame Code Commissie Regulates Gender Ideology in Dutch Advertising. Case Study: Suit Supply’s ‘Toy Boys’ Advertising Campaign. Kelly Meijns – 10375651 Supervisor: dr. S.A.E. (Sarah) Bracke Second reader: S.P. (Sherria) Ayuandini Master Thesis Sociology – Gender, Sexuality and Society Amsterdam – July 2017 FOREWORD Sexist imagery in advertising is considered harmful by the UN’s International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), which requires the Netherlands to pursue an active role in combating harmful gender representations in advertising. The only advertising regulating body in the Netherlands, the Reclame Code Commissie (RCC), has the power to rule on the limits of what is permissible in Dutch advertising. This study examines representations of gender circulating in men’s fashion retailer Suit Supply’s advertising campaign, as well as how these representations are perceived and responded to by The Feminist Club Amsterdam (FCA) and the RCC. Through a visual analysis of nine images from the campaign and a critical discourse analysis of an online discussion about the campaign by The Feminist Club Amsterdam, and of the ruling of the complaint against Suit Supply by the RCC, the discursive practices in relation to the campaign are examined. Analysis reveals that Suit Supply is aware of their use of harmful gender stereotypes, which are perceived as controversial and hurtful by members of the FCA. The RCC, respectively the College van Beroep (CvB), rules in favor of Suit Supply and deems the imagery acceptable, and not sexist. The study concludes that the RCC as an institution is counterproductive in combating harmful gender representations in Dutch advertising. I would like to thank dr. M.P.C. Janssen for providing an intensely exciting and interesting Master’s program that, above all else, has been inspiring to experience and helped me shape my final thesis. I would like to thank dr. S.A.E. Bracke for the guidance while writing this thesis, for asking me difficult questions and therein pushing me further than I could have imagined. I would like to thank S.P. Ayuandini for providing me with guiding feedback and inspiring me to use critical discourse analysis for this thesis, which has turned out to be most appropriate and fruitful in this study. Last but not least, I would like to thank my family and in particular dr. Chris Meijns for proofreading and supporting me in the process of writing this thesis. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction 4 2. Theoretical Framework 8 2.1 Gender 8 2.2 Representations 9 2.3 Discourse 12 2.4 Advertising 14 3. Methodology 17 3.1 Research technique 17 3.2 Research Sample 18 3.3 Operationalisation 20 4. The Campaign 24 4.1. Suit Supply 24 4.2. Results Suit Supply 42 5. The Controversy 44 5.1 The Feminist Club Amsterdam 44 5.2. Results The Feminist Club Amsterdam 49 6. The Ruling 50 6.1. The Reclame Code Commissie 50 6.2. Unrealistic 52 6.3. Rape culture 58 6.4. Decency 68 6.5. Results The Reclame Code Commissie 76 7. Conclusion 79 8. Discussion 83 Bibliography 87 Appendix 90 3 1. INTRODUCTION “The real political task in a society such as ours is to criticize the workings of institutions that appear to be both neutral and independent, to criticize and attack them in such a manner that the political violence that has always exercised itself obscurely through them will be unmasked, so that one can fight against them.” - Michel Foucault In the spring of 2016 the men’s fashion retailer Suit Supply released an advertising campaign named ‘Toy Boys’. The campaign sparked considerable controversy and media attention for its imagery, and received complaints for its presumed sexist content. These complaints have been judged by the Reclame Code Commissie (RCC), the only institution in the Netherlands concerned with the regulation of advertising. Surprising to many, however, was that the RCC ruled in favor of Suit Supply, deeming the advertisements acceptable, and not sexist. The Reclame Code Commissie is situated within the advertising industry, as parties took it upon themselves to regulate their own industry, instead of an outsider institution or the government doing so. This makes it a self-regulating institution, working independently under its stated purpose: “(...) to ensure that advertising in the Netherlands is accountable.”1 Self-regulation serves, as the term states, for organisations to monitor the participants in their own industry for adherence to the standards of the industry. The main organisation involved in the regulation of Dutch advertising is the Stichting Reclame Code (SRC). The SRC has set up the Nederlandse Reclame Code (NRC), the set of rules that any Dutch advertisement should adhere to. When advertisers receive complaints about their advertisements, the RCC assesses these complaints for compliance with the NRC. In the past the RCC has received multiple complaints about previous Suit Supply campaigns regarding sexist advertising. The RCC has in some cases reprimanded Suit Supply, while in others the complaints have been rejected. By reprimanding, the RCC recommends Suit Supply to no longer advertise in this manner, but connects no actual negative consequences to the company’s actions. Unsurprisingly then, Suit Supply continues to use sexist imagery in their advertisements. This leaves one to wonder how 1 Nederlandse Reclame Code: https://www.reclamecode.nl/nrc/pagina.asp?paginaID=0&deel=2 4 sexist imagery can be addressed in an effective manner that will reduce the degree of sexism in advertising, as the RCC seems to be falling short in this respect. The need to combat sexism in advertising is prescribed in the UN’s International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), which the Netherlands has ratified in full, together with its Optional Protocol. By ratifying CEDAW, the Netherlands must pursue an active role in eliminating all forms of discrimination on the basis of gender and sex2, which includes harmful gender representations in advertising. Advertising is omnipresent in Western societies, where the average person is exposed to an estimated 3,000-5,000 advertisements on a daily basis.3 It is at the heart of our social existence, and the magnitude of its influence has been compared to that of education or organized religion. Advertisements are central to the political economy of media; they influence – both directly and indirectly – the kinds of programmes that are, and are not made. It has a profound impact on the entire shape and content of contemporary media, where gender ideology is the biggest resource for advertisers.4 In these advertisements a certain Western, idealized beauty standard is upheld, with the attached gender ideology. This ideology reinforces predominately stereotypical gender norms, notably through hypermasculine and hyperfeminine representations of gender. These gender norms are on the one hand institutionalized through advertising and media, and on the other hand sustained on an individual level. As advertising can be seen as a vast structure in society, the frequent exposure to these gender norms adds to a historical ritualization of gender5, as representations of gender in advertising are only effective if they are recognizable and adhere to gender norms. Advertising then, has a considerable amount of influence in the construction of a gender ideology.6 Gender ideology refers to a set of societal norms regarding the types of roles, rights, responsibilities and behaviours that are considered appropriate for women and men.7 A gender ideology that is either directly or indirectly discriminatory to any gender is considered harmful. Direct discrimination on the basis of gender and sex is understood as explicit differential treatment, while indirect discrimination is understood as all laws, 2 Public International Law & Policy Group (2015a). Sexism in Advertising: International Framework under the Convention on the Elimination of All forms of Discrimination Against Women. 3 Killbourne, 2000. 4 Gill, 2007. 5 Berger, 2008. 6 Goffman, 1979. 7 http://www.sociologyguide.com/gender/gender-ideology.php 5 policies, practices, or institutions that have a discriminatory effect in practice.8 Regulating advertising that contains harmful gender ideologies should therefore be of feminist concern, as it provides a means of working towards a more equitable media landscape, reducing discrimination on the basis of gender. The gender representations that we are exposed to in advertisements can be seen as a constant reminder of these idealized gender norms; an institutionalized and accepted form of gender stratification in society. The gendering practices that take place in these advertisements are then not fully representations of femininities or masculinities, but simply very specific ones as they are considerably normative.9 Stereotypical representations of gender in advertisements constitute a gender ideology, which is presented as ‘natural’ while legitimizing subordination of women through patriarchy.10 Organizations, such as the advertising industry, engage in gendering practices through their policies and the discourses they put forth.11 As advertisements construct fictional realities, so do their practices, operations and policies that collectively shape the gender ideology we are exposed to. Within these fictional realities, assumptions about women, men and a supposed gender hierarchy get circulated and sustained by individual actors who

Load more