Mother fired up by Dai Henwood’s 'hot' women

Women wearing nightdresses sitting in front of a fire can be described as “pretty warm” and “hot”, according to advertising watchdogs.

The Advertising Standards Authority has rejected a complaint that a television commercial featuring well-known comedian Dai Henwood was degrading to women, as the ad for a woodburner fire was satirical and did not use sexual appeal.

Complainant S Ram claimed the ad for Metro Fires was “exploitative and degrading of women”, saying it referred to them as being "hot" for an unrelated product.

“As the mother of two girls, I am abhorred by this style of portrayal of women as sexual objects, dressed provocatively and skimpily while commented lasciviously by an onlooking male," she said.

"Surely we have progressed to the point where we find this use of women as sexual objects to sell unrelated items as irrelevant and simply ridiculous.” 

However, the advertiser, Pioneer Manufacturing, said the commercial was not “exploitative or degrading” of women because they were not “sexually dressed in skimpy clothing” but rather wearing nightwear, which some women do when at home.

The term "hot" referred to the wood fires and Mr Henwood only used that term when the footage showed the “wood fire only”.

Had the commercial being offensive to women, it would have attracted more than two complaints, it said.

The Commercial Approvals Bureau described the advert as “taking the mickey out of heat pump commercials which feature the ex-New Zealand cricketer Stephen Fleming.

“In it, Dai Henwood, one of New Zealand’s favourite funny men, takes a very light-hearted look at the new ‘flame’ to show that the wood fire is still the best heating source for your home,” it said.

The bureau also noted word play over the terms "hot" and "flames", and commented that the “the whole scenario is insinuation”.

“CAB submits that this is a tongue-in-cheek advertisement, appropriately rated to remove it from airtime when young children would not understand the innuendo, and as such the complaint should not be upheld,” it said.

In the deliberation, the ASA complaints board noted most of its members agreed there was a level of “sexual innuendo” in relation to the women, but the words used were in context with the product being advertised.

A minority of members felt there was some “gratuitous” sexual commentary not saved by humour that breached codes, but since they were in a minority, the complaint was not upheld.

View the advert at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJz3CuYbBZg