Honey Birdette breaches, ignores Ad Standards twice in September

The Panel noted that the advertisement was in the widow of shopping centres and considered that the relevant audience for this advertisement would be broad, and include children.

The Panel considered the second image. The Panel considered that the poses of the women in this advertisement were more sexualised, with the women holding each other as though they are about to kiss. The Panel noted that the bottom of the body suite worn by the woman who was standing was extremely high-cut and exposed a large amount of the woman’s groin area. The Panel considered that this in combination with the sexualised pose of the women was a highly-sexualised image which did not treat the issue of sex, sexuality and nudity with sensitivity to the relevant broad audience and that the advertisement did breach Section 2.4 of the Code.

Ad Industry self-regulation means they get away with it 

"The advertiser has not provided a response to the Panel's determination"

Sign the petition to Westfield here

Honey Birdette "Maria" 

Honey_Birdette_Maria_upheld_sept_18_0398-18.jpg


Honey Birdette "Chelsea"

honey_birdette_upheld_chelsea_sept_18_0385-18.jpg

Honey_Birdette_Maria_Westfield_Sydney_copy.jpg

As seen Westfield Sydney (blurring ours)


Add your comment

You can defend their right to childhood

Everyday our young people are exposed to more brands continuing to sexualise girls and objectify women. You can bring change to this sexploitation, stop companies from degrading women and prevent its devastating effects on young people.

Donate Now

From Our Supporters

Join the Discussion