Sexism and CEDAW

Sexism and CEDAW

Sexism and the CEDAW

Recently, the issue of sexism has gained more attention. Sexism means discriminating on the basis of gender. The Dutch State must take appropriate measures to eliminate prejudice of inferiority based on gender under Article 5(a) of the UN Women’s Rights Convention (CEDAW).

Sexism in advertising according to UN Women’s Rights Committee

According to the United Nations Women’s Rights Committee, advertisements that are allegedly sexist should (also) be investigated under Article 5 of CEDAW. The Women’s Rights Committee says an advertisement is sexist when it portrays a negative stereotype of a woman or objectifies a woman’s body: ‘(…) discrimination against women includes differences in treatment that exist because of stereotypical expectations, attitudes and behavior directed toward women.’
The persistent negative stereotyping of women, according to the Women’s Rights Committee, is an impediment to moving toward further gender equality.

Advertising Code Committee is going to test against CEDAW

The Advertising Code Committee (RCC) is going to test against CEDAW. This emerged from a recent ruling by the RCC on a campaign by fashion company Suit Supply.

The ruling follows an objection by the Clara Wichmann Trial Litigation Fund and PILP. According to the Clara Wichmann Trial Litigation Fund and PILP, the way in which (allegedly) sexist advertisements had been judged by the RCC until now was namely insufficient and incorrect.

In its judgment of October 12, 2016, the RCC emphasized that the CEDAW had been assessed, while also explaining the manner in which this assessment had taken place.

The Clara Wichmann Trial Fund and PILP are pleased that the RCC is actually applying the important standards of the Women’s Rights Convention. This should lead to better and more complete judgments. The Clara Wichmann Trial Fund and PILP do not have a problem with nudity or sex in advertisements. They are concerned with the negative stereotyping of women and objectification of the female body at a time when women, also in the Netherlands, still have a disadvantaged position and are much more often victims of sexual violence, sexual harassment and discrimination than men.

Thus, the Clara Wichmann Trial Litigation Fund and PILP recommend that future complaints about an (allegedly) sexist advertisement make use of CEDAW and the considerations of the Women’s Rights Committee.

What does PILP do?

PILP, in collaboration with the Clara Wichmann Trial Litigation Fund and some legal scholars, is researching the application of CEDAW in cases involving alleged sexism in public.

Research by PILPG

For example, research commissioned by Clara Wichmann Trial Litigation Fund and PILP was conducted by the independent PILPG. PILPG’s first study, titled ‘Sexism in advertising: international framework under the CEDAW’, shows how CEDAW and the Women’s Rights Committee view sexist and stereotypical advertising and how they see the State’s task in this area. The second study, ‘Legal frameworks regarding sexism in advertising: comparison of national systems,’ shows that many of the surrounding and surveyed countries, such as France, Germany and the United Kingdom, test advertising not only on whether it violates morals, good taste and decency, but also on whether the expressions are sexist or stereotypical within the meaning of Article 5(a) CEDAW.

Conversation with the Advertising Code Committee

As a result of these investigations into sexism in advertisements and CEDAW, PILP, together with the Clara Wichmann Litigation Fund sent a letter to the RCC. A conversation followed from that. The conversation included the distinction between sex and sexism. In it, the RCC indicated that if a complaint explicitly asks to test for sexism and stereotyping, it will test for it.

Complaint about sexist advertising

Next, PILP and the Clara Wichmann Trial Litigation Fund filed a complaint against the latest advertising by the Suit Supply company. This company’s ‘Toy boys’ campaign caused a stir and many believed it was sexist.

144 complaints were filed against the Suit Supply company’s ‘Shameless’ advertising campaign in 2010. The RCC rejected all of them. The RCC looked at these advertisements primarily through the lens of morality: isn’t there too much nudity and/or sex in this advertisement? For example, last summer the RCC ruled on an advertisement of Radio 538, in which a largely naked woman with a pussy in front of her genitals is used to promote the radio station. While the RCC named this as being sexist, it only substantiated this by pointing out the (ambiguous) sexuality depicted. According to the RCC, this is “contrary to good taste and/or decency.

The RCC upheld the complaints against this Suit Supply advertisement. Yet it was not yet clear whether the correct test from CEDAW had been applied. For example, it did not specifically mention the treaty. The Clara Wichmann Litigation Fund and PILP therefore appealed to seek clarification.

In the ensuing fine and comprehensive judgment of October 12, 2016, the RCC emphasized that the Women’s Rights Convention had been tested, while also explaining the manner in which this test had been carried out.

Dossier

Our Dossiers

Our Dossiers

Support our work

PILP is the legal ally of civil society organizations, movements, communities, and activists dedicated to human rights. Your donation enables us to continue providing this service.