British Ad Watchdog Says Gay Kiss Ad Okay

Posted on | February 3, 2006

The Advertising Standards Authority in the UK has ruled in favor of a Dolce & Gabbana ad the features two male models briefly kissing on the lips. The ad received eighty-nine complaints in which seventy complained about potential for kids to see the ad at the time it ran and the remaining nineteen complaining about the ad being unsuitable period.

I shudder to think what would have happened if our own FCC had been involved. They probably would have fined the networks once again because some people with rocks and twigs in their asses and have nothing better to do than troll around TV for shit to complain about. I love the fact the Brits are so much more laid back about this kind of stuff. It is trolls like that which forced Howard Stern onto Satellite Radio.

If you want a good compare and contrast between British and American TV, just look at Graham Norton. His now defunct "Graham Norton Effect" which aired on Comedy Central looks like The 700 Club when you compare it to" So Graham Norton". The format to the show is identical, but the topics get way more raunchy such as Shannon Daugherty talking about a stallion she had that would constantly masturbate, Sarah Brightman talking about the size of Andrew Lloyd Webber’s penis, or having an audience member talk about making bread using semen as a spice. One of his most infamous, if it is not the most infamous, involved him contacting the model on a website known as "The Pipes of Pam" which featured an Eastern European woman who would play a pennywhistle with her vagina. The episode, in which I believe Lulu was a guest, actually showed Pam in action playing Frère Jacques and God Save the Queen live. The image broadcast was actually a camera on Graham’s computer screen showing a fuzzy webcam image. The episode got only seventeen complaints. In its ruling, the British equivalent of the FCC said the following:

As far as the ‘Pipes of Pam’ episode was concerned, this ‘comic item’ had been ‘carefully prearranged’ to avoid overstepping the mark. The fuzzy image, a small picture within the computer screen, made it difficult to judge whether there was any contact and in fact the flute was never seen inserted on screen. The placing of the camera allowed no clear sight of the woman’s genital region and, throughout the item, very much more was implied than shown.

If that had been in the US the fine would have probably been more than all of the fines Howard Stern has been the subject of and Janet Jackson’s "boob-gate" combined. Of course this is all just speculation since our uptight networks would have rejected the ad outright anyways.

As for the people who complained about that ad, as Santino sang on Project Runway: Lighten up, it’s just fashion!