Women are not meat: Nando’s ad makes me sick to the stomach

Published: April 3, 2016

Nando’s, the popular global chicken restaurant chain, wants you to imagine you are biting into a juicy woman when you hungrily grab its hot chicken.

“Don’t whistle… don’t objectify me.”

“Don’t make me just about tits and a**.”

“Don’t try to touch me.”

These are the most common things women think, or say, when catcalled at by men. The underlying message is that women are a heart, a mind, a person, a will, a personality, a consciousness… and not just a piece of meat. Not just a rack of breasts, not just a fine piece of booty, not just a pair of legs, not just the sum of her hot parts.

Not. A. Piece. Of. Meat.

And yet, the latest advertisement by Nando’s India, the popular global chicken restaurant chain, wants you to imagine you are biting into a juicy woman when you hungrily grab its hot chicken. A huge new ad by Nando’s, splashed across newspapers, asks you to,

“Try something you can grab with both hands”.

And what are you grabbing again? You are grabbing “buns, breasts, thighs”. Because

“Whatever you are into, enjoying any Nando’s meal with your hands is recommended”.

Let’s see what’s happening here. The ad speaks the language of daily harassment that women face. Under the sexist male gaze, a woman is viewed as little more than a tasty morsel. Like a trussed up piece of chicken served on a plate for a man to devour, she has no voice, possessing not even a chicken’s squeak. You can proceed to look at her and eat her.

There is understandably, furore on social media over this ad.

Photo: Screenshot

Photo: Screenshot

And yet, there are people who see no problem with this sexism.

“The advertisement was bad enough. But what was even worse is the reaction it evoked from many Indian men – and women. Since they tweeted in perfect English, it would be reasonable to assume these are educated people. While some thought I “couldn’t see the subtle humour” in the advert, others actually said it was ‘witty copy’ and that I was too dim to appreciate the cleverness of the dolt who wrote it. The advert reconfirms two things for me: the standard of English education in India has gone from brilliant till the late seventies to pathetic and embarrassing in 2016. And second, that depraved Indians who enjoyed this ad and abused me for calling it obscene, are the ones contributing to our dubious image as ‘rape capital of the world’,” says Padma Rao Sundarji, senior foreign correspondent and native Delhiwali.

Sadly, Nando’s is not the only one to depict a woman, literally, as a piece of meat. Delhi’s Asian food restaurant Mamagoto also had a similarly sexist ad, which compared the food it offered to a woman’s parts. In Mamagoto’s ad, it had a beautiful Asian woman meekly offering her buns to be eaten.

Photo: Screenshot

Women and some men are asking: Is the food in Mamagoto and Nando’s not good enough to be eaten, so ads have to stoop to levels that would make sexual harassers happy? Nando’s has since then apologised for the ad, but one wonders if this lip service – a single tweet – is enough. Will these companies actually spend money in putting out ads that say sorry?

Photo: Screenshot

In the iconic TV show, Mad Men, we are shown a captivating picture of capitalist United States – we look inside an ad agency that uses every trick in the book to sell products. Most of the tricks, though, are women. Ads usually make the sexist the rule, and not the exception.

The old Coca Cola bottle was famously shaped as a woman. Ads repeatedly show women standing next to random objects – an inverter, phuljhadi (firecrackers), tables, bathroom faucets, sofas and so on. When the woman is not a fine body grabbing your eyeballs, she becomes the product on display – the phuljhadi, the piece of chicken.

Noted actress and activist Shabana Azmi recently spoke out against filmy item numbers, objecting to the way women were portrayed and the adjectives used to describe them. Azmi referred to the words in Kareena Kapoor’sFevicol Se” item song, where the lines describe the heroine as a piece of meat to be downed with alcohol.

“This is a serious issue,” Azmi pressed.

Apart from justifying a rape or harassment culture, these depictions in ads, songs et al get bundled into one giant mess of popular culture and shape impressionable minds.

“Don’t mind” as the Nando’s ad says.

Because women not minding is every harasser’s dream. In fact, women not having a mind at all is what harassers want. Yo Yo Honey Singh’s rap videos have him following women in the street (“Blue Eyes, Love Dose”) who don’t mind him stalking them, singing to them and touching them. But those are dumb videos showing boring old stereotypes. The problem comes when these depictions portraying women who are objectified as women who don’t mind is assumed to be the reality.

This is not reality. This is a twisted mind’s reality. And twisted minds should have no place in society.

This post originally appeared here.

Neha Sinha

Neha Sinha

The author is a Delhi-based columnist whose work appears in several newspapers and websites. She writes on environment, wildlife and women's issues. She tweets @nehaa_sinha

The views expressed by the writer and the reader comments do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of The Express Tribune.

  • S25

    Reading the text of nando’s ad made me cringe and very uncomfortableRecommend

  • Parvez

    Thanks for pointing that out…..I’m no prude but that was distasteful. Nandos could and should have used their brains before coming out with this.Recommend

  • Ali88

    And then people throw their arms up at islam prescribing hijab for society. What do we expect from our kids when they grow up on pornography, hyper sexualization in mass media and lulu lemons. Garbage in= garbage out.

    ( P.S. hijab is for both men and women and it is not just a peice of cloth on a woman’s head)Recommend

  • ABC

    If you dont have a sense of humor, do not just ruin it for all.Recommend

  • AH

    Nando’s marketing team obviously lacks any real sense of humor or wittiness. That’s usually the case when people can only come up with vulgarity in lieu of jokes.Recommend

  • Milind A

    This is well-written… However the writer should go a step further and write against ads for men products or cars that (unnecessarily) objectify women.. The explanation that goes, is sexually arousing a person, triggers the same area in his/her brain, that deals with (irrational) decisions.. In short an this long-legged female creates an association (in his mind) with that shaving cream / car, and our poor guy/gal is more inclined to buy itRecommend

  • Rolli Polli

    So like women objectify themselves by posing on billboards, what is that? You always have to make an issue about it.Recommend

  • Acorn Guts

    The ad is only offensive if the reader makes it so i.e. it’s not the ad that’s objectifying women; it is you. I agree that women are not meat but then meat is not women either, this river kinda flows both ways.

    It’s in pretty poor taste nonetheless.Recommend

  • Sarah

    THIS IS NOT FUNNY!!Recommend

  • Alter Ego

    You cant have the good without the bad , when you want the freedom to dress as you like ,to talk as you like,to go where you like,with no regards to the social customs and religious practices of others .

    Then other people too have the right to see where they like , to stare where they like ,to whistle when they like and to write what they like.

    The river flows both ways.Recommend

  • gp65

    Sorry, false equivalence. Women dressing how they like and going where they like does not impinge on the rights of others. Men whisting at women DOES impinge on the women’s right to travel safely.
    If a woman chooses to pose for ads scantily dressed, she is willingly objectifying herself and no one would object to comments about that specific woman. How does that give people a right to objectify millions who were neither part of the ad nor agreed to be objectified?Recommend

  • gp65

    Unfortunately they DID use their brains by appealing to other parts of some men’s anatomy. Their sales will boom. Unfortunate. Only way to fight such objectification is the way they corporation understands – boycott the products or services. I do not see that happening in the near future.Recommend

  • M

    Consent is the key word here. Whether someone willingly chooses it or not.
    No one but individual woman herself has the right to do it.Recommend

  • Abdullah Ahmad

    Yes but no “woman” in particular was on the ad. Just a generic female is assumed. Hell, they could be talking about a transexual and you would not know.

    Since no woman was on the ad, its all fair play. Nobody was abused, taken advantage of or harmed in any way. This ad should be allowed.Recommend

  • Abdullah Ahmad

    To you it isent.

    Besides, its not targeting you. Just people with a sense of humor.Recommend

  • Alter Ego

    To a deeply religious man,woman dreesing immodestly would be hurtful.
    A “liberal” man would not mind it much.

    A “liberal” woman would not mind being objectified(just see the advertisements,songs movies ,look anywhere you like)to a certain extent.
    A conservative woman would not even dream of it.

    A “liberal” woman does not ask a religious or a traditionalist man,before dressing “immodestly”,if his sensibilities are being hurt.
    A “liberal” man does not ask a tradionalist woman before whistling , if it is hurting her feelings.

    So like i said , the river flows both ways.Recommend

  • DudeFromDC

    Nonsensical comparison. A man being religious is his problem and not the world’s. If he doesn’t want to see women dressed immodestly he can stay indoors and not go out. He shouldnt make his religion a problem for others. Also, religious men whistle too. Recommend

  • DudeFromDC

    So, in your world, women should be free only as much as the men want them to be. What if the women dont want to follow this non-sensical religion and culture and want to have more “freedom”? Did someone ask what they really want?Recommend

  • LS

    What did you expect from quranic studies…Recommend

  • gp65

    I was talking about actual rights. And yes,people have a right to get offended at hurt at other people’s actions but they do NOT have the right to stop others from doing what they like simply because they are hurt or offended. In other words they do not have a right to have their feelings protected.
    So as long as a deeply religious woman can dress modestly herself, hr opinions and feelings should not impact the right of another woman to dress as she chooses.
    I will repeat. Your logic is based on false equivalence between actual harm in one case vs. self-created hyper-ventilation.Recommend

  • Alter Ego

    Then a women who minds this sort of thing should not eat there and not blame Nandos for making such an offensive advertisement.
    After all , a woman who minds it , it is her problem not the world’s.
    If she doesn’t like it, she can boycott their products .
    After all , all of the women on the planet don’t mind it.Recommend