The Advertising Standards Authority has ruled that Rightmove Group Ltd is not in breach of any regulations regarding a recent TV ad.

A complaint was lodged regarding the advert seen on television in July, which included the on-screen text, ‘When life moves, make your rightmove”.

The ad featured a man looking at Rightmove listings on his phone, while his female partner was unpacking boxes and their four daughters were playing. The man appeared in various rooms, unable to get any privacy, as the girls regularly interrupted him.

The complainant, who believed that the ad depicted women and girls as demanding and annoying and men as not taking responsibility for childcare, challenged whether it perpetuated harmful gender stereotypes.

But Rightmove argued that the ad, which was first shown in December 2018 and had been regularly shown since, brought to life one of the most common reasons for moving home – the need for more space.

The portal added that the story centred around the interaction of the dad and kids – the mother, although present, was only ever on the periphery of the activity – merely dramatized the need for parents, of either gender, to have a break in the day for themselves, and this was not always possible in a small house, demonstrating the need for more space in a larger property.

Rightmove did not believe that the ad perpetuated or relied upon harmful gender stereotypes, and ASA agreed, which is why the complaint was not upheld by the regulator, which stated:

“Advertisements must not include gender stereotypes that are likely to cause harm, or serious or widespread offence”. The joint CAP and BCAP Advertising Guidance (the guidance) said that ads may feature people undertaking gender-stereotypical roles, but they should take care to avoid suggesting that stereotypical roles or characteristics were always uniquely associated with one gender.

“The guidance stated that ads may feature people undertaking gender-stereotypical roles (e.g. a woman cleaning the house or a man doing DIY), or displaying gender stereotypical characteristics (e.g. a man being assertive or a woman being sensitive to others’ needs), but they should take care to avoid suggesting that stereotypical roles or characteristics were always uniquely associated with one gender, the only options available to one gender, or never carried or displayed by another gender.

“We considered the scenario presented in the ad. The main character was the only male in a family with a female partner and four daughters. The family dog was shown with a pink bow on its head, which viewers would likely take to indicate that it, too, was female. We therefore considered that the scene was specifically predicated on the idea of the one male being “outnumbered” by females in his household, rather than just annoying children of either gender. The father was shown trying to find somewhere to read a magazine about trucks, an interest stereotypically associated with men. His daughters were shown putting make up on him and doing his hair ? these were activities stereotypically associated with girls. In the end, the father was shown entering a shed at the bottom of the garden. Again, this played on a commonly-held stereotype about men wanting to escape to a shed, den or “man cave”.

“While the ad could be characterised as a depiction of a parent trying to find some alone time in a busy household, the scenario was clearly conveyed in a way that was reliant on gender stereotypes. With that established, we considered whether the ad depicted gender stereotypes in a way that was likely to cause harm. We noted there was nothing in the ad to suggest that the main character was unable to cope with childcare or that he did not participate in family life. While he seemed tired and harassed, the daughters approached him to play with them and help with problems, and after dealing with the baking incident he was shown with flour on his face in the next scene, suggesting that he was generally an active father. While the female partner was shown unpacking at the end while the man went to the shed, we considered this was logical given that the ad was centred around the dad character and showed one of the benefits he would get from moving into a larger house, and did not suggest that he never participated in domestic duties. The female partner was a peripheral presence and was not shown as making any demands on the central character.

“Furthermore, while the little girls were noisy and lively, and the father was called on to help with problems they had caused, we did not consider the ad gave the impression that they were particularly annoying or demanding on the basis of their gender, and a similar treatment could have been achieved with boys being loud or disruptive while taking part in activities stereotypically associated with males.

“We considered that the overriding impression of the ad was of a family’s hectic life in a home that they were outgrowing and that the scenes in which the dad was shown relaxing were those exceptional times when he tried to take a few moments for himself, rather than a harmful depiction of a father who avoided childcare and domestic chores or of women and girls proving an annoyance specifically on the basis of their gender. While the presentation of the scenario undeniably drew on gender stereotypes, we did not consider that it did so in a way that was likely to cause harm.”