Sexy Hustler honeys unlikely to corrupt Croydon yoof

The youth of Croydon is unlikely to be corrupted by adverts promising HUSTLER HONEYS IN THEIR STARS 'N' STRIPES GETTING ALL WET, the UK's advertising regulator has declared.

However, adults confronted by the ad – punting Larry Flynt's Huster Club (Croydon branch) – were likely to be offended by the ads.

Mr Flynt's haven for tired gentlemen was examined by the Advertising Standards Authority after it received a complaint over an ad in the Croydon Guardian for a 4 July promotion.

According to the ASA the ad, "showed the lower half of a woman. She was bending over slightly and was draped in an American flag, which was raised to reveal her naked bottom."

The text read: "INDEPENDENCE DAY CELEBRATION COME SEE OUR HUSTLER HONEYS IN THEIR STARS 'N' STRIPES GETTING ALL WET AND SPLASHED OUT IN OUR SUMMER HOT TUB."

Other attractions included "BOUNCING, BUCKING BULL COMPETITION ... FREE NUDE DANCES ..."

However, the exhortation to indulge in a patriotic celebration to mark US independence did not go down well with one reader, who thought the ad was offensive and unsuitable for a publication which might be seen by children.

Larry Flynt's Hustler Club UK (Croydon Branch) argued that "they took their responsibilities to the community seriously and made every effort to ensure their club, their services and their advertising were not accessible to children".

While accepting the nature of their club could cause offence to some, Hustler Croydon said the ad applied strictly to its event, and "was neither sexually explicit nor provocative and did not link attendance at the event to sexual prowess". The draping of the flag over the lady's bottom maintained "a degree of decency and decorum".

The ad would not be attractive to children, it argued, and appeared in a section of the paper carrying ads for theatres, pubs and clubs, and was therefore not likely to be seen by kids. They offered a verbal apology for any offense caused to the single complainant.

The ASA upheld the first part of the complaint, saying the ad was likely to be seen as degrading to women "by objectifying them and implying their bodies could be used as themed accessories" and considered it was not appropriate for the "Free Time" section of the paper. As such, it could cause serious offence to the paper's adult readership.

However, it continued, the placement of the ad in the Free Time section meant it was not likely to be seen by children, so this part of the complaint was not upheld. ®