As a woman, it would be so simple, so neat and tidy to admonish creative legend Neil French outright for some questionable remarks he made while in Toronto for "A Night with Neil French". But that would be missing the complexities of the shit storm that followed his "women are crap" comment.

On October 6, while being interviewed by Mark Fenske and Rick Boyko of VCU AdCenter, French got a little fast and loose with his verbiage - perhaps as a result of the cocktails served to him by a woman in a French maid get up - that has resulted in his resignation from WPP Group and renewed debate on equality between the sexes.

Though I'd planned to, I didn't make it to the presentation - press deadlines being the burr in that particular saddle. But the gist of the furor is that French, in response to a question about why there aren't more women creative directors, reportedly said in his trademark bombastic style, that are aren't more women in senior roles because they don't deserve to be there, aren't equipped to deal with the job because they leave to have children and have a tendency to "wimp out".

While his comments could have been confined to the room of a few hundred, Ogilvy & Mather, Toronto creative director Nancy Vonk took to the blogosphere and spoke out against her friend French, rebuking his comments as out of touch and enough to make her question her approach of "taking the bad with the good" - specifically things like his old-school approach to "babes", as he repeatedly referred to women.

From there, a global dialogue exploded, forcing French to respond, at which point he attempted to clarify - albeit unrepentantly - his position by saying to AdAge, "All the reporting was out of context. I did not say female creative directors are crap. What I did say is that when somebody asked why are there so few creative directors, I said it was because they can't put in the hours. Somebody has to look after the kids. You can't always get what you want. You can't have it all... If you can't commit yourself to any job then, by definition, you're crap at it."

So what to make of this craptacular mess? Especially because it's not a cut-and-dry case of an advertising dinosaur making misogynistic comments. He is, but his words aren't without an element of truth. Women do have the very difficult task of choosing when and if to have a family, and have to face the realities of that choice.

On the flip side, successful women should be afforded the respect they deserve, which is perhaps where some of this controversy comes from - not so much the fact that French was spewing mistruths, but because he appeared to lack the sensitivity and esteem for his female colleagues, even if his delivery was for shock value and effect. And the truth should not, and cannot, come at the expense of respect.

In some ways we should thank French for being such a blowhard, if only because it's sparked some debate and a little reassessment of gender politics (throw in a little reflection on race relations for further enlightenment). And perhaps it'll remind people of another truth - ideas are paramount, no matter whose desk they come from. Care just needs to be taken to ensure everyone's getting a fair shake at coming up with those ideas.

And in the case of French, his biggest mistake may have been that he disregarded the cardinal rule of advertising: know your audience. Had he known his, he'd have realized, as Vonk pointed out in her essay that French calls 'death by blog', that he was knocking babes as being "slacker-breeders" in a town where there are nearly as many female CDs as there are male at the best known agencies.

Respect!
Rae Ann Fera
Editor