Lacasa Turrón Ad Sparking Backlash Over Gender Stereotypes

Lacasa Turrón Ad: The Holiday Controversy

A turrón advertisement from the brand Lacasa has sparked controversy this Christmas, according to a forum post. The campaign, reportedly aired on television and aimed at women, encourages them to enjoy their free time by eating turrón, prompting immediate rejection from groups who view the message as condescending and rooted in imposed gender narratives. The discussion, initiated in a responsible consumption forum, has evolved into a broader debate about the role of advertising in cultural wars and whether boycotting a specific brand is effective.

The ad no one has seen in full

The controversy began with a message claiming to have seen the ad in a village bar during morning coffee. The author labeled it "empowering" and "100% xqyolovalista," announcing he would not buy any bars from that brand. However, he could not recall the name. The community scrambled to guess it, suggesting brands like Suchard, El Almendro, or Delaviuda, while the author refused to name it to avoid giving it publicity. Eventually, after several edits, the name emerged: Lacasa. According to the description, the ad suggested women have less relaxation time than men and should spend those precious hours eating the product.

Television as a source of indignation

A key point of debate was television. Several participants joked that no one who matters watches TV nowadays, and learning about such things through traditional television is almost an anomaly. "Do you really believe that people who matter watch TV?" one wrote. The author’s response was clear: he does not have a TV, but the village bar where he drinks coffee does, and that is where he encountered the ad. The anecdote highlights a paradox: television advertising remains the main showcase for major brands, even as TV consumption plummets among certain segments.

Boycott, negative advertising, and the Streisand effect

The decision not to reveal the brand name divided opinions. Some argued that naming it was giving it publicity, while others countered that negative publicity is still publicity and hiding the name only protected the company. "If you name it, you create negative publicity, and that is the point," one participant noted, citing the ING Direct case with Iker. The discussion led to a classic debate on consumer boycotts: does avoiding a brand matter if the rest of the market remains unchanged? The implicit conclusion was that individual gestures serve more as an emotional outlet than a strategic tool.

Beyond turrón: cultural war in advertising

The turrón issue was quickly overshadowed by a broader analysis. Several messages pointed out that the ad is just one piece of a general trend: advertising, cinema, and media constantly reproduce messages portraying men as the problem and women as victims or heroines. "If it were just one ad or brand, the cultural misandry and the impunity with which women show disgust are deeply embedded in society," one participant wrote. The discussion shifted to the feeling that consumption has become an ideological battleground, with brands choosing sides to connect with specific audiences.

Alternative consumption and a return to local products

In response to the boycott, alternative proposals emerged. One of the most repeated suggestions was to buy honey and almonds directly from small producers in areas like Alicante or Albacete, bypassing intermediaries and industrial brands. This idea, though minor, connects with a broader trend of local consumption gaining adherents every Christmas. Others opted for humor: "This year, cider for the bagpiper, so Puigdemont and Zapatero get screwed," wrote one participant, mixing the turrón boycott with Catalan politics. The irony, however, did not hide a reality: most participants admitted they would eventually buy turrón from some brand, even if not the one targeted.

---

The Lacasa turrón controversy will fade with Christmas, as always. But it leaves an uncomfortable fact: a brand that generates millions during these dates can afford to alienate part of its customer base if it connects with another. Boycotts, meanwhile, remain more of an emotional outlet than a tool for change. And next year, another brand, another ad, another outrage.