KATIE Price has shown off her huge boobs and tiny waist once again whilst flogging clothes online – after her ad got banned for objectifying women.
Former glamour model , 47, put on a very busty display as she modelled clobber from JYY London following .
Posing in various garments in her kitchen, she asked enthusiastically: “So who doesn’t love a bargain? Because I love them,”; holding up one of the brand’s £10 ‘lucky dip’ mystery bags.
Katie added: “This is the kind of thing you can get in them. Yes, I smell everything because it’s all new.”;
The former , dressed in a series of curve-hugging outfits that highlighted her tiny waist and enhanced chest, kept up a cheerful commentary as she worked through the haul.
“I love these,”; she said of one pair of flowy shorts. “They’re like shorts underneath – great for holidays or going out. Easy to wear and to wash.”;
Modelling another colourful co-ord, she added: “Actually, now I do love a bit of colour. Look at these shorts. Even these have pockets in them. We do love a pocket!”;
Showing off a dress with a plunging neckline and cinched waist, she declared: “Look at the back of this! Gorgeous, just easy to wear, even with a pair of wedges.”;
The whole range, she reminded viewers, was available in sizes six to 20.
Katie’s video comes after her appearance in Diesel’s SS2025 campaign sparked outrage — and a formal ruling from the Advertising Standards Authority.
The included an image of Katie wearing a bikini and holding a handbag in front of her chest.
She as she showed off her body tattoos.
Her boyfriendalso starred in the Diesel campaign, posing as a waxer in a chaotic salon.
But the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) received 13 complaints that the ad objectified and sexualised women and featured a model who appeared to be unhealthily thin.
It was shown all around the world to over 100 countries, with Katie appearing skinny and dressed in a glittering bikini while holding up a handbag to cover her stomach.
It was first featured on the Guardian website on 26 March this year and then shared widely across social media, including on Katie’s own accounts.
Diesel said the ad was part of a brand campaign called ‘The Houseguests’, which was designed to challenge stereotypes and support diversity and inclusion in the fashion industry by reflecting a wide range of body types.
They argued it showed Katie in “an active and dynamic pose where she proudly showed off her body and the handbag.”;
Diesel added she “was well-known for her exaggerated appearance and larger-than-life personality and her large lips and breasts formed part of her curated public image. That exaggerated, eccentric and altered appearance formed part of the creativity of the campaign.”;
They believed the image was a “celebration of Katie’s sexuality and empowerment and was not objectifying, degrading or sexualising”; and further stated that Katie “was slender, she had excellent muscle tone and was not unhealthily underweight”;.
Partly upholding the complaints, the ASA said the bikini only partially covered Price’s breasts, and it considered the positioning of the handbag, in front of her stomach with the handle framing her chest, drew viewers’ attention to, and emphasised, that part of her body.
The ruling from the ASA said: “While we acknowledged that Ms Price was shown in a confident and self-assured pose and in control, we considered that because of the positioning of the handbag, which had the effect of emphasising and drawing attention to her breasts, the ad sexualised her in a way that objectified her.
“We therefore considered the ad was likely to cause serious offence, was irresponsible and breached the Code.”;
However, the ASA did not uphold complaints about Katie appearing to be unhealthily thin, and concluded that the ad was not irresponsible on that basis.
They said: “Her hair had been styled away from her face in a beehive style, in such a way as to elongate her face and her head was slightly tilted downwards which added to that effect, but we did not consider she appeared gaunt.
“None of her bones were obviously protruding.”;
The watchdog ruled that the ad must not appear again, adding: “We told Diesel to ensure their future ads were socially responsible and did not cause serious or widespread offence.”;
