Print Page | Close Window

GE Millie Dresselhaus

Printed From: Commercials I Hate!
Category: The Message Board
Forum Name: Commercials You Hate !!!!!
Forum Description: Go here to voice your opinions
URL: http://www.commercialsihate.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=25180
Printed Date: 19 Oct 2017 at 12:41am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: GE Millie Dresselhaus
Posted By: sharonite
Subject: GE Millie Dresselhaus
Date Posted: 11 Aug 2017 at 2:35am


Something about this ad gives me the creeps.

Maybe it's because Dr. Dresselhaus is kinda sorta dead. Is that even really her?



Replies:
Posted By: GulDukat
Date Posted: 11 Aug 2017 at 3:46am
She died, yes.

I kind of like this one. It is melodramatic and the woman with the nose ring, memorized, almost in tears at the end is over-the-top. Still, a nice commercial with a good message.


Posted By: DarkRealmStar
Date Posted: 11 Aug 2017 at 5:42am
I don't mind this ad either.  It's a good message.  If only that was the brave new world!  They could lose the chick with the nose ring, or have her lose the nose ring, it doesn't bring any credibility to the message.


Posted By: Ad nauseous
Date Posted: 11 Aug 2017 at 7:09pm
This a very unique commercial. A well done "what if" about what could be in our society today. I Wish it was like this.

-------------
One good thing about TV-you could always turn it off


Posted By: PaWolf
Date Posted: 11 Aug 2017 at 7:34pm
I can feel a little creeped out by this ad, also. Probably couldn't get her permission while she was around, so they waited her out.
All these scientists!
I had no idea of who Millie Dresselhaus was before seeing this commercial and then doing a cursory lookup on her...*I* think they should make a commercial about ME.
All the kids would have a stuffed Wolfy...
 


-------------
X               <sig.nature>
"What we do for ourselves dies with us, What we do for others is and remains immortal." - Albert Pike


Posted By: Thor
Date Posted: 11 Aug 2017 at 9:12pm
So, girls would go into science more if they thought they could (or should) become celebrities as a result??
 
Is that what it takes?  Shouldn't they get into science because they like it or it's a natural proclivity for them?  Y'know...kinda like males do?
 
 
 
 
 
 


Posted By: DarkRealmStar
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2017 at 1:18am
Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

So, girls would go into science more if they thought they could (or should) become celebrities as a result??
 
Is that what it takes?  Shouldn't they get into science because they like it or it's a natural proclivity for them?  Y'know...kinda like males do?
 
 
 
 
 
 
No, the message is that society should idolize (I hate to use that word, because of the religious false idols thing), so, highly admire or venerate scientists who happen to be female, instead of putting on a pedestal the likes of Madonna (the [aged] pop tart, not the real Madonna), Britney Spears, etc.  You get the idea.  If women were respected more for being brainy than just beautiful on the outside.


Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2017 at 1:49am
The ad is based on a false premise, because male scientists aren't treated like celebrities either.

If you're a guy and you want that kind of hero worship, you have to be a college/professional athlete/sports star, a rock star or a movie star.

IOW, pretty much just like women.

Science is interesting, but nobody associates it with fun or entertainment or partying, hence the lack of excitement.

Science is work. People do it for a living and they come home after long days and nights in their laboratories or observatories, dead tired and beat just like everyone else who works for a living.

And male or female, there's nobody waiting outside their doors, screaming for their autographs.

This crap ad is all about making men feel guilty.

Typical chick sh*t!!!




-------------
Great news guys.... With the Air Hawk, flat balls are no longer a problem!!!


Posted By: Thor
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2017 at 10:58am
Also, I think women are largely in control of whether or not they become scientists, and whether or not they're idolized for being pretty.  It's not men buying all the clothes and makeup.  And it's generally not men going to see the likes of Madonna and Britney Spears.
 
But I don't expect that paradigm to ever change much.
 
 


Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2017 at 11:34am
Well, the "explanation" for that has always been that men are somehow behind the fashion and makeup industry and that men make it necessary for women to doll themselves up and do all the clothing and makeup etc, in order for us to be interested in them or to advance in their careers so male bosses will hire and/or promote them, etc, etc.

IOW, male dominated society has objectified women to the point that they have no choice in the matter but to be the objects they are expected by men to be.

Or something to that effect.

Maybe they're right.

I'm not sure I'd take seriously the findings of a female scientist who didn't look hot in a short skirt, big hair and spiked heels....



How could I possibly???

It just doesn't compute!!!


-------------
Great news guys.... With the Air Hawk, flat balls are no longer a problem!!!


Posted By: aka ron
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2017 at 12:14pm
LOL
http://www.cltampa.com/news-views/sex-love/article/20750498/top-10-sexiest-female-scientists" rel="nofollow - http://www.cltampa.com/news-views/sex-love/article/20750498/top-10-sexiest-female-scientists
 


-------------
Multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2...Say what?


Posted By: Jimbo
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2017 at 1:46pm
The gal in that pic could blind you with something else if your eyes were at just the right height and you bumped into her.

Especially if it was cold...



-------------
Great news guys.... With the Air Hawk, flat balls are no longer a problem!!!


Posted By: Ad nauseous
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2017 at 3:54pm
This commercial is well meaning, but has no basis in reality!

-------------
One good thing about TV-you could always turn it off


Posted By: DarkRealmStar
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2017 at 8:59pm
Well, its GE (General Electric) promoting their corporation and letting us know that they have women scientists and are not sexist and misogynist.  Wink  It could also serve as a recruiting/marketing tool.  Approve


Posted By: Thor
Date Posted: 12 Aug 2017 at 11:38pm
I wonder if GE is going to have to start setting quotas for women in their tech/science positions.
 
 


Posted By: PaWolf
Date Posted: 13 Aug 2017 at 12:16am
Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

I wonder if GE is going to have to start setting quotas for women in their tech/science positions.
 
 
WinkI think people have to realize that women generally mature two years ahead of men and that when in business, they're awfully successful as they think and reason differently from men. They make great scientists, programmers, policey peeps, and...well, you name it! 
I may joke about salary disparity but I have never practiced it and I have to admit the best employee I was allowed to work with was a woman. She accepted my job offer and worked under my trust and care for 10 years without ever really getting along with me - but she never needed to once she had a target objective. I'll also say I learned a ton from her.


-------------
X               <sig.nature>
"What we do for ourselves dies with us, What we do for others is and remains immortal." - Albert Pike


Posted By: Thor
Date Posted: 13 Aug 2017 at 12:57am
Originally posted by PaWolf PaWolf wrote:

I may joke about salary disparity but I have never practiced it...
 
Well, if you're talking about paying women an actual lower wage for the same job, you legally can't.  I think that's been illegal since 1964.
 
 
Salary disparity refers to a difference in the overall amount of money women earn, and is usually seen in higher-level jobs.  It has little to do with any actual discrepancy in wages.
 
 
 


Posted By: PaWolf
Date Posted: 13 Aug 2017 at 1:22am
Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

Originally posted by PaWolf PaWolf wrote:

I may joke about salary disparity but I have never practiced it...
 
Well, if you're talking about paying women an actual lower wage for the same job, you legally can't.  I think that's been illegal since 1964.
 
 
Salary disparity refers to a difference in the overall amount of money women earn, and is usually seen in higher-level jobs.  It has little to do with any actual discrepancy in wages.
 
 
 
ConfusedWinkI'm SO proud of you for knowing the law. So what? Why do you think many organizations have very wide grade bands with wide ranges in salary? I can have people working for me in the same grade band and be as much as $50k per year different. I can pay whatever I want and it is easy to legally justify via clay job descriptions and evolving skill set requirements. If I want to pay men and women differently, then toss in ethnic and racial segregation? SURE!
Don't like it? PROVE IT and, well...so sue me, bitch.
Do I like that nasty picture I just painted? Heck no - just telling how it is, like it or not.
Grade bands? They're there for Benefits and Management.


-------------
X               <sig.nature>
"What we do for ourselves dies with us, What we do for others is and remains immortal." - Albert Pike



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2015 Web Wiz Ltd. - http://www.webwiz.co.uk