Your donations pay for the CIH Forum hosting and software.
Please help the CIH Forums by disabling AdBlock Plus on this page.
Forum Home Forum Home :: The Message Board :: Commercials You Hate !!!!!
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Where's my whipped hubby?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Where's my whipped hubby?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
Author
Message
Skippy View Drop Down
Honor Roll
Honor Roll
Avatar
Formerly Skibibbles

Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Location: Smalltown in PA
Status: Offline
Points: 1450
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Skippy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Where's my whipped hubby?
    Posted: 06 May 2008 at 1:53am
 There was a commercial on tonight for "Sure Coat" paint rollers that shows Smart Mommy™ walking into her house with Smart Female Friend™. SM starts calling out to Dumb Hubby™ like a puppy, then after searching through a few rooms, he pops up out of a cardboard box with a stupid look on his face. She then shows him how to use the paint roller (Who doesn't know how to use a paint roller?). When she tells him to do the other rooms, he cowers away into another room. This has got to be the worst male bashing commercial I have ever seen. Dead
Back to Top
Sponsored Links



Back to Top
kat View Drop Down
Junior Executive
Junior Executive
Avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Location: lala land
Status: Offline
Points: 989
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote kat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 May 2008 at 1:56am
Grr.
I'm getting fed up with this. If it were the other way around, people would raise a stink and the whole thing would end in a lawsuit. There's still double standards but now it's the men who are trampled on.
 
 
 
 
 
I'd so be the coolest girlfriend ever.
madness fills my heart and soul as if the great divide could swallow me whole
Back to Top
Ad nauseous View Drop Down
Revolutionary
Revolutionary
Avatar

Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Location: Connecticut
Status: Offline
Points: 23629
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ad nauseous Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 May 2008 at 1:30pm
I was sad and disappointed because at first I thought she was calling for an adorable cat or puppy, stupid ad. Thumbs%20Down
One good thing about TV-you could always turn it off
Back to Top
Thor View Drop Down
Revolutionary
Revolutionary
Avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Location: Rockaway, NJ
Status: Offline
Points: 57867
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Thor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 May 2008 at 3:41pm
Sounds even worse than most commercials featuring couples.
 
Worse than this, however, was a Goodyear commercial in which the wife angrily (not just condescendingly, mind you) says to her husband "You're an idiot!!" after he buys the other brand of tire.
 
I'm used to the typical dumb daddy commercials---so much so that they don't even stand out in my mind anymore.  But the Goodyear one sticks out in my mind as particularly egregious.
 
 
Back to Top
shadow View Drop Down
Honor Roll
Honor Roll
Avatar

Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Location: Rhode Island
Status: Offline
Points: 5028
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote shadow Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 May 2008 at 4:25pm
remember poor raymond?  His nasty wife dragging him into the drug store, ask the pharmacist where something was and then dragged raymond away again.  I think it was the same couple where the poor guy was in line at the market and his wife starts telling people about his bowel problems. 
was feeling nostalgic
Back to Top
Thor View Drop Down
Revolutionary
Revolutionary
Avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Location: Rockaway, NJ
Status: Offline
Points: 57867
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Thor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 May 2008 at 4:51pm
Hey Shadow, is your signature from a Suicidal Tendencies song?
 
edit:  Just looked it up, and...yep, it is.  Wow!!  I haven't thought of that song in probably 25 years. 
 
I was in my room and I was just like staring at the wall thinking about everything, but then again I was thinking about nothing. And then my mom came in, and I didn't even know she was there. She called my name and I didn't hear her and then she started screaming “Mike, Mike!” And I go “what? Whats the matter?” She goes “whats the matter with you?” I go “theres nothing wrong, mom.” Shes all “don't tell me that! You're on drugs!” I go “no mom I'm not on drugs. I'm ok, I'm just thinking, you know? Why don't you get me a Pepsi?” She goes “No! You're on drugs!” I go “mom, I'm ok. I'm just thinking.” She goes “No! You're not thinking, you're on drugs! Normal people don't be acting that way!” I go “mom, just get me a Pepsi! Please, all I want is a Pepsi!” And she wouldn't give it to me! All I wanted was a Pepsi, just one Pepsi, and she wouldn't give it to me! Just a Pepsi!
 
 
I may have to buy this song just so I can yell back at the kid "Getcher own goddamned Pepsi" like I used to whenever I heard it.
 
Back to Top
violetlightning View Drop Down
Commercial Hater
Commercial Hater
Avatar

Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Points: 331
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote violetlightning Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 May 2008 at 8:44am
Originally posted by Skibibbles Skibibbles wrote:

 There was a commercial on tonight for "Sure Coat" paint rollers that shows Smart Mommy™ walking into her house with Smart Female Friend™. SM starts calling out to Dumb Hubby™ like a puppy, then after searching through a few rooms, he pops up out of a cardboard box with a stupid look on his face. She then shows him how to use the paint roller (Who doesn't know how to use a paint roller?). When she tells him to do the other rooms, he cowers away into another room. This has got to be the worst male bashing commercial I have ever seen. Dead


Eh, cry me a river. I've seen this ad, and it's just that the guy doesn't want to do chores. I don't want to do chores particularly, either. Why should that be insulting? And she's not showing him how to use the roller, she's showing him how much better that particular roller is. And then he leaves when she mentions that they have a ton of laundry to do.

As to the alleged "double standard", television ads are one of the few places I can think of where the "double standard" really may favor women. kat, it's great that you recognize it here, but you also have to realize that there are other areas of life - far more important than tv ads - where the dice is loaded, and women are getting screwed. (And I can elaborate if anyone wants me to, although I highly doubt they will.) But issues like the Wage Gap, Discriminatory Hiring Practices and Health Coverage aside, open a magazine and look at the print ads* - even in a women's magazine like Cosmo or Vogue, and you'll see that female-demeaning advertising is alive and well. Perhaps it's also important to remember where advertising was a few decades ago in terms of gender. There's a great collection of some old print ads here, and another collection here- they're not quite as bad, but there are more of them, so you see more of the pervasiveness. And beyond that, this is what is being taught in public schools today.

I understand that you don't like the ad, and you don't like the "women are smarter" themed ads. Perhaps part of the problem is the association I have with the "boohoo they're making men look dumb" line and some really ugly stuff - particularly these guys and their list of companies to boycott because of supposed "male bashing". (In particular check out their reaction to the Trojan ad with the pigs, although you really need to see the reasons they give for each company to see how nutty they are.) But this one is my favorite. They want to boycott the Body Shop - yeah, the make-up place** - because they . . . well, here it is: Earl writes "Boycott "The Body Shop" anti-male campaign. The Body Shop for many years has been supporting and solicting donations from customers to "Stop the violence against women". This attitude is blatantly anti male; not recognizing male victims of domestic violence, blaming men for all violence and condoning violence against men by making it a non-issues. Simply going into a store and telling the manager that they will not shop at the store sends a warning to the management. Please pass it on!!!" In their news section they gleefully report any time a woman drops a rape charge or abuses her children or kills a man, just to show that they are indeed victims. And they are, but they take it way too far. (Warning - don't read too much of this site unless you want a reeeeeeeaally bad headache. Particularly the comments sections.)

Well, that's all from the Annoyed Feminist® for now, folks. And kat, though I may be single at the moment, I'm not a bad girlfriend. I've been known to fold his laundry, mend his clothes, make his breakfast and dinner and bake him brownies. (Although not all on the same day.) Big%20smile

*there's a great little article about reading into print ads here
**Can't you just picture all the (male) Men's Right's Activists marching into the Body Shop and declaring "Violence Against Women? Well! You've just lost yourself a customer! I'm going to buy my Lash Accentuating Mascara, Pomegranate-Scented Body Shimmer Misting Spray, and Deep Cleansing Pore Refining Facial Masques at Sephora from now on. So there!" LOL Don't worry, Body Shop, I don't think you've lost any customers. Wink
Back to Top
Skippy View Drop Down
Honor Roll
Honor Roll
Avatar
Formerly Skibibbles

Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Location: Smalltown in PA
Status: Offline
Points: 1450
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Skippy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 May 2008 at 1:31pm
So you are justifying the male bashing in ads because the opposite double standard exists elsewhere? That doesn't make much sense. The whole problem that I, along with many others here is political correctness. How would you feel if the bashing roles were reversed in this commercial? Instead of the dumb hubby, you have the stereotype ditzy blonde woman, being talked down to by her hubby? You know the outrage that would ensue.
 
The underlying message that I have been trying to get across for years is this:
Just because it is bad to portray women or any racial minority as inferior to the white male, it is not any better to do the same to the white male. 2 wrongs do not make a right.
Back to Top
shadow View Drop Down
Honor Roll
Honor Roll
Avatar

Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Location: Rhode Island
Status: Offline
Points: 5028
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote shadow Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 May 2008 at 3:23pm
I have never understood why a company would try to alienate 50% of their potential customer base by insinuating that they are lazy and dumb.  Granted I wont be buying douches, but oddly enough they don't bash men.

good eye thor.  Sometimes the randomness in my head makes it onto the interwebz.
was feeling nostalgic
Back to Top
Thor View Drop Down
Revolutionary
Revolutionary
Avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Location: Rockaway, NJ
Status: Offline
Points: 57867
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Thor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 May 2008 at 3:41pm
Violet...when I see wives (and ads for wives) replacing windows, repairing cars, building homes, putting up fences, changing tires, chainsawing trees, laying drainage, moving furniture, etc., while the husband mocks the wife for not doing the task to his specifications a la "Oh, you silly little imbecile...don't you know that you need an auger to dig that hole?", then I might agree that the male-bashing ads are OK.
 
Don't you think that perhaps these commercials diminish the importance of husbands/fathers, and relegate them to the "expendable"?  Aren't you aware that there's a problem with single parenthood in this country (too many kids with no male figure in the home)?  Somehow, with the advent of feminism, this all became OK.  While I don't think such commercials have caused the problem, they ARE a symptom.  Kids in single mother households grow up seeing this sort of commercial, thinking that fathers/husbands are useless, anyway, so no big deal.  Kids in two-parent homes---if they were to accept the premise of such commercials---will see fathers as their peers (or lesser).
 
I'm surprised you would be offended by the website you posted a link to.  It's as if you think men should just shut up, and be the dutiful little women that feminists would like men to be.  Are men not supposed to have opinions on such things---or are women the ones who should be in control of what men think and say and do?  Why are women allowed to have say in how women are portrayed, but men aren't allowed to have say in how men are portrayed?  I read about the first twenty comments in the Trojan ad, and while you call them "nutty", I think most of them are pretty good.  Does that make me nutty?  Or is it just "nutty" that men would even dare to have opinions?
 
As far as the advertising in Vogue and Cosmo, whose fault is it that these magazines, and the ads contained within, even exist?  Men don't buy them, and really, no man cares how "volumizing" your mascara is.  If you find these ads demeaning, you only have your own gender to blame.  Once again, how in hell are men responsible for the magazines that women choose to read?
 
Oh, as far as the old ads picked and chosen for the article you posted a link to, don't you see that the male-bashing ads are the same thing?  You're outraged at those ads of yesteryear, but seem to think that men should just shut up about today's, and accept their role in them as women's employees/playdates for the kids.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Back to Top
violetlightning View Drop Down
Commercial Hater
Commercial Hater
Avatar

Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Points: 331
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote violetlightning Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 May 2008 at 5:45pm
Originally posted by Skibibbles Skibibbles wrote:

So you are justifying the male bashing in ads because the opposite double standard exists elsewhere? That doesn't make much sense. The whole problem that I, along with many others here is political correctness. How would you feel if the bashing roles were reversed in this commercial? Instead of the dumb hubby, you have the stereotype ditzy blonde woman, being talked down to by her hubby? You know the outrage that would ensue.
 
The underlying message that I have been trying to get across for years is this:
Just because it is bad to portray women or any racial minority as inferior to the white male, it is not any better to do the same to the white male. 2 wrongs do not make a right.


No, I'm not justifying it, I said that particular ad doesn't strike me as that bad (and I explained why), and even if it was worse, I say count yourself damn lucky you don't have to put up with that condescending nonsense elsewhere. This is a culture right now where no matter how accomplished you are professionally it's still the first instinct of both men and other women to look at you as a Female __________ (politician, executive, business person, doctor). Don't believe me? Watch some of the coverage of the presidential primaries. Things have gotten a bit better recently because of complaints to the networks and Reverend Wright having a psychotic break or a manic episode or whatever the hell that was at the NAACP, but especially at the beginning of this year it was completely ridiculous. And I don't particularly like Hillary Clinton. I think she's done some good things for this country as a Senator, I agree with her on several issues (not all), but I don't like the way she runs her campaign and I have serious reservations about the people she has associated herself with politically and financially. I didn't vote for her. I will in November if she's the nominee, but I'd rather not. So it actually bugs me even more that instead of criticizing her on legitimate issues, we have to hear endless babble about her "tearing up" in New Hampshire, how she "cackles", how "unlikeable" she is, how she sounds like "a nagging wife", concerns that she'll be PMSing and nuke someone (how? with a time machine? SHE'S 60 Censoredin' YEARS OLD!), and on and on. Not enough? Chris Matthews pinched her cheek. Really. And probably no one who will read this will think that's worth getting worked up over. And just to be clear, I was also really annoyed by the way older feminists were suggesting we should vote for her just because we need to break through that final glass ceiling. Gloria Steinem's op ed about who's more oppressed was stupid. Geraldine Ferraro needs to be put in solitary confinement. I have no desire to play in the Oppression Olympics - we've got more important things to do in this election than b*tch about who got the vote when.

Okay, I'll admit that women aren't routinely portrayed as dumb in commercials. A lot of commercials don't pay any attention at all to the fact that we have brains, or vocal chords. We're objects. Sometimes Literally. (Oh, there are more if you insist.) And you don't always notice it, do you? Most of the time it's a little more subtle, and you have to be watching for it. Because that's just the norm. It's the default setting.

Back to Top
violetlightning View Drop Down
Commercial Hater
Commercial Hater
Avatar

Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Points: 331
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote violetlightning Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 May 2008 at 8:09pm
Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

Violet...when I see wives (and ads for wives) replacing windows, repairing cars, building homes, putting up fences, changing tires, chainsawing trees, laying drainage, moving furniture, etc., while the husband mocks the wife for not doing the task to his specifications a la "Oh, you silly little imbecile...don't you know that you need an auger to dig that hole?", then I might agree that the male-bashing ads are OK.
 
Don't you think that perhaps these commercials diminish the importance of husbands/fathers, and relegate them to the "expendable"?  Aren't you aware that there's a problem with single parenthood in this country (too many kids with no male figure in the home)?  Somehow, with the advent of feminism, this all became OK.  While I don't think such commercials have caused the problem, they ARE a symptom.  Kids in single mother households grow up seeing this sort of commercial, thinking that fathers/husbands are useless, anyway, so no big deal.  Kids in two-parent homes---if they were to accept the premise of such commercials---will see fathers as their peers (or lesser).
 
I'm surprised you would be offended by the website you posted a link to.  It's as if you think men should just shut up, and be the dutiful little women that feminists would like men to be.  Are men not supposed to have opinions on such things---or are women the ones who should be in control of what men think and say and do?  Why are women allowed to have say in how women are portrayed, but men aren't allowed to have say in how men are portrayed?  I read about the first twenty comments in the Trojan ad, and while you call them "nutty", I think most of them are pretty good.  Does that make me nutty?  Or is it just "nutty" that men would even dare to have opinions?
 
As far as the advertising in Vogue and Cosmo, whose fault is it that these magazines, and the ads contained within, even exist?  Men don't buy them, and really, no man cares how "volumizing" your mascara is.  If you find these ads demeaning, you only have your own gender to blame.  Once again, how in hell are men responsible for the magazines that women choose to read?
 
Oh, as far as the old ads picked and chosen for the article you posted a link to, don't you see that the male-bashing ads are the same thing?  You're outraged at those ads of yesteryear, but seem to think that men should just shut up about today's, and accept their role in them as women's employees/playdates for the kids.


Okay, this is going to be a doozy. In answer to your first paragraph:

Or does that not count because it's from a few decades ago? As we all know, after thirty years any injustice is officially irrelevant.

As for the single parent stuff, I will never understand how feminism is to blame for absentee parenting. Sure, sometimes the father is out of the picture because the Mother wants it that way, or used a sperm donor, or heaven forbid is a lesbian, but I don't remember anything in mainstream feminism (not radical Andrea Dworkin nonsense, I can't stand her and her ilk) that says that it's okay for men to not take responsibility for their children at all. It's certainly not okay to be abusive, so I fully support women leaving those husbands and taking the kids far far away even if he never did much to hurt the kids physically.  And for the couple thousand kids who do not have fathers because they died in Iraq, or the World Trade Center, explain to me how feminism screwed the pooch there. And are these kids you're talking about supposed to not have uncles and grandfathers? Is there a Recommended Daily Allowance of Male Role Modeling that I should be aware of? And are you still under the delusion that there's just no such thing as a single father? Well, I object to the idea of those kids growing up thinking that women are beer pouring robots who can be purchased with jewelry and don't have anything intelligent to say. Because obviously if they have a single father there just simply won't be any actual women in their lives.

And let me get this straight - you didn't find the responses to an ad that promoted men taking responsibility and protecting themselves and their partners from STIs offensive or nutty? Not this one?
Imagine if an advertisement depicted women as COWS who are reluctant to use their diaphrams, or take their birth control pills?

Notice that when the guy TAKES RESPONSIBILITY for sex by going into the john and buying a condom, he morphs from being a pig into being an attractive if pussified young man ---

and, the girlie skank at the bar now wants him.

You know what, gentlemen?

Even the Nazis in WWII in Germany could not make better propaganda than this!

Not a problem? Pretty good point? And why should I be offended by this one?:

Let's get a commercial going for gags for women... we could show all the women as female dogs yappin' constantly at men, with men just plugging their ears. We could tell women that they need to evolve and wear the gags in order to be better mates for men. After all, if you're driven by an instinct to just yack and criticize rather than communicate and consider someone else's opinions and feelings, then you're an ignorant bitch right?

No?!

Because that's a fair comparison! I can't tell you how many men have contracted STIs because I just wouldn't stop yappin' about lady things. Not to mention all the men I've impregnated that way.

Female hypocrites and liars calling men pigs......is nothing new and does not dissuade me from throwing a monkey wrench in their misandric antics in the least since as you see men are VERY aware of the female/mangina anti-male shaming tactics. It's nothing but more attacks on male biology which shows just how stupid these women are.

Why even sit around creating alters just to argue over sh*t that men already know are lies? Get a life bitches.

I must have missed the day in biology that we learned that men have a biological need to engage in behavior that puts themselves and their partners at a greater risk for contracting diseases. How dare we ask them to behave in a responsible manner if we agree to have sex with them? And this gem certainly isn't nutty in the least:

The way I see it Feminism (which views men as the Nazis did the Jews - i.e. it seeks to destroy us) is our enemy. Most women are passive feminists, and when informed of the facts they continue to be passive feminists. A very large number are actively, publically feminist also (how many times have you heard a women wail "I hate men" - it's practically ingrained into popular language). Therefore, women, as passive or active supporters of feminism, are our enemy.

No, that's a completely valid reaction. (And no, this is not the same guy who brought up the Nazis before.) Certainly I believe that these men have every right in the world to say whatever the hell they want. And I have the right (even with a uterus!) to point out that some of them are, in fact, nutty, offensive, and even downright scary:

The problem is that the absolute majority of men are as blind as you are and don't see the real situation. In your spare time you may think about the following: had it not been for male feminists, what would have stopped men from taking baseball bats and beating out all the feminist crap out of the feminists' heads?

If there is any woman on this board who is not in the least bit uncomfortable with this stuff, especially considering the content of the ad that sparked this deluge, Please Post. And keep in mind how easily they slide back and forth between using "feminists" and "women". You might not consider yourself a feminist, but you're still the "enemy".

And Thor, I want to point out to you how you worded part of your post: "It's as if you think men should just shut up, and be the dutiful little women that feminists would like men to be." Yeah - who in the hell would want to be a WOMAN? They suck! Think about all the really bad (non-racial) words people call each other. How many of them are male-gendered? D*ck, are there any others? Now how many of them are related to women, or, like F*g, suggest that men adapt roles that are traditionally female, like sleeping with men? Unless I could say "Men just want us women to be Husbands and Fathers" and someone would automatically know that I meant "Men just want us women to behave in an incompetent, oafish manner", I don't think we're really even.  2 Wrongs don't make a right, and 1 Wrong and a Slight certainly don't mean things are equal. How many 527 groups are there that make fun, possibly with a stupid acronym, of John McCain or Barack Obama for being Husbands and Fathers? None? And yet we have Citizens United Not Timid going after Hillary Clinton because of her recent comments about her willingness to use nukes? Wait, no, they're upset about her affiliation with Mark Penn. No, that's not it. Gee, I wonder what their problem with her is?

I love that you think that any ad or publication that's geared towards women was therefore produced by women. That's not even necessarily true of "feminist magazines", let alone industry Mammoths like Vogue and Cosmo, which have been around since before women were allowed to vote (although Cosmo didn't become truly a women's magazine until the mid-sixties, that certainly doesn't mean they wiped out the entire male staff and replaced them). Remember supposedly-feminist-magazine Jane? As a mainstream glossy magazine, they had to push their "investigative pieces" to the same part of their magazine as Cosmo has used for it's bullCensored articles about "gray rape". Their "Jane Make-under" feature, where they encouraged women to adopt a more natural look? You'd be amazed how many neutral shades of eyeliner, mascara and powdered foundation they'd recommend to achieve that. Why? Because they weren't allowed to tell readers that they could or should give up their make-up, because they'd lose advertisers. And bear in mind, if you remove all the actual content from any of those magazines, literally rip out every page with magazine content on any part of either side of the page, you'll still have a thicker publication than TIME or Newsweek. And why is that? Advertising. Are you saying you think that any ad that sells something to women or appears in a women's magazine is automatically designed and produced by women? Because if you do, I'm afraid I have some rather shocking news for you. Now I'm not saying there's no such thing as female ad execs and creative personnel, but the leap from "this ad appears in a women's magazine" to "and therefore women are responsible for it and condone its message" is just patently ridiculous. If that were true, this ad, which caused a lot of complaints, would never have made it into a magazine where women would see it and be offended by it.

Well, I really hope you read this all the way through (and I congratulate you if you had the patience to do so), and I actually want to say thankyou, I've enjoyed having the opportunity to write about this. And I realized just how ready I am to start taking classes again. (And hey, if I do, I won't have as much time to spend on the internet having arguments like this! So it would be a positive for both of us! Smile)
Back to Top
kat View Drop Down
Junior Executive
Junior Executive
Avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Location: lala land
Status: Offline
Points: 989
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote kat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 May 2008 at 8:56pm
Originally posted by violetlightning violetlightning wrote:

As to the alleged "double standard", television ads are one of the few places I can think of where the "double standard" really may favor women. kat, it's great that you recognize it here, but you also have to realize that there are other areas of life - far more important than tv ads - where the dice is loaded, and women are getting screwed. (And I can elaborate if anyone wants me to, although I highly doubt they will.)
So knew that. I was just saying that this ad only does more to continue the tradition of, "well, as long as we're not offending women, who have suffered so long with being second-class citizens, we can treat men like total crap! yay!"
i know feminists are for equality for the sexes. i just think that if that's true they shouldn't be called "feminists" because that would mean they're for women's rights only, they should be called, like....equalists.
madness fills my heart and soul as if the great divide could swallow me whole
Back to Top
Hootman View Drop Down
Revolutionary
Revolutionary
Avatar

Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Location: Ohio
Status: Offline
Points: 8151
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hootman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 May 2008 at 9:01pm
kat, that's an excellent point.  You're wise beyond your years.
Back to Top
Thor View Drop Down
Revolutionary
Revolutionary
Avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Location: Rockaway, NJ
Status: Offline
Points: 57867
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Thor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 May 2008 at 10:22pm
Violet, just like that one article picked and chose the ads that demonstrated its point, I think you picked and chose some of the more extreme comments.  I don't think they were even all that bad.  However, the flipside might be how the Duke University feminists were absolutely giddy with excitement and ready for a weenee roast after those lacrosse players were first accused.  They seemed absolutely delighted at the idea of white men gang-raping a black woman.  Yet, when the truth started coming to light, there was no apology, and the women were nowhere to be found.  They even closed their website "to further comments" re the matter.  That's grrrrl power, for ya! 
 
Yes, men should take responsibilty and protect themselves, too.  But the fact of the matter is that women ultimately will bear the brunt of an unwanted child.  It really behooves them to do so, more so than it does men who, ultimately just have to provide child support.
 
Your longest paragraph makes me realize you missed my point about women's magazines.  It doesn't matter who puts out those mags.  If there wasn't a market, they wouldn't be published by either gender.  It's women who place value on the latest hair and clothing styles, not men.  Men may like how all that stuff looks, but, believe me, we were fine with last year's styles, too.   
 
You said:   "And Thor, I want to point out to you how you worded part of your post: "It's as if you think men should just shut up, and be the dutiful little women that feminists would like men to be." Yeah - who in the hell would want to be a WOMAN?"
 
The answer to that is---apparently not feminists!!  However, they do want men to be women.  Soft, sensitive, motherly, taking care of everyone's needs, happily cleaning the house, etc.  Somehow, they don't mind guys maintaining other traditional male roles---such as chainsawing trees (something I'm doing today).  The fact of the matter is that women do some things better, and men do other things better.  I suck at housekeeping.  No matter how much I try, at best, it gets a B-.  My property, on the other hand...
 
But if a man is better at housekeeping, and his wife is better at the outdoor stuff, that's fine.  But to insult the man because he doesn't houseclean well, is the same as insulting a woman because she can't handle a chainsaw.  Somehow, you'll never see the latter in a commercial.
 
And that's where my dislike (in an eye-rolling sort of way) of the hundreds and hundreds of male-bashing commercials lies.
 
 
 
 
 
Back to Top
violetlightning View Drop Down
Commercial Hater
Commercial Hater
Avatar

Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Points: 331
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote violetlightning Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 May 2008 at 11:38pm
Originally posted by kat kat wrote:

Originally posted by violetlightning violetlightning wrote:

As to the alleged "double standard", television ads are one of the few places I can think of where the "double standard" really may favor women. kat, it's great that you recognize it here, but you also have to realize that there are other areas of life - far more important than tv ads - where the dice is loaded, and women are getting screwed. (And I can elaborate if anyone wants me to, although I highly doubt they will.)
So knew that. I was just saying that this ad only does more to continue the tradition of, "well, as long as we're not offending women, who have suffered so long with being second-class citizens, we can treat men like total crap! yay!"
i know feminists are for equality for the sexes. i just think that if that's true they shouldn't be called "feminists" because that would mean they're for women's rights only, they should be called, like....equalists.


Some do call themselves equalists, but being a rather broader term it's also used by people who feel that affirmative action gives minorities an unfair advantage. (Which is not something that all feminists would sign onto.) And feminists worked really hard to get the Equal Rights Amendment passed, but they failed because people like Phyllis Schlafly were telling people that it would lead to widespread unisex restrooms and such. There's also the term womanist, used by black women who felt that the major feminist movement was ignoring the issues specific to their lives. But it doesn't really matter what you call yourself. I could call myself a purple-people-eater, and it won't change my position on anything. And to understand the reason the word feminist is used you have to look at the circumstances of the time it was first being used. The movement grew out of the work that many women did in the abolitionist movement, and the successes of that movement led those women to begin working for some rights of their own. At the time, calling themselves equalists or using the term equal rights instead of Woman's Rights as it was called before the word feminism came into use probably would have seemed about as inappropriate as the word feminism seems to you today. These first feminists were not really looking for total equality or any special privileges. They wanted to vote, they wanted batter factory conditions, more education, things like that. Suggesting that they were looking to be complete equals to men probably would have turned off many women at the time, to say nothing of the men. I wish I could point you in the direction of a really great book about the History of feminism in America, but I haven't found that one book that has it all and is still readable; I get my info from lots of different books, and they're not necessarily about feminism per se.

To be perfectly honest with you (and I don't know how old you are but I'm guessing maybe high school?) I wasn't too thrilled with feminism in high school. I actually blamed feminism for the fact that everyone expected me to go to college and have some sort of career. Personally, my goal in life - and the only one I haven't changed every other year or so - is to be a wife and mother. Stupid feminists, why can't I stay home and raise kids like my grandmothers? Well, turns out my grandmothers both had jobs outside the home - one of them is now in her mid seventies and was in the hospital a lot recently, and I was shocked to hear her say she couldn't wait to go back to work! And the other, although she's been retired for 20 years or so wishes she had been able to go to New York and work on Wall Street. (Mind you, that was around the time of that ad suggesting women couldn't even open their own ketchup to make dinner for their husbands.) I've been really lucky to have people in my life - and I'm particularly indebted to the men - who encouraged me to speak my mind (but always back up my statements). I feel very differently now. I know I can wear spike heels and nail polish and I'm not being anti-feminist. (And keep in mind, I'm not saying that any of this is how you feel.) And I also know that the feminist movement has done and is still doing a lot of work to make it easier for women like myself, when we do get married and have kids, to balance that with our jobs and not be discriminated against because an employer doesn't want to take the chance of hiring us, despite qualifications, because we might go and get ourselves knocked up. (I should also point out that there is no federal law requiring employers' insurance companies to pay for birth control, even though it can also be used to treat medical conditions. So no help there. Oh, and by the way, they DO cover Viagra.)

The idea of a feminist movement may seem outdated, but before I go, there's one little anecdote I'd like to share. In 2005, the director of the Office of Women's Health resigned in disgust because of the political influences that were preventing them from approving certain drugs. Her replacement was announced - He was a doctor who had been working for the FDA for years. What was his specialty? Was he an OB-GYN? No.
He was a veterinarian.
(They had to change their minds when word started to get out.)
I think I'll stick to calling myself a feminist - apparently someone in the current administration can't remember what we are, exactly.
Back to Top
J.R. View Drop Down
Honor Roll
Honor Roll


Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 1886
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote J.R. Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 May 2008 at 6:51am
Violet and kat make some very excellent points. I don't think I could go over each statement piece by piece, but I will say that I agree with most of it.

Personally, I wish advertisers would just go back to simply telling me about the product and why I should buy it instead of all these lame and desperate attempts at humor.
Back to Top
Yutolia View Drop Down
Honor Roll
Honor Roll
Avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Location: Владивосток
Status: Offline
Points: 2586
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Yutolia Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 May 2008 at 4:59pm
I agree with JR, Violet and kat - my equalist sensibilities cause me to think it's wrong to demean anyone or make someone else look superior based on gender, ethnicity, etc.
Back to Top
Thor View Drop Down
Revolutionary
Revolutionary
Avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Location: Rockaway, NJ
Status: Offline
Points: 57867
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Thor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 May 2008 at 5:28pm
Originally posted by yutolia yutolia wrote:

I agree with JR, Violet and kat - my equalist sensibilities cause me to think it's wrong to demean anyone or make someone else look superior based on gender, ethnicity, etc.
 
 
Uhhh--did you even read Violet's posts?  She has no problem with commercials portraying men as idiots. 
 
 
 
 
Back to Top
Thor View Drop Down
Revolutionary
Revolutionary
Avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Location: Rockaway, NJ
Status: Offline
Points: 57867
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Thor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 May 2008 at 5:38pm
Here's a quote from my favorite lesbian feminist author, Tammy Bruce:
 
"One of the goals of the Feminist Elite is to reinforce to women the idea that men are obsolete".
 
 
Back to Top
HollyRock View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
Illustrious Video Moderator

Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Location: Mass.
Status: Offline
Points: 2873
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote HollyRock Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 May 2008 at 6:10pm
Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

  Uhhh--did you even read Violet's posts?  She has no problem with commercials portraying men as idiots.   
 
I didn't get that.  I got that she didn't agree with the concept, and explained how gender stereotyping in advertisements, and elsewhere, has insulted women for decades.
 
Originally posted by violetlightning violetlightning wrote:

No, I'm not justifying it, I said that particular ad doesn't strike me as that bad (and I explained why), and even if it was worse, I say count yourself damn lucky you don't have to put up with that condescending nonsense elsewhere.
 
 
 
Let's try not to be boring, mkay?
Back to Top
J.R. View Drop Down
Honor Roll
Honor Roll


Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 1886
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote J.R. Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 May 2008 at 6:23pm
Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

Uhhh--did you even read Violet's posts?  She has no problem with commercials portraying men as idiots.

Um... actually I did. Nowhere in her statements did I see anything even close to that remark. At all. (I don't think she would appreciate you putting words in her mouth as well)

Frankly, I've got more important things in my life to worry about than if some moronic commercial is portraying men as idiots or not.
Back to Top
Thor View Drop Down
Revolutionary
Revolutionary
Avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Location: Rockaway, NJ
Status: Offline
Points: 57867
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Thor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 May 2008 at 6:24pm

She said she doesn't justify it, and then proceeds to justify it...or at least diminish it's significance.

Originally posted by violetlightning violetlightning wrote:

As to the alleged "double standard", television ads are one of the few places I can think of where the "double standard" really may favor women. kat, it's great that you recognize it here, but you also have to realize that there are other areas of life - far more important than tv ads - where the dice is loaded, and women are getting screwed.
 
 
 
 
Back to Top
Thor View Drop Down
Revolutionary
Revolutionary
Avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Location: Rockaway, NJ
Status: Offline
Points: 57867
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Thor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 May 2008 at 6:31pm
Originally posted by J.R. J.R. wrote:



Frankly, I've got more important things in my life to worry about than if some moronic commercial is portraying men as idiots or not.
 
Then run along.  You haven't contributed anything to this conversation anyway.  Don't you have other people's posts to complain about today?  Seems to be your MO around here.
 
 
 
 
Back to Top
HollyRock View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
Illustrious Video Moderator

Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Location: Mass.
Status: Offline
Points: 2873
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote HollyRock Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 May 2008 at 6:36pm

There is a difference between justifying and diminishing significance.

On a more serious and perhaps related note: earlier this week in Boston, a man was suspected of "acting inappropriately" with a little girl on the bus - which leads the reader to think he kidnapped her, etc.  It turns out that the child is his daughter. 
 
Let's try not to be boring, mkay?
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.04
Copyright ©2001-2015 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.