That depends on how you wish to define victims. They are not the targets of sexism. When someone makes a “men can’t do housework” joke, it’s not a sexist joke about men but rather a reinforcement of the patriarchal (and, obviously, sexist) idea that men don’t do housework because that’s what women are for.
I didn’t, but I’ll have a look when I get home from work!
These remarks and advertisements are based on the patriarchal notion that women are ideal for these roles, not men. You don’t see Tide commercials with men competently doing the laundry or Fairy Liquid ads where the boyfriend isn’t doing a half-arsed job of washing the dishes because, again, society deems those jobs to be “women’s work” - a man would never need to be good at those jobs, because they’re not for him.
Men, like women, are victims of the patriarchy, but they are not on the receiving end of sexism.
I can’t speak for Kaitlyn’s perspective on the matter (she writes the lion’s share of posts these days) but my feeling - I’m Ben, by the way - is that sexism against women has a knock-on effect on men as well.
Women are the ones who society views as more capable of cooking, cleaning, looking after children, homemaking, that sort of thing. Men who are mocked for doing these things are victims of the patriarchy but they are not victims of sexism against men.
I saw this advert on the tube this morning and I thought it was really stupid.
I mean, when are they going to stop the “Real Stuff for Real Men” ads ?! And does it mean that when you’re not a man -or just not a masculine man- you don’t deserve “real” products, just shitty stuff ?
I may be pushing the reflexion to the extreme, but I’m fed up with these “Grrrr, we’re so tough and so extreme” ads for men products…
I always thought of it as useful because women usually have more skin to shave and I find it a pain in the ass to lather up my legs, so the soap makes it easier.
I don’t know if this works for your blog since it’s not about an ad itself, but I actually saw one (photo session, small one) taking place while at a scenic park, and- they experienced some difficulties from male pedestrians. It was just two photographers taking pictures of a woman posing against a wall; she was fully clothed, just standing dramatically. There were maybe three other people there to take care of lighting and a wind machine, minor adjustments.
There was also a group of six or so men, standing around and staring. They were in an age range of 20-40, with a group of four 20-24 year olds who arrived together and random businessmen/joggers who stopped and just stared at the woman. And they didn’t just stare for a few minutes; no, it was much worse then that.
See, the photo shoot was taking place near a relatively small lake; it takes about ten minutes to walk around. I walked around that lake four times. The men were there every time I walked around. By the second time, you could tell the model and the photographers were uncomfortable. Two of the businessmen/joggers left. The 20-24 year olds, however, had gotten closer. They had stopped trying to even pretend that their being there was a coincidence; they just stood around, right next to the photographers, just- looking.Some of them even pointed at the woman; as if the other’s couldn’t see “her ass” or “her boobs” despite their having the past twenty or so minutes to find them, and as if the woman herself wouldn’t notice them pointing.
On my third time around, I could see the photographers talking to the model in hushed tones; by the fourth time, they’d moved to the other side of the lake.
The men had followed them.
I don’t know what happened after that, but it’s still completely shocking to me that the men thought this was okay. It was like they thought she was already a picture in a magazine, and would be totally cool with them staring at her. They didn’t seem to notice how uncomfortable it made her, (and her coworkers) or if they did, they didn’t care.
I’d like to be that optimistic, but if they still have the same leadership, I don’t know if they’ll change.