Have you seen the It's Only Sexist When Men Do It video by TheAmazingAtheist? What do you think???
Well I wanted to give it a shot, but in the first 30 seconds he called the women who host “The Talk” cunts.
I know of his reputation as a sexist and no, I can’t stand to watch it.
What’s it about?
- Kaitlyn (narrow minded Kaitlyn home from 6 hours of work)
Re Men not being the victims of sexism, and how it is how the term is defined, Your example of men not doing housework is not the only possible sexism with regard to men and society. If the joke is instead,"what is the difference between men and bonds? Bonds Mature", your argument fails. You cannot say they are not the targets of sexism then, or that it somehow reinforces a patriarchal form. Immature men are not knowledgeable or powerful or decision makers as the patriarchal form would have it.
I saw a great thing about men and women - jokes like that are targeted at “men” while sexist jokes are frequently against individual women.
Immature men still have power, even over mature women.
Have you seen the new advert for Snickers? It's set in male changing rooms and there is a a 'nagging' lady who then gets told to eat a snickers, then turns back into a man. The slogan is get some nuts! ...
I don’t mind the ones where the line is “you’re not you when you’re hungry” - the first ones were of 20somethings acting like divas - Liza Minelli, Aretha Franklin - not sexist, especially since others followed with well known male actors.
But that is ugh
there was this one ad for the phones or something? and the mom and daughter were crying uncontrollably and it always annoyed me for some reason! thoughts?
Oh yes, I can picture it, though I don’t remember the brand (AT&T? Sprint?) which says that commercial didn’t do its job very well.
The mom is freaking out over her daughter moving out, even though she’s only moving to the other side of town. It is annoying, especially when we see that car ad with the dad who can’t let his baby girl grow up - he’s not sobbing, he’s talking normally, he’s just seeing her as a 5 year old.
But when a mom is worried about her child, she’s hysterical. You know, that came up in an episode of Leave it to Beaver yesterday - June wasn’t crying, but she was like, “Who is this Frances? What is she doing talking about my Wally?” while Ward was cool. That was 50 years ago.
The ad is playing with those same stereotypes and cliches.
and yes it is annoying - somebody crying and shrieking makes me hate the ad, why would you do that?
Re: "the vampires are a positive representation": One of the things that commonly distinguishes vampires from other monsters is that vampires often have the traits we wish we had. They're sexy, elegant, eloquent, and educated. (That's why their popular enemy is the werewolf, our instinctive and base nature.)
I don't know if its just me but when I see the male ad the first thing I thing is 'blow job'. I'm not saying you guys are wrong, in fact I think you guys are more then right, just wanted to add my two cents.
It probably isn’t just you, but I don’t think your reaction isn’t what the ad makers were going for.
And his mouth still isn’t the injured one, which is what I find most upsetting.
Dear Anon: The iPhone adverts feature only hands so the viewer can picture themselves as the owners and users of the phone, afterall, most people have hands. A woman being reduced to a sexualised body part, a body part with an obvious 'sexual function' is not intended to be identified with but to be 'used' and 'consumed' in the imagination of the viewer. This is dehumanising because women's bodies have been so fetishised they are property of the public imagination now.
"Because advertising doesn’t work that way." Isn't a citation or a source to back up your argument. You're attempting a "I'm right because I'm right" tautology and that's no basis for a point.
iPhone ads sometimes only feature hands. Is that dehumanizing too? What about ads for products featuring only a voice over? I'm more than a hand and I am more than a voice. Focusing on a part doesn't reduce one to a part. You'd only be reduced to a part if the ad implied that the rest was worthless.
Have you heard of focus groups? A company as big as Burger King is not doing anything by accident. However, this local flooring place whose ads are only on local TV… no, he probably didn’t do too much research. But he’s not a multinational corporation.
As for the iPhone ads, no they’re not. The focus is not the hands - it’s the product. In that BK ad, all we see is her INJURED MOUTH.
Voices and hands are not sexualized or treated as objects.
"Furthermore, they did not just “flip a coin” - they chose a woman’s mouth for a reason. They want us to stop and look at a woman’s injured mouth." So you have proof of this? How is your guess more valid than mine?
"And it would not have detracted from the message to show her whole face" Perhaps not, but the ad would have been more subtle. It only becomes dehumanizing when you reduce a human to a part. You must hate Apple ads.
Because advertising doesn’t work that way.
"It only becomes dehumanizing when you reduce a human to a part." We have her mouth and only her mouth - is that not reducing her to a part?
Apple ads? The dancing ipod ones or the “I’m a Mac” ones? I’m not following.
"As an image, it still bothers me. Why show a woman’s mouth and not a man’s? And again, showing just her mouth?"
Why does it matter? A woman's mouth is just as valid as a man's mouth. For all you know, they flipped a coin to decide or had a hodge podge of models come in and she had the most suitable mouth for the job. Additionally, they obviously only used the mouth because the ad was focusing on the sheer size of the burger. Just the mouth means the message gets across clearly and quickly.
Again, men and women’s bodies and body parts do not have the same connotations in pop culture. Furthermore, they did not just “flip a coin” - they chose a woman’s mouth for a reason. They want us to stop and look at a woman’s injured mouth.
And it would not have detracted from the message to show her whole face - reducing her to her mouth is dehumanizing and well, it kind of creeps me out.
You can show the bigness of the burger in many ways that don’t involve dehumanization.
If the BK ad showed a man's mouth instead, why isn't that sexist? because you're biased blabbering idiots. please.
Why isn’t showing just a man’s mouth sexist?
Blowjobs. That’s why. Okay? Blowjobs. We’re only seeing her mouth - why can’t we see her face? We have a woman’s injured mouth. And nothing else.
As for the blabbering idiot thing - nice ableist language, but yes, I probably am biased and I do blabber on.
A man’s mouth wouldn’t be sexist because we don’t obsess over men’s mouths in advertising and pop culture. It would still be creepy - I’m going to eat something that will injure me? And it’s just a fast food burger?
I respect what you are trying to convey through your blog, and being an advertising major I know I will have to overcome challenges such as selling sex. However I would have to disagree that the Virgin Airlines ad you posted is sexist. They convey both men and women being "suggestive" in an amusing way, a la James Bond-opening-credit style (which I actually think is pretty cool.)
But men acting suggestive does not have the same connotations and history as women doing so, especially when it comes to airlines. (“Coffee, tea, or me?”)