Laugh or offended?

[MarriedDadOneSonOneDaughter]

I used to laugh at such ads in ignorance and innocence, but have been so sensitised to feminism that I now can't watch without thinking "I'm supposed to be offended aren't I?".

What do you think?

[fifi669]

I can see your point. I wouldn't be offended if it were a blonde bimbo type myself but others would be.

[Keepithidden]

Well, it's always (well until full social, political, ideological equality happens) going to be different taking the piss out of blokes compared to women.

The social context behind it all is what makes it different.

[Keepithidden]

Forgot to add, it didn't offend me either.

[ArmyDad]

Be as offended as you like. Nothing happens.

[Keepithidden]

Does anything even need to happen if offence is caused?

It's not comparable to a reverse gendered advert as the social context isn't skewed in the same way. It's more acceptable to take the piss out of men because it's not done day-in-day out the way it is to women.

Ideally, I suppose, this kind of advert should be fine (for everyone, I'm not speaking personally 'cos I don't really have an opinion on it!), no one should take offence because there isn't any of the shit behind it. Shame that Utopia is so long coming though...

[Panwearsrosa]

On one level, should be offended. But mostly I'll save being offended for other things.

[MarriedDadOneSonOneDaughter]

I think I'm getting the message that I shouldn't be offended because other men once held or still hold certain views about women so I, as a man, should just suck it up. Why?

Why should it be acceptable to treat men in a way that would be unacceptable for women? I don' get it. Is it that men now have to look forward to 2000 years of "payback" before equality can arrive?

[Panwearsrosa]

I don't think it's 'sensitised to feminism', it's a desire for a fair playing field and a right to not be subject to daft and damaging assumptions. Which of course you're right in wishing. I'm just too old and stupid enough to simply raise an eyebrow at the vid., even smile a bit, and get on with life. One personal panacea is to ensure "equality arrives" and remains in your own thoughts and conduct.

[Keepithidden]

Sorry MarriedDad, that wasn't the message I intended to send. I suppose my thinking is that adverts like that should be fine and dandy no matter who is being piss taken. So, if there wasn't any power imbalance then I personally would have no problem with either gender being piss taken (I guess someone, somewhere will be offended tho').

Unfortunately, there is a power imbalance and women having the piss taken out of them in these kind of adverts reinforces that. Men having the same treatment, by virtue of their privelidge don't experience those repercussions.

I don't view it as some kind of payback for equality, just a reflection of the current status quo really.

Anyway, all IMO so feel free to disagree!

[MarriedDadOneSonOneDaughter]

I grew up in an environment where topics such as ecology/environment, nuclear war fear, aids, anti-racism and women's rights were very dominant and persistent themes (at least during my teenage years).

I, and many of my male friends, are surrounded by women who are, to use the language, empowered and professional breadwinners. Many of them "supported" by their LATKHs (look after the kids husbands .... just made that one up ).

I am well aware that the wider world is still full of all sorts inequality but ads like these are a bit of a kick in the teeth to men who treat women with respect plus chivalry. I guess we're still in the minority so my question is what does this do for the majority of old fashioned out dated men. Doesn't it just give them ammunition to carry on?

[UrbanDad]

LATKH is good, but I prefer DARKLORD (domestic and rearing kids, laundry and other range of duties)

[Panwearsrosa]

Cool UrbanDad

[Panwearsrosa]

I think/suspect it's an advert that's been quite well thought out. 'Real men' don't eat yoghurt. Younger women do (sales and target audience research will have told them that) so having a joke about how younger women can laugh at blokes in a non-threatening way seems a good way to go.

[FunkyBoldRibena]

You are so right, it's not as if semi naked suggestive women are used to sell products any more is it?

[Keepithidden]

I grew up in a similar environment MarriedDad, I understand what you're saying. It does seem like equality is coming with the changes that our generationhas lled through.

I don't view these ads as a kick in the teeth, just a bit of attempted comedy by the Advertising folks. Not really to my taste, but then I'm not the target audience.

Re: Ammunition, yes I would agree with you here, it does give them permission to carry on, but that is only due to them not recognising the wider context. If they did they would realise it wasn't a value argument - apples and oranges.

[MarriedDadOneSonOneDaughter]

FunkyBoldRibena I assume that is heavily sarcastic!

DARKLORD - that's excellent. Take the menial duties and make them sound like an anti-superhero. Love it.

[MarriedDadOneSonOneDaughter]

FunkyBoldRibena

You point brings another issue to mind which is that advertising is dominated by scantily clad women selling products to women. And women buy into that aspirational imagery and buy the products. They continue to pay considerably more attention to their appearance than men. Much more attention than is necessary to be just "presentable".

And yet these unrealistic aspirational female role models are constantly blamed for female self-disattisfaction, eating disorders, image detracting from strength or intellect and early overt sexualisation of youth.

But it's women buying the products - clothing, fashion, makeup, etc.

Why is this acceptable too?

It just feels like no one is getting equality and we won't until we minimize the gender difference in all walks of life. Whether it's demeaning ads about men (rare) or objectifying ads about women (ubiquitous) people don't vote with their feet, mouths or wallets.

Doomed, we're all doomed.

[Keepithidden]

Loving DARKLORD, I hope you don't mind me stealing it UrbanDad!

MarriedDad - I think the point about women perpetuating the whole beauty industry is very valid. From the FWR forum here I think the consensus is that the belief systems of many (most?) women and men for that matter have been indoctrinated by the 'normal' patriarchal society, so much so that these industries which prop up such a society are continually nourished by women. A kind of vicious circle if you will.

Pop over to FWR and they'll explain it far better than I can if you want. The whole Feminism thing is a bit new to me.

Ultimately though 'doomed' is pretty much on the money.

[MarriedDadOneSonOneDaughter]

I wonder if solutions for the loop of female objectification and obsession with appearance could be broken by drawing on two extremes from other cultural norms.

1. Women cover up at all times and no public "sexuality" is permissible
   or
   
2. Nudity and sex are no longer treated as taboo subjects and we allow, encourage and accept nudity and sex in the media and public.
   
   I think 2 is where the answer lies. I have always found it odd that nudity and sex are such difficult things to show on TV or in Films and yet horrific violence, gratuitous killing and torture are just fine. Sex is normal, violence is not. We are normalising violence and continuing to portray sex as somehow more exciting than it actually is (for a third party). I don't think there would be anywhere near as much interest in porn if "normal" sex was an everyday part of the media - by that I mean sex in normal context, no matter how explicit, is fine. This would take away a lot of the "value" of porn.
   
   PS - I think this is an equally good place to discuss equality. No need to head over to the Women's rights section of Mumsnet

[Keepithidden]

Yep, agree. 2 is the way to go.

Discussing equality, yes here is as good as any. They're a lot more erudite than me over there though. It's a bit busier too!

[MarriedDadOneSonOneDaughter]

Plenty of this stuff going round too.

[profplump]

I agree with the OP. The ad is stupid and offensive to men - and I thought that independently when I saw it on TV and before reading this thread. I would be offended if women were portrayed in that way and men have every right to be treated with respect too. The ad objectifies a human being which cannot be clever or funny.

[MarriedDadOneSonOneDaughter]

Is it possible that the history and struggle for women's rights has lead to both a "backlash" against men and also a sort of overcompensation and acceptance by men? Clearly not all men, as there are plenty of bad examples, but the ones who this affects most will be the ones who have the feminist cause burt into them and will therefore be mostly like to be open to being taken advantage of or dominated by women, women who think they are championing feminism but are actually the wrong side of the line of equality.

[Keepithidden]

I suppose it is possible that a "backlash" and over compensation does occur. DW certainly believes the feminist pendulum has swung too far in the opposite direction. I tend to disagree with her on this point though. Society has come a long way in many respects, but the key features of modern society: the judicial system, moral standards, the media all display overwhelming misogynistic undertones. I can't really reconcile equality in advertising (using this example) while ignoring the fundamental issues that separate the genders.

Basically, advertising cannot be viewed in it's own little bubble, it has an impact on society. Ads like this don't adversely affect men at a societal level, the equivalent do to women. Equality can only exist in advertising if it exists out of it, which it doesn't at the moment.

I can see why people would be offended by both male and female versions of the advert, but I'm not personally. I also don't really have much of a problem with objectifying people, but only in a given context. The problem is people seem to view objectifying outside of the context it is general provided in!