Discover and share stories

of adventure, connection, and change making.

Discuss

  1. {{attachment.file.name}}
  1. {{fields.video_link.url}}

Ready to post! You’ve uploaded the maximum number of images.

Your video is ready to post!

Oops! Nice pic, but it’s just not our (file) type. Please try uploading a .jpg or .png image.

Well, this is embarrassing. Something went wrong when posting your comment. Care to try again?

That image is too large. Maximum size is 6MB.

Please enter a valid URL from YouTube or Vimeo.

Embedding has been disabled for this video.

{{c.errors.other}}

Posting comment...

  • Common Tater

    Some valid points - but basically this video is very confused. E.g. aside from a general critique one might have of the media alloting roles to all of us there is nothing per se particularly pernicious in the fact that "women are sexualised" in the media. Women have sexualities - they are not sexless drones. It is not generally helpful to conflate representation of female sexuality with sexism, unless one wants to build alliances with the religious right. Moreover, although at least some of the earlier ads you use are undeniably sexist and rather ridiculous, the experiment backfires with the 'reversed ads', many of which would be quite plausible as adverts. Where it isn't plausible this tends to be because the guy involved is too fat or stereotypically unnattractive. If all the male ads featured hunks they would not be too different to many of the ads around at the moment aimed at women and gay men. Such ads may be vaguely ridiculous but they are no more offensive anything else in the world of advertising.

    • Wayne Eusanio

      Wow, that was a good critique...and I didn't watch the video knowing it would likely tongue-tie me. Lucky for me it didn't have that effect on Common Tater.

  • luke.p.mansfield

    The most interesting part of any advert seems to be missed. The marketing work that goes into any advert made by any large company...

    This video makes one major assumption that the advert is made for a company by a company. With only control and manipulation in mind.

    The Truth is the adverts are designed to sell a product, they are design to appeal.

    Its not quite a science but there is a method. I myself have taken part in this process, and for the low payment of tea and biscuits. Yes my soul is cheap.

    The biggest part of any advertising campaign is the market research. After a board picks their favourite adverts they put them to a control group and a lot of times to randomly selected people from the street(this is where I contributed).

    The general public are shown a few adverts and pick their favourites giving arm chair criticism. The favourite advert tends to go on to become the one.

    I am also know the guy who does the T4 adverts in the UK he has to make four adverts a week and if he is lucky 2 get picked, if unlucky its back to work.

    The Consumer is also the biggest factor in any advertising campaign. And while the world like sex that is what we will want.

    As for the video, perspective can change what you see.

    You see a woman's hair being pulled, I notice that she is smiling. You see a diamond ring resulting in sex, I could see an engagement proposal resulting in a first night together...Search for the negative and you will find. Demand a sole explanation for the obscene actions of a few and you will find an excuse.

    Open your mind and you will find questions not answers

    P.S I actually found the alternative videos entertaining and comical, the girl replacing the boxer dude, failed though as she failed to fit the context.

  • gaara87

    I completely understand what the video is trying to say, which is nothing new.
    As a devil's advocate, i do have to applaud on the ability of all those people with deepening pockets to be able to play with subtle and sensitive emotions of the human instinct and mind to fill in their pockets even more.

    How do you make the mass understand that ripping yourself at the gym or getting a surgical augmentation is not the path to culturally/socially, non-superficially truthful acknowledgement and bonding? These advertisements serve their purpose, brainwash the person watching to buy the product, regardless of the consequences of what is being portrayed. So in a way, there are some conscience blurred extremely smart bunch of people playing master of puppets with a whole lot of blind people :)

    This does seem to be extremely true in an aggressively capitalistic and consumer driven market based nation.

  • Scott Crofford

    You're objecting to the wrong things if you think this issue is about sex in any direct way.

    The sexual objectification of either gender is questionable in value at best but it isn't at the core of what is causing this constant bombardment of sexual imagery.
    It isn't about sex, its about how advertising and marketing has stopped having anything to do with the products in question. Sex is just one of many manipulations you are being exposed to. Sex is just a particularly potent and political issue that serves wonderfully as an emotional distraction from the real practice.

    The first wave of behavioural psychology is responsible for this particular crime against reason. Specifically John B. Watson, who I admire but have a sore spot with over this.

    Sex is used because it has a very powerful subconscious effect that modifies our preferences, our decision making process, and drains us of our proper capacity to resist or ignore temptations that otherwise would have little obvious value to us.

    Beyond the issue of screwing with our already boggled minds to convince us to purchase more useless trinkets it probably has a toll on our very ways of thinking.

    Evidence from more recent research on behaviourism shows that over time a stimulus that is not properly paired with its source or outcome will fade. Experiments done attaching a fear response to a neutral stimuli highlight this. Once the fear causing source is removed the associated neutral stimuli eventually fails to bring on the response. The association lacking any proper reinforcement will fade away.

    But is this doing more? is constant exposure to sexual imagery that has no sexual pay off messing with the very core of how we respond to sexual stimuli? Probably, the question is just how much and in what way.

    Long term this method of advertising is somewhat self defeating. By observing and responding to our responses to such marketing they are influencing and modifying our reactions to the same marketing, it is losing its power because of over exposure. Like having too much candy, you get sick of the taste of sweet eventually no matter how much you liked it before.

    Question is, what other consequences does a reduced response to sexual stimuli have for human beings?

    • Joy Gallary

      ps. I don't think there is any risk in the near or distant future of women being saturated with sexual imagery designed for their seduction.

    • Joy Gallary

      Lets hope so ('it is losing it's power because of over exposure')... and good question re what other consequences result, not just of reduced response, but shaping of values and expectations in relation to sexual stimulation.

      Thanks for posting an intelligent, informed comment

  • Paul-harris

    Hi Peter,

    I dont believe that advertising is responsible for causing rape however it is clearly responsible for causing self-righteous people like you to produce idiotic reductive 'studies' on it. This is a grave issue that needs to be addressed urgently. Maybe that should be your next film?

    • Pete(r) Karinen

      Hey Paul-harris,

      Thanks very much for advancing this discussion in a meaningful, productive way.

      Although you were incorrect in assuming I produced this film, you were absolutely correct about my self-righteousness. How did you know that? Did you Google me or something?

      Please write back at your earliest convenience. You can also email me other fabulous film ideas at peterkarinen@gmail.com. I really need all the help I can get in that department, and you certainly seem like an authority.

      Self-righteously,

      Peter Karinen

  • Rory McCallum

    What a load of crap. No one is holding a gun to any of these women's heads to do any of this. So no woman in this video takes responsibility for their own actions? Do they live consequence free and just blame the big bad terrible white man for forcing them to do this? Not one woman was forced to do anything in this video that she didn't volunteer to do herself and no man has to apologize for anything. These women sure love the paycheck but when it comes to stepping up to the plate and say, "No I am not doing this because it's degrading to women." You don't hear one single peep. This video is a load of garbage, and no male I know would ever treat a woman badly or degrade her, and every woman in this video did this voluntarily knowing they were going to get a big fat paycheck in the end. I don't have to apologize because certain women want big boobs, or tummy tucks, that is their business, and the only kind of people that like stripper types are the dregs of society. Nice try at your male hating campaign, but I don't have to apologize because a group of jerks in history treated women poorly, and it's funny how women ignore good men, and go after the scumbags then cry when they are victimized. Things change in history, what was normal content back then, isn't acceptable now, and was is acceptable now, you would never see back then. Get over yourselves and stop your whining.

    • Jonas Willmer

      I can't believe you actually said this. Get educated and try again because in life you have failed.
      Things change in history yes. They change because people make them change not by devine intervention.

      Be the change you want to see in the world.
      -Gandhi

  • Lilly Le

    there are bias to this video. Firstly, the video only mentions statistics in Canada, does that mean the advertisements affects consumers around the world or just Canada?. Statistics can also bias depending on the data and the researchers' techniques. For example they mention the statistic of women having cosmetic surgery related alot in Canada might not be because of the result of advertisement but because the people their have the money to do cosmetic while in the third world countries advertisement that are consider as "sexism" does not affect the people at all simply they do not have the extra time and money for it. Secondly, the second part of the video where examples of gender roles reserves; the advertisements look ridiculous only because the models are the University students (whom have no modelling skills or the bodies to make the advertisements look better.) Lastly, the companies who did these sexism advertisement only do so because that is what the public would like to see; example they are selling beers, the consumers for beers are males so of course to make advertisement look appealing in order to attract consumers they would have females models with the beers.

  • SherryThomasWhittle

    I truly understand and sympathize with the over all arch of this message however, what most people who watch this and became outraged probably didn't even think about is the effect that these and other adds have on MINORITY women and men. NOT ONE brown skin face was shown in this clip. Advertisers don't even think about how NOT seeing yourself can damage the psychie of young and budding minds. Even the pics of the men don't represent my brownskin friends. NOT A SINGLE BROWN FACE! Not an African American, Native American, Indian, Hispanic...NOTHING!!! So, when I see this add and see the statics regarding the dehumanizing of women it just seems that this is a Cauasaian issue only. African American women can't possibly feel dehumanized in advertising because they're not even being humanized. tough i guess...

    • Caitlin OConnor

      These aren't all advertisements that ever sexualized women, just a sample, there are plenty of minority models that subject themselves in the same way, just open a magazine anywhere. But I think you missed the American apparel ad featured in the video, which was one of the worst. The model was in a swimsuit with her legs spread wide open, she was dark-skinned.

    • Lilly Le

      Maybe because the "brown skin" people doesnt want to take part in such advertisements/clips...

    • Mikael Bergström

      Well... I agree that there should've been more brown in the mix, but there was at least one non-white. 3:24. He looks pretty brown to me...

    • Ryan Lazarus

      This appears to be a Canadian video. It would make more sense if they showed African Canadians or Native Canadians, not Americans. Plus, Canada has very small amounts of non-Caucasians. It wouldn't make a lot of sense to market to a demographic that is insignificant from a business standpoint.

  • ikinone

    What a load of sensationalist nonsense.

    Spam a load of statistics and then claim it is caused, or even influenced by adverts. Correlation is not causation.

    • Joy Gallary

      haha ikinone you're funny. you think these guys just now came up with the idea visual media influences people's perceptions of themselves and each other in society? haha.

      • ikinone

        Where did I say that?

        If they want to make a point, they need to show evidence, rather than simply spamming statistics.

        Anyone else wanting to make this point also needs to do this. Since you seem to believe that is the case, feel free to link me a decent study on the subject. Or stop acting like an obnoxious child.

        • Joy Gallary

          since you pefer links i thought i'd better provide a link that mentions the studies on suicide and breast surgery. as you will note at the end the plastic surgeons point out there is no correlation between the implants and the suicide. maybe you will like that affirmation of your correlation is not causation. implants don't cause suicide, it's more like mental health issues cause negative self image based on unrealistic beliefs about body image gleaned from advertising and media, leads to breast surgery looking all the more appealing, leads to reading about other people getting it, leads to getting, and apparently leads to improved self esteem and increased libido, then after ten years unfortunately the good affects wear off... etc. end of sad story. so yes advertising doesn't 'cause' a person to get an eating disorder or breast implants, but social/cultural issues are never that straight forward are they. It's not like smoking causes cancer because it's mental/emotional/psychological not physical. http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Healthday/story?id=4508241&page=1#.UZR_3aLg2So

        • Joy Gallary

          this link is just to demonstrate the correlation is well accepted, again this doesn't explain how but is about a government initiative to do something to protect young people from image anxiety http://www.youth.gov.au/sites/Youth/bodyImage/actiononbodyimage
          There have been a number of studies that show women who get breast augmentation are more likely to have suffered self esteem issues and also mental health problems and are more likely to commit suicide (ten years later).
          With an understanding of how advertising works, what kind of unattainable images of women are likely to be seen and also the fact plastic surgeons advertise in the same magazines/shopping centres, and stories on models/celebs/ and their surgery choices are also popular in women's magazines etc. blaha blah etc etc it's not A here is an add B here are the negative statistics resulting from that add.

        • Joy Gallary

          something very specific to start you off (this doesn't explain the reason for the correlation but does support there is one), but really you could have done this yourself I feel like your mum or teacher "Negative media information appears to have been a persuasive influence on patients' opinions regarding their implants." http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8415958

        • Joy Gallary

          ok so you have to resort to labelling me now? thanks a lot and I think you are being quite rude I am nothing like an obnoxious child. As to providing links on a study it's not as simple as your request would like it to be. You could start reading about advertising and how/why it works, you might read up on semiotics/ cultural criticism - Saussure's decoding images, visual arts and film studies analysis would help, then there are many sociology and social psychological theories that explain how culture shapes our 'self' but you might want to stick tight to study of images in society as it is in depth at the academic level. So yeh, you only have to google it if you have an interest. As for the correlation with statistics, they will be meaningful once you have a grasp of the theories, examples, evidence, social studies on how visual media affects body image, perceptions of self etc. It isn't only academic theory it's also medical/psychology correlations eg. depression, eating disorders such as anorexia. eg. google: Why do women get anorexia? Thats a good topic to gain an understanding of how image consciousness can go very deep. Or just go to some interview documentary/or google studies finding out why women get breast implants. After all it's surgery that often has to be redone each ten years, costs a lot of money, tens of thousands, something must be compelling them. Why are they so keen to change their appearance? Where did they get their ideas about how they want to look?

  • Jason van Buren

    The first part of the video does a good job exposing the issue; the second part trivializes it. Taking the examples used in the first half and replicating them with goofy-looking men swapped in for the women originally depicted doesn't exactly "reverse" the gender stereotypes, though it is entertaining. I'd like to see something that examines more realistic or real world examples, such as the "Dominance. By Equinox" ad: http://bit.ly/equinox-dominance

    • Joy Gallary

      re "dominance" interesting image. . it's not quite dominance as the male looks to have free agency but is an interesting balancing act in more ways than one :)

      • smpkicksass

        what about porn? the domanatrix or shoe lickers I don't know what its called but I know there are genres of women dominating men although allot of them are somewhat weird but it would still be an example of women dominating men in media,,, well a form of media anyway no??

        • Joy Gallary

          yeh the female dominatrix definitely exists and is explored in a range of media including S&M porn. I'm not all up on this area but I'm sure if someone was looking for inspiration for art or film or an advert with a dominant female they could trawl the internet for what's out there.

    • Joy Gallary

      agreed Jason. I have never seen goofy looking women in this kind of role.

  • Paul Griffin

    Complete nonsense! Breast augmentation and tummy tuck increases in numbers due to adverts? Rubbish, more likely that too many people eat rubbish and can't be bothered to exercise, or even walk! Can we look at who is actually the loser here? The women are paid a fortune. And another undeniable fact is simply this, men are more visually orientated than women and hence more 'enticed' by a fit looking woman. That is backed up by the level of male v female porn - it;s just NOT the way most women work, they like guys in uniforms, we like women out of clothes, not in them!

    • Joy Gallary

      also, tummy tucks are often after childbirth... so you really are quite rude and ruthless in your observations. do you really think those numbers of women would be having surgery just because they aren't into fitness? Perhaps if you are into reality, you could make some enquiries about how many women with breast augmentation and tummy tucks go to gyms and jog ? there's some facts to find. liposuction on the other hand and stomach stapling, that is about fat people who don't exercise.... different issue.

      • smpkicksass

        no position on this as long as I don't have to see it, kinna queazy just thinking about it.

        • smpkicksass

          The surgeries not the women, im not a big fan of cutting folks open to tinker with stuff.

          • Joy Gallary

            me neither... or should I say, nor am I

    • Joy Gallary

      oh and breast implants have nothing to do with fitness, they are purely about sexual attractiveness. When men start having surgery in large numbers on functional body parts - the breasts are meant to be for feeding babies - then we will know men are really being objectified in society to the same extent as women. It is a competition for winning attention from people in general, and from the opposite sex. Men working on their bodies at gyms is nothing new, and it certainly isn't on the decrease even though desk jobs are increasing. They aren't doing it so they can life an axe easier, they are doing it to primp up for attention.

      • Joy Gallary

        oops typo.. i meant LIFT an axe of course... or an ox :) ... also some of my reply was in answer to smpkicksass... cheers

    • Joy Gallary

      All of those social observations you make Paul are based on the way people have responded to societal norms from our upbringing and that comes from our past not our future. Women are changing. Did you notice how many women went to the movie 'magic mike'? A whole lot were disappointed that it was not really about female desire and women were not really treated with respect. However, women went there in large numbers to look at guys stripping. If you also notice the advertising industry is beginning to take note that women also like to look at beautiful men and is using that as a selling tool, to get women into mens wear stores and looking at the merchandise, and even to sell washing powder. Good looking, fit, healthy men appeal to women. The other part of your argument about women and their attraction to men of high social status, well I think that criteria now cuts both ways. Now that women are in the public arena and in the work force men are also looking for women with high social status, earning capacity, successful careers. Power is intoxicating and money, among other attributes, like a uniform, represents power. A lot of men want a woman who is successful as an added status symbol to their own success, and, as many many men complain about supporting a family, they want the reassurance of knowing it won't all fall on their shoulders. The reason earning capacity has been so important to women in the past when identifying a good mate, and was inculcated in her as she was raised, is because women didn't have independence or earning capacity. They HAD to find a man who would support them and their children. It takes generations to change these ingrained notions. They are adaptive mechanisms and we are adapting. If you think the amount of male porn that exists is proof males are more visually orientated you are completely denying the fact public life has been dominated by men for centuries. Women weren't even allowed in pubs at one time. YOu also omit the information that a tradition exists of women offering sexual services to men (for money). ONe of the oldest occupations in which women have always been paid (even before there were really many options for a woman with no husband or family to look after her). We need to remember women were not considered intelligent or capable of having public status or career in our not to distant past. These attitudes are finally falling away as we have female political leaders, business entrepreneurs etc. There is also now emerging porn for women, and has been for some decades even if it is not anywhere near as much as for men (yet). Women are talking about these issues, on the internet and in their circles. Perhaps you could eaves drop a little? Change happens slowly. If you don't think women are visual creatures why do you think they spend so much money decorating their homes? AS forgiving and empathetic as they may have been raised, fed stories of female beauties seeing the inner qualities of beastly men, they are now more willing to admit, a man's personal appearance fitness level etc. matters a great deal. I think women have been ashamed and too oppressed to create a market for porn (and porn is an industry catering to those who demand it just like any market, women were not raised to ask for sexually explicit material - in the past) .... I think women are now quite vocal about their desires, and are eg. with Magic Mike audiences, making a noise about looking at the male body half naked and naked in public.

  • Justin Evans

    I love all these advertisements, they are enticing and provocative which is exactly the point. You cannot tell me all those statistics come from men looking at these ads which are in a magazines for high priced clothes.

      • Joy Gallary

        good point Annette. what is really needed is to focus on liberating women to the point where they choose to flaunt their flaws or objectify themselves, just as men choose.

    • Annette-superninja Davis

      well done you, go and get your cookie at the "who cares what this misogynistic douchebag agrees with table".
      you and your ignorance mixed with male privilege sense of entitlement and complete lack of empathy are definitely part of the problem.

      • Joey A

        I made an account just to reply to you, Annette. You say that Justin is the "problem" with his "misogynistic views," but the reality of the situation is that it is YOU and people like you who are the problem. Before anyone jumps on me for being a woman-hating super douche, by "people like you" I DO NOT mean women, I mean people who jump down someone's throat to berate and attack them claiming just cause without actually looking into facts first. Just because you are a feminist (which I admire and fully support), doesn't give you the right to shove your opinions on everyone every time they have a different view than you. People have different views, deal with it. If you actually took the time to look at the picture Justin was talking about instead of senselessly trying to destroy him on an internet forum, you would have figured out that he wasn't trying to degrade women, but simply make a statement about something that he enjoyed or found appealing (a high crime indeed). Nowhere in any of his comments do I see anything about degrading women, but I do see you attacking both him and men in general while completely ignoring the other side of the argument as well as any other argument someone tries to confront you with. Yes it is terrible that women don't have the same treatment as men in a lot of things and that needs to be fixed, but when people like you use aggression and venom to prove your point, all you do is prove to those that disagree that what you are saying isn't worth listening to. Claiming that Justin has no idea about the prejudices against women is valid, but as he is gay, he has probably faced just as much hate and equality issues as you (if not more). I'm not telling you to stop trying to get equal treatment for women (not by a long shot), but I am saying that you need to go about it in a better way if you don't want to come off like another jumped up cause junky who just likes to try and force their opinions on others whether they like it or not. If you want true equality in the world, you need to educate others about inequality and not make them feel like they are being crucified for not seeing what you see. All I want in this world is true equality for all human beings, regardless of sex, age, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc. Equality without the hate, violence, or media spin that gets put on so many important issues. If you want change to happen, you need to fight for it, but in the midst of the fighting you must remember that those you are warring against are human as well and are just as entitled to their lives, freedoms, and thoughts as you, whether you think they are right or not.

        • smpkicksass

          Very happy you made an account and decided to post that :D

        • Annette-superninja Davis

          at this point I do not need to sell my point so that people like justin who don;t find misogyny to be such a big deal find it easier to get. How dare you claim he might have experienced more prejudice than me? Is this a "who's-the-most-oppressed-one-competition?"
          I'm a Black Queer Woman whose single mum is illiterate, did I win already?! Or does Justin still win this one? Are you for real?
          Believe it or not, I've often been praised for my calm and fairplay discourse when talking to "non-believers" about feminism but as a human, especially one who's spent the week being groped in public places and abused in different ways by men I have my limits at times. I want change to happen but it won't be on Justin's or that of any man's term anyway. I do get your point but YOU should:
          1-refrain from telling oppressed people how they can "sell" their fight. I owe to no one to educate them, even if I want to express my point, sometimes I feel like exposing clear and cordial facts, some other times I just feel like showing people that I oppose their idiotic views.
          2- you should understand that oppressed people, Blacks, women, the poor have a legitimate anger that needs expressing and I'm the ranting kind of chick, and my friends understand it, they understand why and see how it gives me the strength to fight and I don't think I'm the only one doing this. the intelligent thing to do if you are the ally that you pretend to be or want to pass as, is to validate the legitimacy of this anger, see beyond it and NEVER EVER tell a Black Woman that she shouldn't be angry. I actually shouted the words in cap lock.
          3- stop trying to define what I "truly want" or what someone else truly wants. Right now i truly want men to stop mansplaining, I truly want you to get how making jokes about any serious issue is contributing to the perpetuation of the oppression it belittles.

          btw what pissed me off wasn't Justin's comment I actually replied to but the one before that : "I love all these advertisements, they are enticing and provocative which is exactly the point. You cannot tell me all those statistics come from men looking at these ads which are in a magazines for high priced clothes." this is what pissed me off

          • Joey A

            First I want to let you know that I am not attacking you, women, or anyone. I am simply trying to show you my views on the world and some of the many issues we face as a whole. Before I explain (that's explain not mansplain; we are equals, remember) more, I want to address a couple of your points. First, stop jumping on Justin, he didn't say anything about misogyny being good or bad, he was merely defending himself. Second, I in no way claimed that he experienced more prejudice than you. What I said was that it is a possibility he had experienced as much or more than you. I feel, given the fact that I do not know Justin or yourself other than what was posted on here prior to my comment, that was a reasonable assumption to make. It was not my intention at all to make this any sort of "contest," but you seem to try and warp most arguments I've seen into just that. You say you are fighting for women's equality and that you are just and above all of us, yet your status as a "Black Queer Woman" seems to be your constant go-to argument to try and trump any other viewpoint (that or creating words like mansplaining to try and demoralize your competition while simultaneously disentangling yourself from any potential future argument).
            I understand that I am a white, middle-class male living in North America and in reality have never truly experienced any sort of real prejudice and can't compare anything to it. However, I do understand that those problems are there and that they need to be fixed. I did not mean to tell you how to "sell" your fight; only to explain that aggression and spite are not methods that will win you support. And in the end, support is all any movement is ever about, is it not?
            I know that people have bad days and that there are times when others say something so stupid, you can hardly believe that they can even function enough to get themselves out of bed in the morning. When those things happen, you need to take a step back and look at the picture from another angle. You can't ever change what happened, but you can change what will happen. Instead of trying to demoralize or slander the idiot that misspeaks, try to explain your views to them. You never know, maybe you will show them something they never saw before that completely changes their worldview. Although you seem to think otherwise, you do owe it to the world to educate it in whatever ways you can. Without education, we have no progress in knowledge, and without that, we are nothing but senseless animals trying to satisfy our primal instincts and nothing more. The more people you educate about the issues, the more people will know they exist. Assuming the world is not inherently evil, once enough people know about the problem, there will be progress to solve it.
            Finally, yes, you are a symptom of the cruelty that fills this world, but so are we all. Even the fat cats on Wall Street that sit in their NYC penthouses counting their millions. They may not think about these problems as having any sort of impact on them, but they were shaped by those problems just as we are. Your situation is terrible and I am not trying to say that it's not or that you don't deserve to be angry. I would be furious if I was in even half of your situation, but the road to progress is long and already filled with treachery; why not make allies along the way instead of enemies?

            • Annette-superninja Davis

              http://mansplained.tumblr.com/
              as i said, I owe to no one to educate them, it is a choice only I can decide to make or not to make.
              You clearly do not believe that in my good days I actually take the time to phrase a cordial aggression-free reply to the hateful nonsense people post but it is not my duty neither is it my obligation. Just as this man and the others that side with his misogyny I have the right to express my opinion however I want to. I do not feel like the whole movement is at stake when I choose anger over patience, why would it be?
              something that happens a lot to oppressed people and minorities (although neither Blacks nor women are a minority on this planet) is that any individual action becomes a generalisation of the whole group.
              thank you for your advice on how to lead my fight. I see the good intentions but still feel irritated by the patronising tone you used and the fact that you deny me (with your "i-was-so-shocked-by-your-comment-that-I-had-to-intervene-to-defend-this-poor-innocent-man" message) the right to express my opinion however I feel like expressing it on the postulate that i'm hurting the cause... I do not consider this man an ally, neither do I intend to take any second of my life to "rescue" him, I just felt like telling him "hey, arsehole, as a white cisgendered male you're probably not used to a woman telling you this but I think you're wrong and you;re a dick, so get out of this debate on women oppression to which you've got nothing clever to contribute to.

      • Justin Evans

        Honey bee you should try to learn the definition of misogny before you try using it.

        • Annette-superninja Davis

          I re-checked and your praisal of ads that objectify women and glamourise violence against women + your condescending "honey Bee" that you're only using because I am woman are blatant symptoms of your misogyny.
          Like racism or homophobia misogyny isn't always acknowledged by those who are guilty of it. you remind me of a guy who told me "I'm not a misogynist, I love bitches!". Belittling issues that do not affect your life is also a symptom of misogyny.

          • Justin Evans

            You are an idiot. And just to give you your homework misogny is the hatred of women. The ad at 3 12 is of a sexy scruffy man which I find very attractive in that situation. I could give a shit about women in ads I'd rather have all ads be of men because I'm gay and that's what I want to see.

            • Annette-superninja Davis

              Yes I am an idiot and YOU are a genius. Insulting me doesn't make you a hateful person and the comments you make that imply how harmless those ads are aren't misogynistic...
              Misogyny just like racism or homophobia aren't always "active" thought processes. As I said your comments give away your apparent disdain for women= misogyny
              "i couldn't give a shit about women"= misogyny
              "you're an idiot"= I guess general hatred for other people
              "and just to give you your homework..."= mansplaining. Thank you I believe I know more on the topic of misogyny, discrimination in general and how to be a decent being in general than you do.
              have a good life, you are useless

              • Justin Evans

                You as a person are an idiot because you can talk so far past then point that your point is irrelevant. How am I supposed to know you at a women you are an avatar on the Internet of a person typing incesently on the keyboard. Also how dare you compare advertisements to how I am treated as a homosexual through law and everyday people. Get off your bleeding vagina high horse. Y

  • Ian Digby

    Excellent. Another pernicious gender role trend in advertising is to depict men as hapless, incompetent foils to a clever woman or children. You know, can't cook, is a bumbling idiot easily bamboozled. This undermining of family life is a bad thing.

    • Annette-superninja Davis

      yes men are portrayed as idiots but in the end gender based violences, hit women more, sexual assault hit women way more, and without denying the negative effect of these manipulative imageries women get it way worse. check rape and sexual assault statistics

      • smpkicksass

        so then it doesn't matter women get hit more so we should do something about commercials improperly portraying women but commercials improperly portraying men are of no consequence? somehow that does not sound like equality.

        • Annette-superninja Davis

          i'm pretty sure I never said or wrote this. I don;t see the problem with the single issue tho. As an activist I know how groups have to focus on a restricted number of issues, it is natural. LGBT groups focus on LGBT issues, it doesn't mean they deny that straight people have issues, Disability activists focus on disabled people's issues, it doesn't mean they're denying that able-bodied people have issues. why is there always a man to tell feminists "me me me, my penis counts, why aren't you talking about ME?"

  • Kevin FitzMaurice

    Now do the right and fair thing and do the same video about men as support objects in the media. Once men lose their social role as support objects many retire only to die. At a man's funeral you often hear, "He was a good provider." How about the other half of the dialogue? Or it that not politically correct yet? Be brave or be one-sided.

    • wererogue

      That's not the other half of the story. That's another facet of the *same* story - that predominant and stereotypical gender roles hurt everybody (but disproportionally women).

      • smpkicksass

        this site needs a thumbs up or like button so I can use it

      • Kevin FitzMaurice

        Yes, it is the other half and it is time to recognize it as such. Your video focuses on sexual roles not support roles. Men are most demeaned by support roles and disproportionately so from women. I understand this is not a current or popular view because it does not allow the blaming of men for every problem.

        • wererogue

          I'll start with what I agree with, because I think you have a reasonable point to make, but you're framing it in distracting antagonistic angry rubbish that's making a lot of people mad. I definitely agree that the support role that men are presented with is harmful to men, and disproportionally so - women are only harmed by that myth in that it reinforces the idea that women are powerless without the support of men. I also agree that it'd be great to see a video on that topic.

          However, my point was not that "media-presented support roles disproportionally harm women". It was that "media-portrayed gender roles disproportionally harm women". The psychological damage done to men by media expectations stacks up quite well against the psychological damage done to women by image expectations, but then you can add on further moulds that harm women: the pro-violence, pro-rape media, the myths of powerlessness, uselessness, women-as-objects - I could go on, and I'm sure others have the time to. Most of these empower men to retain powerful positions in society.

          Here's how I wish your comment had read:

          "Great video - women certainly get a bad image in the media. You put a bit in there about how media stereotypes hurt men as well, but I'd love to see a video about men as support objects in the media. Once men lose their social role as support objects many retire only to die. At a man's funeral you often hear, "He was a good provider." It's an often-overlooked part of the problem."

          • Kevin FitzMaurice

            Thank you for your thoughtful response. Yes, society does harm to both genders and profits from doing so. Yes, there is more harm done to women in some areas and more harm done to men in some other areas. However, in the most important area of all, existence itself, men are the ones who lose the most. It is men who are fodder for cannons in war. It is men who die in the mines. It is men who are left to die on sinking ships so women can escape. It is men who are on the front lines in all the dangerous and harmful trades, professions, and jobs. It is men who die working dangerous and toxic jobs. The percentage of women is next to nothing by comparison. There are other areas where men also have it worse, such as the legal system. You never hear women saying "Equal time for equal crime." Women are often given the benefit of the doubt in court and men rarely. Now come all the exceptions that women will use but hate when they are made about women's issues. Isn't it time to stop saying who has it worse and to work from both sides to end the problems together? Thinking and working for one side is just not getting the job done.

            • Mierte

              I have to disagree again! You mention it is mostly men who are put in the most dangerous situations, so women can escape, or live more comfortably...It is MAN who decided this, not women. Men continuously either discourage women and/or convince them they should not be in dangerous situations. Then men continuously convince themselves that they are the brave ones and this is the right thing to do.

              • Kevin FitzMaurice

                When I grew up all I learned was from women at home and in the schools. My father was away at work most of the time. It is women who taught me who and what men and women were supposed to be, not men. It is women who conditioned and trained me, not men. Children are victims. But adults are responsible and if adults want equality in society, then the first step to having that equality is claiming equal responsibility for society. Children want the rights and privileges of adults without the responsibilities and duties of adults.

                • Mierte

                  I allways seem to be in this predicament about my role in society...I am not a mother, and nor do I wish to be. Mothers with children have a better time at accepting this 'traditional' role, for obvious reasons. So forgive me for being at odds, but I can't help it. My job is dangerous and I am always willing to go these routes and its frustrating because I allways end up in a position where there are few to no women at all. So I guess I am one of 'those' women...Perhaps if all men had to go to war again, I would be 'offended' at not being able to go, because I think I would do a good job of it. But the exclusion of women wasn't meant to offend, it was meant as a sacrifice like 'doing the dirty work, and not complaining.' So I thankyou again sir, for this has helped me come to this much needed understanding.

                  • Kevin FitzMaurice

                    Congratulations. Showing empathy for the other side in a debate shows great potential for the ability to rise above the din of competitiveness and selfishness to a place of service to and fellowship with all of humanity. Your courage to do what is now called taking perspective is commendable. Peace be with you. We are all human. We are all children of God. “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.”—Galatians 3:28

        • Annette-superninja Davis

          this video isn't blaming men but patriarchy but i guess you can read it however you like it in order to fuel your antifeminist male-o-centrist views...
          do you also comment on videos about LGBT communities and complain that they don't mention straight people's issues?
          because that's pretty much what you're doing

        • Mierte

          Once AGAIN (with all due respect) another MAN, saying 'don't blame me it's not my fault...Is that what you call doing your job? making woman inferior in society. Or does it just help you along? Are the Arabs good providers too? They can't even look at a pretty face without thinking of rape! This awareness is apart of our consciousness and in some countries, they are in power, ruling populations. So yes I blame MAN for this pickle. They still get off on it, and it helps them while they work. PEACEFULLY of course. Sexual roles are parallel to "support roles" some dudes don't even like women on top in sex because they feel emasculated. The comments below mention the advertising companies aim more toward men because they SPEND more money. So women get left out when it's time to get the upper hand in a sexy ad. As a full-time-working-individual, who's 'out there' everyday, making money, I agree. Men spend more money on dumb things. and dumb things are toxic, that convince you to buy them again...The money that pays to generate these ads is toxic. Men bully women because they are toxic. So go out with your friends, eat more toxic, it's ok, no one knows!

          • Jaron Shim

            Wow, really? Did you really just stereotype Arabs as rapists? What does that have to do with anything about advertisements? And what exactly do you mean "Is that what you call doing your job." What exactly are YOU doing about this situation? You're here complaining that MEN are the reason for this situation, that women are so subjectively used in such ways in advertisements. And I absolutely love how you refer to men as "dudes." Great word of choice in your argument. Men aren't the only ones who spend loads of money. Last I remember, women do as well. So both genders spend money, therefore the issue is gender-neutral and should not even be pointed at a single gender at all. In the end, it's money that causes such issue in advertisements.

            • Mierte

              Yeah I was responding to another comment, that veared away from the video altogether...anyways

          • Annette-superninja Davis

            sorry i stopped reading after your racist comment on the arabs.
            The Arabs are all rapists? I had no idea! Thanks for letting me and others know, I shall tell my arab friends they have to get busy filling their quota of rape...
            Feminism shouldn't be stained with racism. White feminists very often alienate non-white women with their ethnocentrist views and their blatant racism as yours. Please check your privileges, educate yourself and stop making feminists look bad with your hatred.

            • Mierte

              I am a little surprised at the defence of Arabs...I have read about their leaders and the rules women have to follow...the term rape was meant as "when they look at a pretty face they think poorly of them...So they cover themselves up, it's apart of their culture...they are far more at war than I will ever be

              • Annette-superninja Davis

                I have read far worse things about white people yet it would not cross my mind to make a barbaric generalisation of "white people"
                their culture?
                do you know how many cultures you're talking about? which country did you have in mind?
                which religion?

                • Mierte

                  I was talking about the muslims based on the kuran. It is hard for me to explain, but they split the muslim religion in different sections of 'types of beleivers', (like protestants, and christians) and there are some Arabs in particular, who lead as a patriarch. They are especially (attempting not to sound 'barbaric') indifferent towards women. The kuran was transfered into all laws, so their court system is based on the kuran and the way their leaders interpret it, so again this patriarch gets a little funky.

          • smpkicksass

            Whatever the whole thing is a joke anymore, yes media treats women as sex objects yes women treat men as bank accounts, yes men are stronger blah blah blah. Either side is so tied up whining about the other side they are lost in ignorance. I cant tell you how many times I have had to sit and listen to a woman standing on a soapbox preaching about feminism and how all women's problems stem directly from men to see her call another girl a slut three seconds after or hear her crying the day after about how he boyfriend got tired of paying the rent and cleaning the house so she could live a perpetual life of girls night out pretending to be a princess. I couldn't count on both hands the number of guys I know that spent a night in jail because their GF beat the crap out of them with a golf club, frying pan, or my favourite lost her freaking marbles and tried to hit him with her car and they did nothing but still they spend the night in jail. on top of that the courts don't do anything its ok for a woman to hit a guy and in the morning when they phone there GF and tell her to take a hike there not allowed to go home because the poor woman that beat them shouldn't be thrown out without a place to stay, so the guys gotta find a couch to sleep on for a month till the woman he's dating gets out of his house and he can go home. Tell a single man you know a girl you could hook him up with but she's kinda fat and not necessarily conventionally attractive and he's offended. must be a horrible no good POS shallow man. Try telling a single girl you know a single guy you could hook her up with but he works as a gas station attendant and see what she does. Some ugly guy grabs a girls ass and its a rape charge, some ugly woman grabs my ass in the bar I don't like it either but there isn't jack all I can do about it Id get laughed out of court even brining it up. My neighbours just split up and the woman was the bread winner the last 5 weeks I have listened to nothing but women whining about how he could possibly have the gall to ask for alimony. I have seen women complain about sexual objectification and use it to there advantage in the exact same moment. I know guys that have altogether given up on women they don't even try and talk to them anymore they just sit back and hope that one eventually picks them. Wait while she writes out a list of acceptable criteria for how she will run there life because at least then they don't have to guess what they can or cant do according to her brand of feminism. The best part of it is the guys are not even remotely interested in or attracted to her there just willing to settle to avoid the BS.
            Gender roles are in flux and both sides are suffering to kevin's credit at least he voiced himself most men are so sick of it they don't even bother to participate, the more you sit and point the finger at men then turn around and say sorry we don't care about your issues or problems with gender issues the more men are going to sit back and say who gives a F@$&.

            • Annette-superninja Davis

              feminism blames patriarchy not men. even if patriarchy benefits to men the most technically a well-off white woman is higher in the hierarchy than a black man even if he's well off himself. Women with their internalised oppression enforce and perpetuate patriarchy. Most of the time it's the mothers who ask the daughters to clear the table and won't ask boys to do it, it;s the mothers who encourage their daughters to become self-absorbed shallow gold-digging people whereas they'd encourage the boys to develop useful skills etc... the problem is patriarchy (and rapists)

              • smpkicksass

                feminism at its core as the name implies is associated with women, when they run too far off the edge, ignore and undermine any issues associated with the opposite sex they jump back and spout out a bunch of BS babble about feminism being against patriarchy and not men that it in no way undermines men and that really its just the same as humanism .... Funny they don't use that title then? feminism is a title for women by women concerned with the struggles of women and with mens struggles only so far as they benefit the feminist agenda. Humanism favours no individual over another any argument under the title of humanism must come from a position positioning all people on equal footing and deserving of decency. I make time for people who believe in humanism whereas I generally avoid people who title themselves feminists.

                I once heard a woman say "anyone who says they consider themselves a humanist and not a feminist obviously does not understand feminism because the two are one and the same"
                To that I reply: chairman, fireman, mankind, policeman and every other word in the english language targeted by feminists in the past.

                • Annette-superninja Davis

                  why don;t you go and tell LGBT activists that they have to tackle issues that touch non LGBT people too.
                  Why don;t you tell Black activists that they have to care about white people's issues too?
                  why don;t you tell disability activists that they have to stop favouring their own struggle and become humanists?
                  you;re no humanist, you're an ignorant man with sense of entitlement who despite not actually doing anything to make the world a better place likes to criticise groups who struggle for their own causes on the basis that you are excluded from these causes. you're no humanist, you're me-centrist just like most white cisgendered middle class males. Luckily you're not all like this

                  • smpkicksass

                    .... I think you just spoke to a gay member of society (Justin Evans) and I think he told you he thinks your an idiot... I don't seem to have that problem. I have gay friends and I respect their issues but they don't try to consistently downplay or disregard mine or anyone else's either. you are complaining about advertising directed at men possibly created by men and pushing the idea that men ought to be held higher in hierarchy then women. one man agrees with you but then states that he has a similar problem facings his gender and your response was I bet you complain about black history month too and at the point I see no reason to look at your YOUR side not only undermining anything he said and belittling him but falling back on your ME-centric bullshit and trying to frame his comment as only his own selfish issue and not a gender issue effecting men as a whole. So I did it right back and look at you squirm around right now are we getting anywhere? NO? doesn't look like it. In the past gender roles and the social system were set it place and in equilibrium it may not have been right but for the most part it was accepted, when early feminists challenged it it was hard to look at such a system or roles as anything but favouring men and issues effecting women were for the most part considered only. This is not the past women can vote for the most part they have equal rights under the law unlike the gay community as justin pointed out. Kevin said it "Isn't it time to stop saying who has it worse and to work from both sides to end the problems together? Thinking and working for one side is just not getting the job done" Wererouge accepted his comment and agreed that it had weight and did not nullify the point that the video tries to bring up, lustinthewind did too and so did joy and now there is meaningful conversation between all three. when I berate your posts and opinions you don't like it and write me off as an idiot, do you think that your responses to any male input of "pfft whatever we have it way worse as long as rape or the glass ceiling exists who gives a damn about your issues?" will illicit any other type of response? you don't have to go out with a sign tomorrow and protest on behalf of Kevin's opinion or the issues he see's affecting men but you can at least take them into account. and for what its worth humanism is a better name how much of this BS would have been avoided under such a title do you think that Mierte would have tossed a racial stereotype into the argument so easily under such a heading? do you not think less men would be scared away from participating in discussion under such a heading or do you just not value there participation?

                    • Annette-superninja Davis

                      I do not care for men to participate in the struggle to get women equal treatment if the condition for these men's participation is to remove the "femme" of the name. the feminist men I know are way too clever for this kind of nonsense. "Men don;t need to claim or ask for a place in Feminism, They need to take the space they already have in society & make it feminist"

                      • smpkicksass

                        Men don;t need to claim or ask for a place in Feminism, They need to take the space they already have in society & make it feminist

                        "Men need to take the space they already have in society and make it feminist" why would they concern themselves with making anything feminist thats outside of there own causes ... I mean that was the point you were making with your earlier post? I think its fair to say that feminist men today are obviously men who are capable of taken an interest in groups that deal with issue not specific to men no? but your comment was that men ought to stay out of conversation that does not directly apply to them and if they do participate that they not bring up any issues that face men.....
                        so then men ought to concern themselves with making the space they have in society feminist to support your ideologies but they ought not concern themselves with supporting awareness for any issues facing men they should direct there energy solely toward the feminist movement rid themselves of any self interest and then what wait for feminism to take care of them?? you ought to respect our ideologies and support us but we have no obligation to you? you ought not be selfish but we will concern ourselves only with our self interest?????

                    • Annette-superninja Davis

                      FYI I'm gay. of course you see no reason to look at my side, you never did in the first place. My question about Black history month is relevant. If your so-called gay friends don;t try to talk to you about their issues it's probably because you are the self-absorbed bigoted ignorant that you are, or probably because you don't have gay friends they're probably just friends of friends or people you've briefly met once but will use for ever as your token gay friends in order to "win" conversations with people who talk about oppression but not yours. Because here, YOU are the one who needed to bring up his co-called oppression in the conversation as if it was an appropriate thing to do in a conversation about someone else's. Because unlike you I try my best to be a decent person I would NEVER for example comment on a video about antisemitism and try to bring the light on MY problems, but this is what you and the other thick guys do because as white cisgendered middle-class men that's what you feel entitled to do. I dedicate much of my time thinking of humans in general, not all of them, you for example, I'd have no time for your insignificant privileged existence but should you be homeless, disabled, trans, non-white, a dog, a woman, anything but a white-cisgendered middle class male, I would actually value your suggestions on how to prove my humanism. However my mind and life are busy caring for the environment, animals, homeless people, asylum seekers, victims of racism, children, developing countries, oppressed women, jews, arabs, illiterate men and women of all colour but just... not you.
                      I volunteer my time for these causes and always have and really don;t need a self-entitled white-cisgendered straight middle class man to define or redefine my contribution to this world and society or to tell me what I should do to be a good person in their views.
                      seriously check your privilege. stop mansplaining, stop telling rape victims such as myself that rape isn't a bigger deal than anything you will actually ever experience personally, stop trolling feminist videos, stop being part of the problem.

                      • smpkicksass

                        FYI you do not know me, you do not know if i am middle class, you do not know my friends, you have no information on my contributions to the world and you do not know that I am straight and I did not ask you to prove your humanism I said it is a better title for communication as it does not insinuate that any one gender is the victim and thereby the other genders issues can be held as less significant.
                        but please go on tell me about myself you obviously believe you know me. Or are you just lumping me into all the distasteful categories you can come up with because you don't like what I said.

          • Kevin FitzMaurice

            Nice job of missing every point I made only to repeat cliches that we all know already. You proved my point. The time to look at both sides is not yet upon us.

            • Annette-superninja Davis

              at the moment I see no reason for us to look on YOUR side any more than we already are. you;ll probably not get it

            • Mierte

              mocking me doesn't do any good either. So far there are two people who don't understand your comments.

              • Kevin FitzMaurice

                There is a duality that harms both genders. Women as sex objects and men as support objects. Both suffer. Both have issues both have problems. The problems of one do not negate the problems of the other. If we really want to change things, then we had better look at the total picture and face both sides of the problem. Focusing only on the problems of one gender will not fix the problem. Taking responsibility for the total social reality will do more than a myopic or one-sided focus will. No matter how clearly this is stated it will just be mistakenly interpreted as being against something. Perhaps the next generation can be detached enough to look at the big picture.

                • Annette-superninja Davis

                  boohoo, I'd gladly trade rape for financial extortion... wait a minute, I supported my boyfriend through college and never got a penny from a man... huh...
                  anyways... black people focus on Black issues, LGBT on LGBT issues, disability activists focus on disability issues, how about you go and meet these groups and tell them to focus on YOUR issues too. Yeah, what a brilliant idea.

                  • smpkicksass

                    You said it! black people LGBT and disability groups focus on there issues and of course feminism focuses on it's issue!!! which is the issues of women and not issues of equality between genders as they like to say. feminism has no interest in gender issues so long as the issues suffer the male gender.

                    Wait a minute I've never raped a woman and on occasion have stepped in to defend a women position..... so Im not a rapist and I am a man! go figure I guess men don't commit rape then and that issue is suddenly no longer significant just like financial extortion.... wait that sounds utterly stupid.

                    • Annette-superninja Davis

                      FYI only men can rape as rape is the sexual assault involving a penis, any other sexual assault not involving a penis is simply called "sexual assault".
                      well, as many women, (shall I say most women?) I live with the apprehension and constant fear of sexual assault. To what you'll typically reply that I'm paranoid but it actually is the everyday reality for many of us, going home with our keys in our fist in case one of the catcallers decides to follow us home for example. My experience is the same as many women, your attempt to deny it and belittle it won't change that.
                      sexual assault and gender based violence against women are a real issue, thanks for belittling it and bringing up your typical "what about me, me, me, me bitches!?"

                      • Joey A

                        "Only men can rape as rape is the sexual assault involving a penis..." Biggest load of crap I have seen all day! 1) I would like to know exactly where you got that definition as that is nowhere near how the dictionary defines it. Dictionary.com defines it as "1. the unlawful compelling of a person through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse. 2. any act of sexual intercourse that is forced upon a person. 3. statutory rape. 4. an act of plunder, violent seizure, or abuse; despoliation; violation: the rape of the countryside. 5. Archaic. the act of seizing and carrying off by force." I do not see the word "penis" anywhere in there, do you? 2) You obviously only view things from one side if you think men can't be raped. Go have a read here http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/04/07/four-women-wanted-in-alleged-sex-assault-of-19-year-old-man-in-downtown-toronto/ and come back and tell me that doesn't count as rape. Stuff like this happens all the time and all over the place. Sure it is not as prevalent as female rape, but it still happens. You are just further proving my earlier point of senseless aggression and poor fact checking simply cast to the side because of your war on anything that doesn't have to do with feminism. Please grow up and come at your problems with a logical tact if you want to be taken at all seriously.

                          • Joey A

                            Wikipedia is not a valid source and should not be treated as one, although I do see where you got your argument from this. It would make sense, but the wording of the law itself is already prejudiced towards one side. This law states "1-(1) A person (A) commits an offence if—
                            (a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis," There is no further broadening of the case beyond a male attacking a victim. There is nothing in there about females being perpetrators at all. You say that any female attack is deemed Sexual Assault (which carries a lighter sentence), yet they are virtually the same act. Why should one side be penalized more or less for something that is an atrocity no matter who commits it? Would you hang a black man for stealing $20 and let a white woman go for the same crime? I thought not.

                            • Annette-superninja Davis

                              the reason I know the definition of rape as I described it to you is that I volunteered at a rape crisis centre

                      • smpkicksass

                        are you high? I just did the exact same thing you did and you cant grasp that?... I'll help though :D

                        you: "boohoo, I'd gladly trade rape for financial extortion... wait a minute, I supported my boyfriend through college and never got a penny from a man... huh..."

                        (using a BS statement to undermine what kevin said)

                        me: "Wait a minute I've never raped a woman and on occasion have stepped in to defend a woman's position..... so Im not a rapist and I am a man! go figure I guess men don't commit rape then and that issue is suddenly no longer significant"

                        (mirroring the exact opposite of the statement to illustrate the absurdity of it)

                        you- Something along the lines of: How dare he make fun of my absurd logic, I refuse to take into account any opinion or question put forth by a male. (Even Kevin who actually didn't make fun of your ridiculous comment)
                        Instead I'll give him a discussion about my car keys, condemn him for belittling sexual assault when he does not in fact believe sexual assault is a trivial matter but was simply replying sarcastically to a dumb statement and of course then I will condemn him for his selfishness and Me-centric opinions! Because If i can succeed in reducing everything a male says down to selfishness then I can take his voice away and the voice of all men so long as they speak up individually in a poorly witted spin on what is essentially "ill just talk louder"
                        works great though this way I can stand by my assertion that I don't blame men , I respect there views and acknowledge that they too face issues I simply blame patriarchy and if you say something I don't immediately like or agree with i'll simply remove you from the category of men by addressing you as the selfish individual apart from the whole and continue on telling everybody else I respect men.

                        Nice tactics
                        cheer ;)

                        • Annette-superninja Davis

                          my tactic is to get men to understand that there's no room for their complaints in a conversation about female oppression.
                          I'm not sure why it's so hard to get

                          • smpkicksass

                            there is no room for issues facing men- and that to you is equality?
                            This is where the trying your best to be a decent person brought you?

                            • Annette-superninja Davis

                              if you choose to cut down the end of my sentence in order to make me say what I didn;t say maybe you can carry on making up the rest of what I'm going to say.
                              there's no room for their complaints IN A CONVERSATION ABOUT FEMALE OPPRESSION.
                              just like there's no room for a complaint about women's issues on a conversation focussed on men's issues.
                              e.g: me-The topic of today will be testicle cancer.
                              you- What about Breast cancer! why aren't you gonna talk about Breast cancer?!
                              me -because today we're talking about testicular cancer.
                              you- you're so selfish, only thinking about your testicles and claiming to want to be equal....
                              yes, this is what this whole argument looks like to me, but I guess your view point is radically different and don't see why it is annoying for men to demand their issues to be raised when a conversation is about women.
                              "me, me, me, me, me, me"

                              • smpkicksass

                                What if Gender Roles in Advertising Were Reversed?

                                Sounds like a discussion about gender roles. Don't see where it says only for women to discuss or for men and women so long as they only discuss the female plight? or maybe you feel as though your conversation was interrupted in which case this is a message board where all members are free to post, it is not like the guys who have commented jumped into a private conversation between you and a friend at a coffee shop and blurted out there opinion on a discussion that did not want there input. obviously you may not have wanted to hear there comments but this is not your website. you could start a blog though and just delete or ban comments that you don't like.

                                • smpkicksass

                                  hipforums.com has a lesbian forum that is strictly women, guys can read but any post is immediately deleted you could just post the link of this page there and discuss it without any opinions from men if an open discussion annoys you.

                • nica28

                  I don't think you've read any feminist theory or literature. Everyone knows that "both suffer." Substantive equality is good for everyone.

                • Mierte

                  Thankyou. I agree, yin and yang, good and bad on both sides, understanding it, and then taking responsibility for it. I don't know if any generation can really detach itself so immediately, but eventually, this might be trivial. In the mean time, I am looking forward to the ad portraying some hot dude licking from the kitty bowl and looking up to his Hot girl friend begging for ....something!

                  • Kevin FitzMaurice

                    No doubt the advertising is wrong and switching sides does make a good mockery of it. Glad we can agree on that.

        • Lust in the Wind

          You seem to be missing half of your own story. The demeaning support role of men goes hand in hand with the dependent role of women. The dependent role feeds the sexual role; if I cannot support myself I had better provide whatever is of value to the support giver, namely, sex and offspring.
          My intent is not to blame men, as obviously this system does not work well for either gender at this point in time. But could you kindly explain how having someone depend on you for food and shelter, essentially having power over someone, is more demeaning than feeling that you cannot support yourself except by being of sexual service?

          • smpkicksass

            Thats a cop out its the choice of the woman to trade sex and offspring for support she's not being forced too. thats the same thing as me crying about how the only reason I have a hot GF because of my job and my money. I don't HAVE to have the hot GF i could quit my job be a bum and take my pick from whomever is interested but thats the choice I make. In other countries yes this is true but here if you don't want to sexually objectify yourself to land a rich husband for support you don't have to your entirely capable of getting your own job or starting your own company to support yourself, are you still going to get the rich husband well probably not but thats life, Im sure the the kid fixing your car is a little heartbroken by the fact Hedi Klum is not interested in a grease monkey too.

          • Kevin FitzMaurice

            Men working themselves to death to support those who always demand more is also a problem. Men working at jobs that ruin their health and risk their lives is also a problem. Trying to deny one problem by claiming it denies your problems is not helpful. There is no question of their being problems for both men and women. If we only focus on the problems for women, then we may never solve the systemic nature of the problem.

            • Joy Gallary

              actually Kevin the answer to the problem you are talking about is equal pay and equal work opportunities for women. and guess who has been fighting and working to get that. yes. women. and they are working towards that now so the 'problem' you refer to is a woman's problem and a whole of society problem.

                • EmpoweredLioness

                  Annette and Joy, I have been reading both your comments and would like to thank you both for your effort and energy in responding to the ignorance. It still amazes me that feminism is seen as a dirty word and justification of why women are still subordinated exists. Patriarchy and male power wont shift unless it is challenged and transformed, so thank you both for doing this. Women remain subordinate to men in terms of status, property, income, and autonomy. So for all those people who continue to spread their ideas about men being hard done by, here are some recent facts and statistics provided by UNIFEM & from my Property Law class. Women bear a disproportionate burden of the world’s poverty. Statistics indicate that women are more likely than men to be poor and at risk of hunger because of the systematic discrimination they face in education, health care, employment and control of assets. Poverty implications are widespread for women, leaving many without even basic rights such as access to clean drinking water, sanitation, medical care and decent employment. Being poor can also mean they have little protection from violence and have no role in decision making.Statistics show that -men own 99% of the world’s property and women just 1%. Not to mention that domestic violence is a leading cause of death for women ages 15-44 and that is in Australia and the United States. I encourage all men on this forum and women to watch this: http://www.upworthy.com/a-ted-talk-that-might-turn-every-man-who-watches-it-into-a-feminist-its-pretty-fantastic-7?g=2&c=ufb1

              • smpkicksass

                even with equal pay opportunities and successful women men will still be desired for their socio-economic traits in the exact same way that men lust after women for there physical traits. It's proven poor women rich women they both place heavy value on the socio-economic position when comparing eligible men. same goes for men and physical attractiveness. Getting a high paying job may allow women more independence but it wont mean that they'll suddenly be satisfied with a man of low socio-economic status in fact they look for one of even higher status. Same thing with men change all the adds in the world shut the media down they will still put high value on attractive women.

                • Joy Gallary

                  thanks for the aqua sqaure.. easy to find your posts smpkcikaass... as your name implies you like to win obviously. I'm not here to win, im here to discuss. What you are talking about is the past. I'm here to talk about the present and the future. I wrote a long reply on this subject to Paul already but I think you will notice several things occurring around you... Men also look for successful women because success is sexy. Women also look for men who have sexy bodies because successful women have high self esteem and want an attractive man. Of course men will continue to put a high value on women's appearance. The more important point is women who have the means to support themselves can now look for other traits in their man. Women with public influence, money to spend and the vote can also influence markets and policies. They have the power to create in society a reflection of their desires the way men do and have. Women may have bought home wares since the 1950s and shopped in department stores for nice clothes since the turn of the century, but we are seeing a new era of women shopping for their sexual desires, and they are personal as well as political.

                  • smpkicksass

                    Ya I know, I already wrote a reply earlier to the post for paul but I must have messed something up because it did not go up on the board, probably hit the wrong button. my name really doesn't imply anything it was my first e-mail address because it was easy to remember I was into dirt bikes then and SMP made dirt bike apparel think I was 14 still easy to remember though. Anyways of the posts I have read yours seem the most intelligent to me I mean you no offence and in allot of them I agree with you. my only point is the moment a guy brings up any issue effecting men he gets slammed and told to doddle off. its all good stuff but you cant speak of gender equality and have one gender represent both. yes men may be the "empowered" women the disadvantaged in open society but any new ideas will come out of discussion and if those forums represent only one gender the other will simply dismiss it. then we hear that feminism represents equality and a forum to discuss gender issues for both men and women... doesnt seem like it. when I say humanism instead of feminism the title takes no favours. right now feminism represents men in discussion only when it sees fit. Husband stays at home and feeds the baby while wife pursues goal of being a CEO of a prestigious company "why what a fine example of a feminist man" Man says I understand women are objectified sexually and think its a shame but at the same time why does no one care to I talk to about women using men for money or other things that I are unfair and inhuman? or my wife beats me then you get "pffft doddle off somewhere else and complain about your imagined issues were here to empower women not matriarchic swine"
                    I am talking about the future and not the past I think its time feminism moved toward humanism where all issues can be presented either that or a male counterpart to feminism to address gender issues experienced by men and represent the male point of view. For crying out loud Im reading feminist books about the "new masculinity" where women layout the framework for what masculinity must mean in the future with no input from men outside of those that fit their criteria "I dont want to be strong or tuff i just want to talk about my feelings and play barbies, the only time I have a right to look at a provocatively dressed woman is when she tells me so till then I should look at my shoes and hate that part of myself" and then four hours of feminist screaming let the boy play with barbies!!!! lol fine but where us the other side did every man out there say playing with dolls and talking about feelings is the new masculinity.... probably not but then there opinions and issues were not looked at because they didn't fit that brand of feminisms bill. women didn't like it when men laid out their idea of what femininity ought to be and handed it over to women. women can vote, the can participate in politics, they can own land, they can choose sexual partners for themselves, they can get married, they can get divorced the next day. Big strides have been made in equality. But there is nothing in place to deal with issues arising for men concerning the changes they have no forum. Couple years ago I heard about a boy getting beat up at school by a girl a few years his senior he asked his friend what to do should he fight back "no boys cant hit girls back, I have $40 though we can pay a bigger girl to beat the crap out of her" at the time I laughed but that was the avenue they took.... stupid???

                    • Joy Gallary

                      As far as bullying in school goes I detest it and from my experience very little is done about it full stop. My son was told off by the PE teacher at his high school, who was also the conflict resolution/bulllying someone or other, because I beeped my car horn and waved at the guy who was leader of a bunch of guys who went around bullying kids including my son, egging our house etc. So the PE teacher told my son I was provoking the bully because I smiled and waved. All I was saying is "i know who you are mate". Because I had tried to chase him several times after he and others egged our house, but with them on skateboards and bikes and me on foot .. yeh well, they always got away little bastards. I should'v gone and spoken to their parents but then that turns into an even bigger can of worms doesn't it. To find out the homes these kids come from adds complexity we sometimes don't want to know about. We want to say my kid is good and these kids are bad. But if we go over there maybe we discover the kid is ill treated by his parents. Maybe they have A and D issues etc. This point leads into your rave about mens issues above. Firstly there are forums, and there are studies into masculinity that are not feminist. Secondly feminism is the very thing that is alleviating the need for women to rely on men financially so why is it men who feel unjustly treated by having to be providers are bagging feminism as it's cause? It isn't anything to do with feminism when women rely on men for money. Nothing at all. Everything women do isn't feminism. Secondly, there have always been people who have used other people. Men have also used women of wealth for money. Not because they had no earning capacity, but because they could. Usery is not a gender issue. It may complicate gender relations but it's not an issue of gender. A man or a woman can use the other for sex, money, comfort, reassurance, spreading seed or having a child, boosting their ego etc. People can use their friends for all manner of reasons. For their car, their pool, their parties, their holiday home. etc. Usery really is just a sad human behaviour the same as bullying is.... As for the issue of the 'gaze' the 'scopophilic drive' I for one am not expecting men to stop looking at women as desirable. Nor do I expect women to stop trying to look desirable. It's never going to happen. But I do expect men, and see men, making more effort, though some always have, to look desirable themselves. I do hope and expect women to not be ashamed to act in the same way, that is, to have films, images, art, tv shows, porn, that is designed for and from the perspective of a woman's gaze rather than a man's, straight or gay. When I have discussed this with some women they say they feel it's wrong to objectify men and say it's not the way forward. This disappoints me sometimes as I don't see it as optional. Objectification of women happens, and will continue and will not go away just because there are gender studies papers and clinical studies that show it has negative affects. It's market driven, it's arts driven. That is, creative men with money and power to invest in film will make films that gaze at women. Women will make money from being gazed upon. But, as I said before, the increase in female perspectives (in visual media, not just perpetuating objectification of women, as many women do this) but from the perspective of women with agency... this will increase as women influence the market more. I don't think that is altogether bad at all. Not all objectification is evil. I think, when it balances out and women stop crying victim... when they wake up to their options, when men have been objectified for long enough that they feel a twinge when they see images of amazing looking male faces and bodies bombarding them all day long from every form of media... then...I don't know, maybe we will be able to have a different discussion with both sides having more understanding. It'l take a while so I'm sure by this time women will also have more financial independence. There are sooooo many childcare, nanny, day care, etc. jobs advertised all the time it is obvious more and more women are out working. As for the issue of how should women behave or how should men behave...? I don't think we will be able to dictate that to anyone. Personally, I don't need to be crass about the way I view men for pleasure. I wish men wouldn't be crass either. I wish they wouldn't harass women as though they had a right to comment on every part of her body. I hope women don't wind up behaving like that towards men, but maybe they will. ON women and violence... no one is immune to criminal behaviour and damaged women do some horrific things. Studies have shown young girls from low socio economic backgrounds joining male gangs and whilst they may not be allowed to participate in some of the activities with the guys, and even though they usually do not stay with the gang past teenage years, the attraction to the power of violence is scary. The study showed that when simple assault was dealt with more severely by the law, and reporting of simple assault increased, there was evidence to show young women were involved a lot more often than expected. This was in a troubled area with a lot of family problems etc. Women and girls were still very very low on the stats for aggravated assault/assault with a weapon, and other organised crime, but the issue of girl's and gangs, and assault charges was still cause for concern. One theory by legal/police experts was that mothers were having difficult teenage daughters brought in and charged for hitting them (hitting their mothers that is). When you go into the territory of domestic and family violence, rape and violence against women, it just isn't something I am into discussing at the moment, sorry. But one thing that really stuck to me the other day was when I was listening to an African social worker talk all about how they wanted to treat their domestic violence issues (this is for migrants) as an African problem. The reason things had become violent was that the women were finding jobs and settling more quickly than the men. This created conflict over money and escalated in severity leading to assault. Women turned to the police for protection and many in the African community saw that as wrong because they like to settle things by looking at both sides of the argument. These issues are very difficult, thorny, and I don't think we can discuss them here. cheers.

                      • smpkicksass

                        I like you ... any I think you need a bike or a skate board :D

                        • Joy Gallary

                          haha ha! well I don't think I would'v caught a bunch of 15 y/o boys on a skateboard that is a laff... I could have fun in the driveway though and maybe down a hill if I got the knack of it .... I do have a bike now though and that is very handy and a big saving on petrol. as for liking people. thanks .. but to be perfectly honest I am not sure what to make of you. YOu seem to resent traditional women for depending on men's money yet in the next breath you exaggerate the aspirations of feminism as wanting men to stay at home as child carers whilst they have a career. Seems to me you want it both ways. You want women to do the child care and housework AND you want women to earn as much as men. I say, choose your camp. If a woman is going to not need to be supported by her partner then she must be a career woman, or at least one who has put substantial emphasis on her vocation, that means she cannot also be expected to be a full time carer of her children. It is unreasonable to expect a woman to not need your financial support and at the same time resent her for wanting men to progress in their attitude towards child care. As for the option of being a stay home Dad, why not? If that is what a couple want to do. It really depends on the career point of each partner, and how much they would be giving up in terms of their prospects. Sometimes a woman is the one in a delicate situation as far as her vocation goes. Leaving work to care for children can be very detrimental to career goals and mean she will have to depend on her man for money. Make up your mind thats all I'm saying. Women with money are not women who are going to suck it up at home and be everything they would be if they were a stay at home Mum. These expectations are damaging society right now. Something has to give. I am not a big fan of kids in childcare from day dot. I would much rather see flexible attitudes coming from families and work places. I have actually worked for a couple in the past who managed to split the care of home and family right down the middle. They were both academics, both worked 3-4 days a week, and both did housework, cooking, and child care, so they didn't need to put their child into the care of others for much time each week, unlike many couples who have kids in care from 8am till after 5pm five days a week. This is a negative aspect of feminism, in my mind. Kids don't even benefit from being in group care until they are at least 2 years old, and even then, I think parent child relationships are more important than money.

                          • smpkicksass

                            I just ranted a bunch of junk to stir tempers after I seen how a handful of members jumped all over the first man that raised a similar issue on the other side. I really only did it to prove that you wont gain support or further your arguments by downplaying others. As far as my actual views on feminism I don't get too tied up in it, overall I really do believe in evolutionary psychology I think that men are hardwired not only to lust over but to want some measure of control over beautiful women, that men are hardwired to be competitive and have a higher predisposition toward violence, that women are hardwired to seek out resource rich men that we are wired to try to meet our own self interest and so on i am sure i don't have to cover each trait i am sure your a well read person. But we have choice in the matter we can choose not to be driven by selfishness and base urges we can choose not to rape, we can choose to recalculate the value we place on beauty, we can choose to be empathetic and so on to me those are the real human decisions. The decisions that separate us from animals and break away from our simple cold and old drivers "mmmm nice cave woman give woman meat if no work hit with stick" My philosophy is for the most part simply to try and make more human decisions. As far as the who works deal not really worried I was raised in a fairly traditional setting supporting a woman was pretty much just expected so the idea doesn't bother me but in no way do i think that is the way it ought to be, I really do not think there is a way it "ought to be" well thats not true either for me it's whatever makes her happy whatever I can do to make her happy makes me happy and thats the way it ought to be. If a career is important to her I am willing to make sacrifices to support that. I don't see it being a money thing as much as a fulfilment thing, you get 80 years if your lucky and in that time money comes and goes 90% of the time only to be wasted on meaningless status oriented crap, if she is passionate about her job, needs to feel challenged and wants an area of her life to excel in independently of me and feel capable then thats who she is and preventing her from doing that is preventing her from being who she is. If thats where I end up then to me its not a discussion of feminism its a sign that i am asking someone to be something they are not and that maybe we are not right for one another. on the other hand if it's not important to her and she's not passionate about her job then whatever if I make 10K a month and she makes 5K it only makes financial sense to keep my job if one has to go or vice versa. we spend too much time pointing out the flaws in the opposite gender and not enough time being thankful for them and really for the most part I don't care It's important to me to treat my mother the way she wants to be treated and my GF the way she wants to be treated and thats as simple as asking them as far as the rest of the women in the world meh ill work it out as I go and not get to twisted up about it. I open doors for women if I open a door and she has a fit and tells me she is capable herself power to her, when a woman asks me to buy her a drink I tell her I'll buy the second round and if she is really as interested as she's pretending to be then she wont mind buying the first. I believe its important to teach boys its wrong to hit girls but I think we are too soft on allowing girls to hit boys. As far as boys wanting to fight other boys we should teach them to use other tools but in the mean time hand them a pair of mitts and stick them in the ring, If there fighters thats who they are and there going to do it anyway.

                            • Joy Gallary

                              wow! quite the load down. Ok well that is a popular current perspective but not one I entirely agree with. However I like your individual approach and I think personal vs political are often two different stories altogether. As far as 'hard wiring' goes I've never seen or heard any evidence, only theories to support any hard wiring in our neurological though pathways. A brain of electrical impulses and synapses.. not fixed unchangeable thought paths.. as cognitive therapy's popularity can attest. On the other hand there is a strong body of evidence in Neuropsychology for the plasticity of the human brain. It is an adaptive organ, it is possible to change so much that goes on up there in that grey matter, perhaps everything other than automated nervous system responses. There is no possible way to study human psychology and behaviour outside the paradigm of society. We are not raised in a vacuum, neither do we spend our adult lived in isolation - unless we are the most extreme hermit. However, again, I agree with you on some points. One point being: the body we inhabit affects our behaviour (that is we are an embodied self, not just an idea of a self) for a number of complex reasons both biological and sociological, and then individual psychology also plays a part including disposition or personality - hereditary traits combined with parenting. If we look at biological reasons for violent behaviour then we might find testosterone levels play a big part, but then so does diet. There have been studies done even twenty years ago that connect meat consumption and aggression levels. But testosterone alone does not account for choices in how aggressive urges are played out. Being male also means being exposed to a different set of beliefs about your body and how to use it than what being female would expose you to. Neuropsychologists have not found any difference when testing on brains of boys and girls. The differences they find in men and women's brains cannot be separated from the life choices they have made, how they spend their time, what activities they do or do not participate in, and who they spend their time with. This is where plasticity comes in. Not only can we choose to not follow base urges which occur due to a combination of hormones released and interactions with automatic parts of our brain, maybe the hypothalamus for example, but we are also choosing how to evaluate what we are 'fed' or exposed to on a daily basis. That we have certain urges as a result of biology doesn't mean our brains are 'hard wired' to make us rape people, or dominate our peers. However, our biology and hereditary tendencies make us more or less likely to choose aggressive responses to what happens around us. Girls are not all sweet passive things and nor are males all hyper aggressive. There is a biological and psychological range of aggression that crosses the sexes (ie. hormone levels, fitness and agility combined with disposition), that is then manifested in an environment/culture/society in which we grow up and live. Take a very gentle male with a quiet disposition who has good physical agility and co-ordination but is not a very large or particularly strong boy, in a nurturing intelligent creative family, with happy healthy respectful parents what are your chances he will turn out an aggressive megalomaniac? Take a strong, passionate, impulsive and practical disposition and not a very reflective thinker in a good stable family, whether male or female, and you could have a great trades woman or man, craft person, sports achiever etc. But raised in a violent, prejudiced, criminal or addiction afflicted family what will you get? Possibly a big tough disturbed bully of either sex. The worst cases are probably the first example: quiet, intelligent, sensitive kids raised in highly dysfunctional unsupportive and aggressive environments. They can turn out very conflicted damaged people ready to vent on others and may lash out unexpectedly from their quiet little corner one day never to retreat again. The same infant, taken from this household and raised by a caring relative in a secure environment could be a kind nurturing and successful person. I'l call it complexity, a nervous system, IQ capacity (the amount of grey matter we have apparently along with other genetic peculiarities in the brain affecting it's capacity to learn) combined with social environment, how smart your parents are, how much they communicate with you, what school you go to, what neighbourhood you live in, what year it is, what country, what religion. This is why society matters, politics matters, gender politics matters, media and visual arts matter. They all reflect and reflect back to us our society's beliefs, perpetuate inequality and prejudice or pull the rug out on the same and make us question what we have always believed to be true. It is not just an individual thing. We all have a social responsibility as well as a personal one. We can choose to ignore it and just worry about our own personal choices, but ultimately there is a knock on affect in everything we do because we don't live in a nice little personal capsule.

                              • smpkicksass

                                you should check out a book called The moral animal by robert wright, I think you will like it.

                                • Joy Gallary

                                  ahh this will do for starters a discussion about the book. a nice quote here: "Steve Jones: People want to use Darwin to explain things which are not scientific questions: good and evil, fate, who belongs to our group and who doesn’t, that kind of thing. These aren’t scientific questions, these are social issues. Darwin is in a situation now where any conceivable pattern of human behaviour of society can be explained by his theory. You don’t need any evidence, you just make it up as you go along, and he would have hated that."... nice. then they go on to talk about genes... http://www.abc.net.au/science/descent/trans1.htm
                                  reminded me of that newspaper article i read the other day on the "y" chromosome gradually losing dna sequences or something... over millions of years that is.

                                  • Joy Gallary

                                    Well it's all very amusing really. some of it sounds plausible but I agree with "Steven Rose: I think what’s happened is firstly of course there’s been a huge explosion of understanding of the mechanisms of genetics, and genetics is seen to have an enormous amount of power about explaining many aspects of the human condition.

                                    On the other hand, we’ve also I think, as advanced industrial societies, lost our faith in the possibility of changing the world by for example, social engineering, even socialism, even making revolution; a lot of the hopes for making a different world that came out of particularly the 1960s, have vanished; there’s a much dourer, grimmer view of the world that people have now.

                                    And on the other hand people need something to believe in, and what I call ultra-Darwinism seems to offer very simple explanations of why we are what we are, why we can’t change very much about what we do, and how we should behave. And I think that that’s swept through the world almost like a sort of a craze in opposition to some of the ideas either of the left of the 1960s or the new age idealism that exists around the turn of this millennium."
                                    I'm for change, the plasticity of the brain, revolution. etc. I believe social structures become so ingrained, there is no need for a 'hard wiring'... people do what pleases mum and dad and all their siblings and friends. People want what those other people got over there. We are social beings. we can also change what we do with what we've got

                                    • Joy Gallary

                                      and just to clarify that I mean, at the time (these biological psychology theorists pin point for realisations re evolutionary changes) social change was implemented it started to be ingrained. by now we do all this stuff, like get married, because it is a societal norm. we don't need entertaining theories about our deep ancestral past. we live now in a society that is so ingrained it is enough to make people do what they do. go check out some other theorists called social Structuralists. they are at the extreme end of sociology in a similar way to those Darwinists. Or maybe read up on Marxist theories. Plenty of sociological explanations for why our society chugs along it's dysfunctional route.

                                • Joy Gallary

                                  hmmm sounds familiar, i'l look it up then. had a library book on something similar, not so much on morals, it was analysing whether there was an urge in some people to do right no matter what, whereas others as much as they might think they wanted to do right struggled against urges to do bad and often fell short of their own proclaimed expectations. .. hmmm maybe I'l remember what it was called later. btw. a post script on my long diatribe above... about detectable differences in male/female brain function in adults... there is as much difference between one man and the next as there is between men and women. can't give a book reading on that off the top of my head :?

                    • smpkicksass

                      -before anyone has a fit i am not saying boys should hit girls i am saying that when faced with a gender issue this is the best plan the two could come up with because nobody gave a damn.

            • Lust in the Wind

              "Trying to deny one problem by claiming it denies your problems is not helpful."
              I completely agree. And I feel that I have already acknowledged the support role as a genuine problem. I believe that it not only ties into the issues raised by this video, but that they are one in the same problem.
              A roadblock to the debate in general is that both genders tend to polarize into a bizarre competition for who has it worse. While both seem to be aware that there is some sort of power imbalance going on, neither is quite sure who is on top. A history full of revolutions tells us that in debates such as this to be on top is to be toppled. So the new "on top" of the argument becomes who is more oppressed. Responding to a video that attempts to shed light on one facet of the problem by blasting it for ignoring or blaming men is just one example of this competitive pattern. My responding to that by insisting women are more demeaned is yet another.
              It is unfortunate, because both sides of the issue do need to be heard if this ish is ever to be made better.

              • Kevin FitzMaurice

                Thanks for the thoughtful and intelligent response. I agree on everything you said; therefore it had to be intelligent :) If we first admit that men are on top in the social world, then can we dare approach the elephant in the room, the ignored half of reality, and admit that women are on top in the home at least in most Westernized countries? As a small example: ask a real estate agent who chooses the home (the woman), who decorates the house, who is the house suited to, what rooms are for the women and what rooms are for the men, why is there never a men's toilet in even the most expensive homes, why must a man get lucky to have a "man's cave" or only one room of the house, who controls the budget, who controls the money, who decides where the kids go to school, who is always right at home and who is always wrong at home, who decides where the kids go to church, etc. Of course now comes the argument that not all homes are like that ignoring the same type of argument that not all companies have a glass ceiling for women. Men I have spoken with and counseled repeatedly say the woman controls the time, money, sex, children, and all the major purchases and decisions. So there is imbalance on both sides, which has a lot to do with the climbing divorce rate. Is it possible to face the ugliness and power imbalance in both the home and the workplace? Or must we only admit to the women's point of view about the workplace, which, at least to me, is obviously still true despite some progress in many areas. If men were empowered at home perhaps they would not need to have all the power at work and would be more open to sharing the power at work from their experience of doing so successfully at home. Men do not want to lose all power at work like they imagine they have at home. Men can now be heard to say, "If you want no sex, no money, no time, to alway be wrong, and no life of your own, then forget the monastery—just get married."

                • Joy Gallary

                  but don't you think this is just the 'left overs' from the 50s when all women had was the home, and the kids, and the school, and the church etc?. because it certainly sounds like that is the home life you describe. perhaps it is a generational thing? I'm not sure you are describing young couples here. I would think more opportunity in public life will mean women either buy and live in their own home and don't have a husband (and in fact I read a real estate article about exactly that recent trend in women around 30 ish) ... or, they are busy with a career and expect and need their husband to take a full role in household decisions because they are too busy to do it all.

                  • Kevin FitzMaurice

                    More and more men are seeing marriage as a bad deal all around. The day is coming when men will reject marriage on a global scale. Emotional abuse, verbal abuse, and emotional manipulation are not just in the '50s. The isolated cases that you refer to are not the general cases that I refer to. Just as the isolated cases of female equality do not negate the general cases of a lack of female equality. It is the young couples who are having the most trouble staying together and making marriages work. Divorce becomes more common the younger people are. A major part of that problem is the imbalance of power and control in the home. This is important because without peace in the home there is little chance for peace in the world, because the world reflects the mind and living style of the people who inhabit it. I know brining up this issue will just make me a target for the trolls and haters, but I occasionally attempt to make the other side known despite the irrational attacks it inevitably brings on.

                    • Joy Gallary

                      Kevin I think many people see marriage as only a good thing if the relationship is good. I also feel as though you are speaking from a personal perspective and then equating it with the general population. When you say more and more men are rejecting marriage from where do you get your statistics? Its not of any real concern to me because I left my one marriage a long time ago, and have not found relationships worth staying a long time in since. But I don't go on and on judging the whole of heterosexual population based on my relationship experiences. Gender relations are not about individual experience alone. My relationships are very much tied to my psychology and personality. They don't represent everyone else's experience. I think there are many reasons why marriage is becoming less popular for some people... though statistics show it is still indeed very popular for some age groups. One reason is, women can wait till they find the right person because they can financially support themselves. This is not at all based on my personal experience as I married very young. But it is based on Australia and discussions on our population, from the ABS (dept stats) . People are having children later, and marrying later. That is a fact. Another fact is gay marriage is a hot topic. Some people still love each other and want to be promised in a secure relationship. Your bitterness is personal. Don't make it everyone's please. It doesn't help at all.

                      • Kevin FitzMaurice

                        When all else fails, then attack the messenger not the message. As long as we are willing to deny the problem of an imbalance of power and control in the home, then we are dooming many to an unhappy marriage or an early divorce. I wonder how many generations it will take for people to look at this issue with intelligence. Perhaps it will be too late then.

                        • Joy Gallary

                          and what of the imbalance of work in the home?

                          • Kevin FitzMaurice

                            What about men maintaing the lawn, landscape, garden, yard, cars, house, roof, electric, plumbing, carpentry, painting, heating, air conditioning, garage, and basement. What about cleaning up after the dog, shoveling snow, raking leaves, pulling weeds, picking up litter, washing the car, taking out the trash, running errands, budgeting, paying bills, doing taxes, installing or repairing locks, and all the other chores and maintenance tasks that women disdain or find beneath them? The price of hiring tradespersons versus the handyman who does these things to help the family budget is both immense and ignored. There are more chores than just the cleaning chores inside the house. Oh yes, not all men do these things just as not all women cook, clean, or wash the clothes.

  • Fay Baker

    After watching this and reading a lot of the comments below it becomes clear that the traditional ideals of masculinity are valued far more highly than the traditional ideals of femininity. Am I wrong in thinking that it is supremely sexist to laugh at men in traditionally feminine poses whilst applauding women in traditionally masculine poses? Can we not just smash up these ridiculous signifiers already? Maybe we could just pick out the best human traits and that might actually change something. There's nothing in wrong in being masculine, feminine, anywhere inbetween etc but there's an awful lot right in being loving and courageous and generally accepting of one another.

    • Jaron Shim

      Wow. May I hug you? Your message has been the only positively reinforced comment I have read and whole-heartedly agree with.

      • Fay Baker

        Thank you, Jaron Shim!

  • Mierte

    Speaking as a woman who is working as a bike messenger and not in the construction field with experience of about ten years, because of this kind of attitude.
    I don't find this movie at all accurate because the male models used were not buff like the female models have to be. This movie too, was made to make us laugh, and unfortunately I still don't find it funny.

  • MeMeMe MEMEME

    I think this video missed a trick. It's really hard to agree with something when it feels like you're being attacked or purposely ignored by it. We know from academic work that unless someone is emotionally invested in a piece of communication they will read/watch it far more critically.

    My first reaction when watching this was "that's awful, but what about when the same thing happens to guys?". So instead of engaging with what the video was actually trying to tell me, I felt I had to defend myself from its message - and from the other comments, I'm not the only one.

    If the film had included everything it does about the representation of women but also included the contra-argument about men, then instead of the comments board breaking down into this entirely unhelpful "what about the menz" arguments, we would all be on one page about abusive gender representations in the media - which surely was the point of the video in the first place.

    I think loads of men really want a gender politics they can engage with and support, and are tired of fighting against something they would rather be fighting for.

    • Joy Gallary

      I didn't think this video represented women's issues at all. It only served to perpetuate the myth that women look good objectified and men look ridiculous.... which isn't the case at all, if we are looking at beautiful, self conscious men, eg. models and actors.

    • Lust in the Wind

      So then stop fighting? It is entirely possible to agree with what the video presents while still having room for addressing the male side of things. What doesn't make sense to me is that most of these "what about the menz" comments seem to stem from a desire to have men's issues represented equally to women's, which is a bit reminiscent of the ol' south insisting that their financial woes were on par or worse than the evils of slavery. Yes, there are issues on the male side of the gender issue that are relevant, but given the current power balance there is a reason why attentions are focused on the women's side. The reason being that empowerment begins with the disempowered. Empowering the already in power tends to create further disparity, which is part of why females often respond to male defensiveness in situations like this as an offensive maneuver.
      Maybe I imagined it, but I swear some of the male side *was* mentioned; depression among males and pressure to hold to a masculine standard. It was not the emphasis though, and for most of history the emphasis has been almost entirely on men, so maybe a male coming to the conclusion that males weren't mentioned at all is only natural.

  • Deal_with_it

    I thought this said "What if gender roles were reversed."? Fairly certain that's what it said.

    So why then is this a video about how men need to be aware of the sexualization of women? Why is there nothing about how men are portrayed as buffoons, or as the comical sidekicks to the competent, capable woman? Why is 'The King Of Queens' style male persona so acceptable (fat, slightly left of the bell curve, somewhat funny, and exceptionally ignorant) while the wife in almost every single sitcom (even in cartoons like the Simpsons and Family Guy) is always the 'smart one', correcting his world view, and fixing all of his mistakes?
    Why must there be this severe dichotomy where the 'accepted' norms are so terrible, but pointing out the problems with female targeted advertising is THE ONLY acceptable argument against sexist media? Why can't we just say “enough with the sexism” without it implying that ONLY women are objectified?
    Ladies, yes you are almost exclusively portrayed as sexual objects by media, but us guys are almost exclusively portrayed as sub-standard, worthless, knuckle-dragging incompetents. You are ENCOURAGED to point out how degrading to women the media has become, but unlike you I am labelled a misogynist simply because I want to see adverts where the man ISN'T the fool, where the man ISN'T ridiculous, and where the man IS capable.
    Why can't both men and women be outraged at the advertising in today's society?
    Why must this argument always be about the sexual objectification of women instead of advertisings corruption of the self-worth of PEOPLE?

    • Lust in the Wind

      First off, I would like to redact the passive-aggressive insult at the end of my last reply. It's a provocative subject and somehow that last bit slipped past my brain out my fingertips.
      Secondly, a large part of why the argument focuses on women involves real-life consequences. Though males are portrayed as incompetent by the media, this identity is rarely forced on males in the real world (with the exception of emotional intelligence, which is often discouraged by other males because it is too "feminine"). However, if a female chooses to not present herself as a sex object she is often ridiculed by both genders for "not trying" and/or arbitrarily labeled a lesbian.
      If/when men being portrayed as foolish is found to have measurable real-life consequences (which may in fact already be the case -- college enrollment is currently tipped in favor of females by a narrow margin), more men will speak out and the male side of gender roles will become more prominent. And I believe women would quickly join in this cause; we have far more to gain from an informed populace than an uneducated one.

      • Joy Gallary

        So therefore, why didn't this video depict women blatantly ignoring self objectification? If this video wanted to serve a real social purpose, make a strong and positive statement, instead of being less desirable men clowning to camera, it would'v been less desirable women. Less desirable because they were not self-objectifying, holding a pose, lathered in make up and special soft lighting, air brushed (photoshopt)... not even waxed, or hair dyed, or dressed in revealing wear. what if they were wearing singlets and modest undies like bonds and didn't have gorgeous legs and tits. What if they were really ordinary women who usually hide behind carefully chosen clothes, or otherwise invisible, or fake exteriors. I agree with all those who are saying stop blaming men. Time is up for blaming men. These issues must now be addressed by women with courage. It doesn't matter whether men objectify women. What matters is what are women doing? Are they brave enough to step out from behind the masks and act up in just the way men do? That would be gender reversal. Look at these men in the video. They don't give a flying f* who sees their imperfect bodies. The only way women will break with the stereotype is to do the same. Men are now being objectified in Advertising more and more. What are they doing about it? Clowning around thats what. They are turning up to ritzy mens wear stores that display hunky buff sculpted men, turning up by the hundreds and taking off their shirts in the store. What kind of action (like this) has any group of women done? Other than geurilla girls. also. men, do post pictures of women, sexy and beautiful women, up on their walls as art works, or posters, or on their blogs etc. Women need to open up about what they want to see. It's ridiculous to imagine objectification is going to stop, It has increased. It won't lessen until women stop doing it and they never will. If women don't demonstrate their desire for beautiful men, but instead hide behind their masks (of fake beauty) trying to pretend all women are beautiful when really, just like men we are a whole mixed bag of weird, wonderful, gorgeous, sexy, and even downright ugly. We all know it. But the reason women keep up the charade is the competition is fierce. When women will go to any length to look wonderful what do other women do? They compete. Yes part of that competition is for men's attention but you can't blame men for women wearing make up and high heels and tight push up bras etc. Really. If all women in the world stop doing these things that would be an end of it. But hey don't. Do they. Nope they get breast augmentation etc. I think it's time for women to change their behaviour towards themselves and each other. Step number one - see the market for what it is, a money market. Sex and beauty sells. It doesn't matter whether male or female beauty. Step two - live reality, and live real. Let people see your true face. Love it. Love the woman you were born to be and forget all the f* bull shite the 'market' is trying to sell you. whoever said all the marketing of objectified women is for men!! come off it!! women lap it up. They are intoxicated by this addiction to self loathing. The advertising world tugs and the strings of inadequacy and women come running to buy the next product or get the next super beauty secret. Ugliness to me is a woman caked over with make up, like Angela Jolie in Tourist. Sheesh! arrgh yuk. and walking on stilts swaying hips ... my face is contorted like I'm watching some kind of weird surreal skit. FAKE fakers. Stop faking it. Be real. and respectfully admire true beauty in nature and people. and that includes men. there are some incredibly beautiful men and i am happy to admire them. put up their pictures and say that is a man with style, or beauty etc. This is desire. Men can desire women. Women can desire men. But we don't have to become victims of the consumer market as a result of our sexual desires. Not if we don't want to. Complaining won't make it end. Just stop doing it. Amen. and love to all those beautiful male bodies that haven't let themselves go (yet) I hope you have someone to love you when you get wrinkled and old too.... wow scuse the rant hahahah :)

    • JoRip

      Watch the video again from 2:04 to 2:44. Tell me how the portrayal of men as simpletons is as dangerous?

    • Lust in the Wind

      I thought it said "what if gender roles were reversed IN ADVERTISING." You cite several instances of dumb male characters in fictional shows, but I'm having a hard time thinking of any commercials that portray men as idiots. Considering that males do still average higher incomes than females, males control more purchasing power and so it doesn't really make sense for advertisers (an industry still dominated by males anyway) to portray their #1 market (and themselves) as stupid, no? Also, at no point did the video emphasize that only men need to be aware of the objectification of women, it appeared to be geared to a male or female audience.
      If you want to stop seeing males portrayed as ridiculous fools, you might start with how you present yourself.

    • Amber Richardson

      I think you missed the part in the video where the impact of the male role in advertising is discussed. The fact that you can name almost all of the examples in which men are portrayed as "knuckle-dragging incompetents," shows just how little it does actually exist. And the women in those shows are often seen as naggy, annoying, and bitchy, so there is still a negative representation.

      Advertising and media are ruining the image of both men and women. But why complain about the Kevin James' of the world? Those men can still be fat, stupid, obnoxious, and they still get a wife thats way too good looking, smart, etc, for them. In those cases, women always settle. Why? Because advertising has led us to believe that that is all they can get.

      • Joy Gallary

        That's why women must take more notice, and make more public notice of, their desire for beautiful men.

    • Freakboi Wnz

      "Why is there nothing about how men are portrayed as buffoons, or as the comical sidekicks to the competent, capable woman? Why is 'The King Of Queens' style male persona so acceptable (fat, slightly left of the bell curve, somewhat funny, and exceptionally ignorant) while the wife in almost every single sitcom (even in cartoons like the Simpsons and Family Guy) is always the 'smart one', correcting his world view, and fixing all of his mistakes?"

      People watch those shows for the funny characters. The female characters in those shows may be more intelligent, but they don't drive the comedy and, just as often as they are treated as the rational one, they are portrayed as the nagging, overbearing character. A character like Homer Simpson might be a fat baffoon but he at least he has a fleshed out character. Whenever I see a fat, female comedic character, they are almost always a very sassy walking fat joke with absolutely no depth to them, whatsoever. Nobody watches these shows for the main characters' wives.

      Stupid characters drive most comedy. All you are saying when you complain that women are the smarter characters in comedy is that there aren't many female-lead comedies. And, when you talk about why there are more fat men on TV than fat women, you are actually drawing attention to the fact that it is really hard for any woman who isn't sexy to get work in TV or film.

      There are plenty of male characters, in fact, the vast majority of male characters in the media are not fat baffoons, only in comedy is that the case. I don't recall a stupid fat guy starring in any of the action movies I watch, or lots of dumb guys getting outsmarted by their female counterparts in science fiction.

      Tell me how many knuckle dragging incompetent male characters star in CSI?

      If your only example of males being degraded in the media is stupid comedic characters, usually written by male comic writers, often as a platform for the comedian/comic actor playing them or even themselves (a lot of sitcoms and comedy films are co-written by the lead actor or written specifically for said actor), you're really not making yourself seem all that sympathetic.

      I don't even consider myself a feminist and, honestly, I do think sexism, in general, is more of a two-way street than a lot of people are willing to accept but that was just a dumb argument, through and through.

  • pollypyjama

    Men are objectified in the media too, have you ever seen a Diet Coke advert? Or men are usually just made to look stupid or selfish. Please watch these links and let me know what you think. I see adverts like this every day.
    Bertolli
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=FPFYh6fNYC4

    Diet Coke
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=HuHV4gwSXn4

    Oven Pride
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=DQ1ZRjw425o

    Nestle
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=DQ1ZRjw425o

    • Joy Gallary

      I think it's great that men are objectified too. Now all we need is for women to be liberated too. That is, to feel free to clown around half naked, hairy, and fat in front of camera like the men in this video.

  • Neil Underwood

    hey there. resonates. have to say though that if you are going to venture into gender representations, you need to look a bit wider. when was the last time you saw a female vicious mugger or a thief in advertising ? or a feller who is adept at cooking or changing babies?

    • Joy Gallary

      good point Neil but I think this vid was specifically about sexual objectification. As for cooking though I have noticed plenty master chef, the naked chef, the cook and the chef, Jamie Oliver.. etc. as for men and babies it is still being explored i'd say and would be a good topic for video, ... but some beautiful images have been made of men and their babies that is for sure.

      • Neil Underwood

        makes sense Joy.. and I totally agree that the sexualisation of women like this is a massive problem especially for very young girls having marketing thrown at them. all I would like to throw into the ring though is that there is also a nasty subtheme in ads and movies of men being vastly more likely to be criminals. another interesting thing to consider is the expendability of men: any count you will do in a movie of shooting murders will find the guys dropping at about 100:1.

        • Joy Gallary

          men ARE in reality actually more likely to be involved in violent crime, especially armed violence as opposed to simple assault eg. pushing or punching someone. Aggravated assault is much more likely to be perpetrated by a male. As for men being shot, I'm not sure if this is an accurate portrayal of our society or an exaggeration for affect as you see it. I don't think showing people being shot in movies is necessarily good but I think men are probably the bigger consumers of violent film? got any stats on that? Why are action flicks so popular with guys? Maybe now you are talking about hegemonic masculinity. There exists the small beginnings of a global movement to try and put forward a different, more positive image of men to counteract the male as conqueror. I think the subject of masculinity, or masculinities is an important one.

  • rudolf.glasnak

    Is there a possibility of posting here some of the sources? I am doing a research paper on this topic it would help a lot. thank you

  • Joy Gallary

    This is not gender reversal because the men in the second part are undesirable and are not sexualised at all. It is nothing more than a clown act so therefore yes obviously ridiculous. Lets see a serious, daring attempt at gender reversal. I for one would welcome it. If you want to know what it looks like ask gay men to show you how they role play to arouse.

    • I'm Serious

      You must be an autist, because I'm sorry that you missed the point of the advert. Yes it was ridiculous, I'm glad you managed to notice that. If you want a serious attempt, have a look at these topless "objectified" men acting like slaves to a woman's desires:

      http://www.anotherqueerjubu.com/.a/6a00d8345192f869e2010536216734970c-500wi
      http://www.cafleurebon.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Josh-Holloway-cologne-ad.jpg
      http://cdn01.cdn.justjared.com/wp-content/uploads/headlines/2012/11/channing-tatum-peoples-sexiest-man-alive-2012.jpg

      I can't be bothered to google further.
      You have to learn to not care about the media, because nobody cares about someone who moans.

      • Joy Gallary

        ps. if the aim of your video (is this your video serious?) is to help women and men not care about the media then perhaps you could also get some women with 'irregular' bodies to clown around half naked in the same way women with 'perfect' bodies and skin and faces are portrayed in media. eg. get some fat, hairy, oddly proportioned, uneven facial features, cellulite, and..hmm i forget all the 'unwanted' things a woman has, but I'm sure if you can actually get those women to clown around in various 'objectified' roles to camera you will have quite a shocking video. But just getting men to do this fun liberated thing, showing their imperfect selves on youtube, it doesn't do anything for women, it just perpetuates the stereotype that women look good objectified but men don't.

      • Joy Gallary

        oh but thanks for the gorgeous pics of guys. by the way one was an after shave add designed to appeal to men (ie. if you use this after shave you will be as hot as me).. the other one is a people mag cover - so celebrity fame not objectification or slavery in fact a well know person who is not separated from his personality or identity. he is what you call a 'sex symbol' different to a sex object. Lastly the fabric softener or clothes detergent, definitely appealing to women but definitely not submissive, just a guy with a great body and edited on shrink wrapped jeans? some joke there obviously about how soft the fabric is? he looks fit and proud and in control not a slave at all, but desirable yes. They all are desirable men. I don't have a problem with that. Do you?

      • Joy Gallary

        Seriously i think you miss my point. i am aware of men in advertising but if one is going to make a gender reversal video then it needs to actually be that. If it is just clowning around then it's not gender reversal because women are not clowning when they are objectified or sexualised. no need to google for me. i am not confused about the issue. men CAN and WILL and ARE being objectified. But as far as I'm concerned that is not a problem, is inevitable, and goes a step towards equalizing the media when it comes to gender, at least much more than this video attempt.

  • Anand Badrinath

    I completely get the point of the video, but the part with the reversed gender roles didn't really make sense. First you'd need all the guys in the pictures to look hot according to the unrealistic standards set by the media, (huge arms, hard abs, large package and tight ass). which was not the case for most of them. As for the ones putting women in the male gender roles, well actually thought they were pretty hot and not at all ridiculous. Once again not commening on the message, a lot of mass media is generally awful, with regards to issues of gender, gender identity, race, and sexual orientation (especially advertisement). Just saying that the artistic choice in the pictures didn't really reflect the message.

  • Laura Goldberg

    All those stats are for Canada, image how much worse they likely are in the United States. The way women are portrayed in a media in general is awful, this is an excellent subset.

  • Hannah Wasserman

    It's interesting because I kind of ignore a lot of print ads in magazines, but seeing a montage like this clearly shows that we have a problem. We know we still have a long way to go in true gender equality-- and over-sexualizing women in the media is certainly not helping. My question is how can we change it? Advertisers do this because it works not because their horrible people-- what does that say about our culture?

    • Joy Gallary

      Hi Hannah, It will only change when women are given agency ie. sexual desire. it is changing as men are more willing to model and more likely to be objectified. Some people think this is negative but I see it as positive, even though there may be repercussions in the short term with guys feeling bad about their bodies the way women do. Eventually men will understand women better (in this respect at least) and women will not be able to complain about their bodies and flaws endlessly and expect sympathy because both men and women will be under pressure to look great. Then what? Something has to give. I reckon.

      • Hannah Wasserman

        Hey Joy-
        An interesting thought. Thanks for sharing! Not sure I think the solution is more people being objectified, but I do think there needs to be more freedom in our society to express sexual desires.

      • Hannah Wasserman

        Wow that's a pretty brave talk-- thanks so much for sharing Phillip. I think she touches on a little bit of what Ryan is saying-- there's an innate reason why we think beautiful people are beautiful-- but there's an issue with our culture where we give too much privilege to those that meet our definition. Can't quite tell if this, too, is ingrained or if we can change this and become more accepting. Since our view of beauty has changed and other cultures have different definitions-- I'm leaning towards the culture issue. I'm kind of spitballing, but I feel like there can be some sort of partnership between media and society where we can start displaying what real people look like, not just the .00001% of people that look like Cameron.

      • Diana Ahrens

        this was a great talk!! just heard it the other day.

    • Ryan MacInnes

      I can't help but think that there must be some evolutionarily based reason that ads like this are so successful. Men like looking at naked ladies, etc. It saddens me because it means the fight for gender equality will be that much more difficult, we have to overcome our own natural evolutionary based cognitive biases.

      • Joy Gallary

        So Ryan are you saying you think women don't like looking at naked men? Sorry I don't follow how it is we cannot have gender equality. Women just need to brave up and start responding more openly to what turns them on.

        • Ryan MacInnes

          Not at all! But there is some truth to the statement that men are more visually oriented. I guess what I am trying to say is that there are core biological differences that we have to overcome.

          • Joy Gallary

            is there? Where or how do you derive that truth? From the fact you see more sexual stimuli aimed at men? That doesn't prove women wouldn't respond to stimuli that was designed for their taste. Perhaps the only truth in the statement is that western society's public arena has been dominated by males for so long that we are still experiencing a predominance of sexual and erotic imagery made for men? We also experience a film industry predominantly filled with male Directors and Producers. To assume that because men are used to being stimulated by visual sexual imagery and are catered to specifically and therefore respond to it more frequently means that women are biologically less inclined to respond to visual sexual stimulation is pure bunkum. Until women are given a genre of erotica that is to their taste as a sex, and as individuals, there is no way of knowing just how women will respond. (I am pretty sure I mentioned earlier the popularity with women viewers of a recentish movie about male strippers). Men and often women, seem to ignore this imbalance in visual media, but others are speaking up loud and clear.
            So as for women not being as visually orientated, there is no evidence whatever to indicate women are not visually stimulated generally by their surroundings, nature, art, film, photography etc. In fact there is a plethora of evidence to prove they ARE visual creatures and the marketing industry is using that evidence to make millions. As I have mentioned previously women are more likely to buy fashion and home wares on the basis of aesthetics and style not just functionality or comfort.
            You see how our senses can be trained this way? Women are socially conditioned in western society, due to centuries of privileged women having little else to do than buy/wear clothes or choose how to run/decorate a home. Those who couldn't afford any such luxuries envied those who could and are constantly tugged at by marketing devices that play on feelings of inadequacy (if you don't buy this necessary cosmetic, dress, or home accessory you won't be beautiful or a successful/good woman). Visual displays in the earliest days of department stores, and order catalogues were designed to seduce women VISUALLY. Do you really think women spent so much money on fabrics and appliqué, lace, jewellery, upholstery, curtains, ornaments, not realising whether they had visual appeal or not? arrrgh ,, !

            • Ryan MacInnes

              you know what, you're totally right. I had never thought of it that way. It brings me back to the nature vs. nuture debate is inevitably cropping up in these sort of discussions. I guess what I was basing that on was men being more visually oriented when it comes to selecting a mate, not in general. It's been my experience that physical attractiveness is more important for males than females, though this could be entirely socialized as well.

      • Lucien Hughes

        Evolution? Sex is why humanity exists, reproduction is why there is life. Life adapts by reproducing as effectively as possible. Without sexual reproduction there is no evolution.

      • Phillip

        I agree that there is some biological behaviours at play, but am inclined to consider what Hannah suggests above in that there are cultural and social evolutionary factors that are the major contributors to the gender skew.

        "How Art Made The World" by PBS has an interesting episode called "More Human Than Human" that eludes to this as well as the TED Talk by Cameron Russell on an industry that sexualized her at age 16.

        • Joy Gallary

          indeed , so true, Art has a lot to answer for as it was really the beginning of visual culture... or rather cultural reproduction.

    • Diana Ahrens

      I think this is an interesting point. To what degree is advertising reflecting a broader cultural representation, vs. creating it first-hand?

  • Hillary Newman

    Okay, okay - I am in no way supporting these ads, but I do think it's unfair that the men replacing the women in these ad are much less attractive. I would have loved to see these ads with equally attractive men.

    • Joy Gallary

      Well said! The market has determined beauty and sex sells. It doesn't matter if it's male or female, and we are beginning to see that fact assert itself into media as well.

    • Adele Peters

      That's interesting. I think the particular men they chose helped underline the ridiculousness of the poses...I wonder if it would have had the same effect with male models, or if the ads would have become something (like some of the women's ads) that we wouldn't notice quite as much. I think it's funny that they used American Apparel as one of the examples, since AA is a company that has sexualized men in ads from the beginning. Also, I think there's an argument to be made that all sex in ads isn't necessarily bad; disrespect and degradation is bad, but that isn't the same thing.

      • Peter Carter

        Excellent post, Adele, and it's lovely to see a thoughtful engagement with gender politics that doesn't fall into the old gender wars mindset. Sex can be good and sex can be bad, and women are sexualised more than men (though I think that's changing) and in different ways. You quite often see male models posing these days, though rarely in the sort of submissive, pseudo-rape posed that are evidenced here. Indeed, I think that the stigma attached to male submissiveness, and the sexual judgements made about men if they conform to a 'submissive' behaviour style probably causes a lot more social problems than any of what is often called the 'objectification' of women: that is, the decoupling of personality and sexuality of which women are often the object.

        • Joy Gallary

          'decoupling of personality? hmmm actually i think women are not only separated from personality but completely denied their own sexuality of desire in many many images. in regards to your comment on male submissiveness and problems stemming from judgements, i agree that hegemonic masculinity does not allow for different roles for men and is largely why homophobia exists. However, I'm not sure there is any evidence the issue has further reaching negative affects (effects?) or damage socially than the subjugation of women. It would be almost impossible to measure this as women have been subjugated for so long. I think it is often those issues closest to us we feel the most. So perhaps you are closer to judgements about men and submission than you are the denial of woman as a whole person with agency and desire? For women who have been bombarded with images as a mere object of desire is it any wonder some feel angry and end up in a gender war debate? Push someone down and what do they instinctively do? ok yeh maybe submit and stay down (the self-objectification of women keeps the consumer market going) but also, maybe they fight their way back up again, rightly or wrongly.

  • Miriam Thorne

    omg - those are real adverts? the female ones, i mean. Pretty unbelievable that anyone thinks it is acceptable to portrait women this way. I like the fact that you take the subject and hold a mirror up to it - thank you!

    • James Price

      It seems, even after all this time, 'Ways of seeing' by Berger is still relevant. search for the book/tv programme if you have not already seen it.