http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=12319

I thought her argument fell down in a couple of areas like using Charlies Angels which was made almost exclusively by guys. But I have not seen some of the examples she mentioned.

I'm posting a response from the discussion forum (I hope this is hunky-dory)which sums up many of my sentiments.

quote:

---

Will it take a few more generations of equality before we stop dumping on each other and treat each other with respect?

---

I think the reason there is so much gender-bashing (there's far more male against female out there) is because there is a pay off at the end-often financial. The media companies are among the most powerfull corporations in the world and all they care about is making money. Much of our cultural industry is a formula-put in so many breasts, car chases, and explosions in a film and you make money. It's pathetic because bottom-line accountants are telling our stories for the most part.

quote:

---

Some of this supposed male-bashing (which I think is really Female Bashing) comes from independent women who have access to women-controlled media, but even more of it suffuses our culture through mass media promulgated every bit as much by men in powerful positions as by women with their hands on the controls. So why do men push these images?

---

I'm not sure that women are the source of these new anti-male advertisements.

The heads of the marketing and advertising firms read the studies that show that women make the majority of household purchasing decisions and, naturally, target the advertising at women. But are the heads of the marketing and advertising firms predominantly female or male? Are women really the creative minds behind these ads?

I don't know much about the HR practices of advertising agencies, so I can't really say.

quote:

---

Who do we "blame" for unethical advertising, the consumer that enjoys and responds to the ad, or the advertiser that creates it? Do they both share some of the "blame"?

---

If you approve of an ad campaign (for instance, i happen to like the 'look good on your own terms' cereal ads), let the company know that, too.

The funny thing was, it was well posted in large letters, "OUT OF ORDER-- USE OTHER DOOR".

It struck me that people aren't stupid, but that there is just so much advertising, we tune it out as visual noise. People saw what they took to be just another flyer or something taped to the glass and ignored it.

So, I question the idea that ads can shape society, or our views on such things as the relationship between the genders.

Most of us here surf the net. Name the last product you saw advertised today. I can't. I've tuned it out. Even the pop ups.

We are jaded to the max. That's why advertisers are pushing the envelop so much these days. In the end, do they really influence us though?

I don't seem to buy things based on the size of the breasts the model showing the product on T.V. has. I sometimes see ads that I know are trying to tap into my kinks and fetishes. Do I sit through an insipid hour of "VIP" just to see Pamela Anderson in latex?. No. I just can't do it. The video's for Hip Hop music are chock full of scantily clad women shaking parts of thier bodies in ways that seem impossible. Have I aquired a taste for "Hip Hop"? No. I can't even watch a whole video, or name a single "Hip Hop" artist.

Do I watch "City T.V." news or "Cable Pulse" because a good 85% of their female newsreaders have impossibly thick, seductive lips? No. I like information with my news, so I go elsewhere.

The idea that advertisers make us dance like pupets on a string is hard to support with facts.

Yes, you can argue "AHA! but those sex things made you remember those products and services". Yes, they did/do.

The real danger is that commercials, along with the violent, tasteless, self-indulgent content of popular programs, form a cultural matrix which is difficult to escape. The images on the tube become the norm against which young people unconsciously measure reality. The values instilled in children by television, the social interactions it depicts, the speech, dress and manners of the shadow-world, become part of their reality.

That world is full of violence, lewdness, rudeness, ignorance and aggressive selfishness, exactly because that's what appeals to our basest instincts. So the basest components of human nature are constantly reinforced by television. The shadow-world -in it's role as representing the social norm - is giving kids permission to be as bad as they want, even while the parents are earnestly trying to teach them good behaviour.

Men are the only identifiable group against which it is legal and socially acceptable to discriminate.

[ February 09, 2002: Message edited by: earthmother ]

quote:

---

Men are the only identifiable group against which it is legal and socially acceptable to discriminate.

---

Actually you can narrow it down a lot more.

Non white men have their advocacy groups and tax funded mouth pieces. You can eliminate them. gays have their charter protection as do the disabled. non Christians are seen to be the minotity and there is always some left leaning support group to take up their cause. Witness, for example the idiotic hand wringing and anti christian blame laying in relation to 9-11.

In reality the only group which it is legal and socially acceptable to discriminate against is healthy, white, hetro, christian men.

There are no tax funded groups to champion their causes. After all, such a group would be, by definition, racist. Right?

[ February 09, 2002: Message edited by: Rabid Gerbil ]

quote:

---

In reality the only group which it is legal and socially acceptable to discriminate against is healthy, white, hetro, christian men.

---

Oh that's malarky.

There's maybe one place in the entire country where being male goes against you, and that's in some areas of family law, and perhaps one could argue that some people get preferential treatment in criminal cases, based on their gender or whatever, this is pretty hit and miss-- the courts seem to take sadistic delight in rendering judgements that offend the ordinary citizen's concept of fairness, and they do so with a shotgun approach.

And you know what?

Let me tell you something.

Being Christian these days gets one preferential treatment before the government and the law. A certain vocal segment of the Christian population is asserting that not allowing them priveledges and the ability to persecute others is somehow persecution of their beliefs.

quote:

---

Non white men have their advocacy groups and tax funded mouth pieces

---

Who exactly are you talking about? I sure haven't heard much from them and I suspect that if you look at how much funding they get it's probably peanuts and dropping with each budget. Likely most of the work is done by volunteers.

I don't have any statistics at my fingertips but it seems to me that conservative white people are usually looked after fairly well-that is if you go along with the many versions of the old boys club-the Republicans, the Liberals, most corporations, the media, cultural industries, financial industries, etc. etc. Token marginalised people in these old boys club can succeed up to the glass ceiling if they are mouthpieces for the old boys club (Christie Blatchford comes immediately to mind.) Leftist males are not welcome in the OBC because they threaten the status quo. Women have that annoying habit of questioning the status quo so they also are mostly excluded.

I have worked in the media and it is mainly white conservative men making the decisions. When I look at the credits on films and tv shows it is about 75% male. Most of the women's jobs are in hair, makeup, catering, script supervision and wardrobe. Most of the important decisions are made by men. They are in charge of the finished product. They are the ones to ask about why they portray men this way. To be fair, women usually get it wrong when they portray men as well. You can rarely ever speak accurately for someone else. When you're speaking for someone else you're appropriating their voice.

I've also worked in the construction and forestry industry which is about 95% male. I only got work because I did the first aid work. Women tried to get into these jobs after going to trade school but most of them ran into an incredible amount of ugly sexism and ended up quitting. I've seen my share of it too. It is rarely ever challenged.