Why is it the people complaining about this are always ugly women?

When was the last time you saw a male saying they are tormented by the ads in mens magazines?

^Mainly because men are not objectified like women are although I have been hearing a lot of criticism lately about men always being shown as stupid in ads.

also *promote

Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Monday, March 28th, 2011 1:49pm PDT - promote requested by ctrlaltbleach.

Are the ads the cause or the effect, though? And she's also not terribly specific about what social ills this trend is bringing about. Anorexia is on the rise but not catastrophically so. General vanity and self-consciousness aren't really anything new - and here, again, they never tell us what an idealized image of female beauty is costing us. I'm not unsympathetic but if we're supposed to be doing anything about it we have to really decide what exactly the problem is.

It's always feminist who complain about it. See the trend? It's women bitching about women. You ever see men bitching about men? No, because we bitch about women because they never shut up about other women. Whens the last time one of your buddies walked up to you and said, man I wish I had his ass...Exactly. I'd down vote this bullshit if I could.

You can't fix stupid. You feel good about yourself. Great for you! Want to get an eating disorder? Great! Thin out the gene pool.

What really sucks about this is the audience shots.

One guy. One.

Undermines the very appropriate point.

Wow those are some ignorant comments... If you truly don't understand the damage this kind of thing causes it's because you don't want to... you truly have to turn a completely blind eye and outright ignore it.

Just so we're clear stu... a female talking about female issues is automatically a feminist... unattractive... and a bitch...

No no... clearly you arn't a product of exactly whats shes talking about...

Tags for this video have been changed from 'advertising, women, sex, objectivity, violence, kate winslett' to 'advertising, women, sex, objectification, violence, kate winslet' - edited by calvados

No, men don't get objectified. We get thrown in one of two camps: the studly, handsome, can-do-no-wrong supermodel hero, or the dumb, dorky doofus of caveman intelligence when paired with the intellect of a woman in the same movie/commerical/etc.

Of course not...You're right! Men are not objectified like women! Especially not in Calvin Klein ads!

Oh, wait....

http://ficdn.fashionindie.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/jimmy005.jpg



>> ^ctrlaltbleach:

^Mainly because men are not objectified like women are although I have been hearing a lot of criticism lately about men always being shown as stupid in ads.
also promote

Women wouldn't be offended by these ads if they stayed in the kitchen.

Look can you stop associating "feminism" with bad/crazy/bitch/whatever other bullshit you want to sprout, it's getting old. First of all, she is completely level-headed and talking in a clear and concise manner, she didn't belittle the models choice of career, she isn't ranting, she didn't do anything to deserve your "feminist" comments.

All you see is a women talking and instantly turned to hate. Ridiculous.

Also you men who think you're amazing for being a man with no influential problems of this nature. When was the last time you cried publicly or even cried? Guess why you don't? Guess why you don't talk to your mates about your problems? You've had "be a man" drilled in to your head since birth...guess what you're a product of.

Disclaimer: I'm a male, I'm also a feminist.

>> ^Retroboy:

What really sucks about this is the audience shots.
One guy. One.
Undermines the very appropriate point.


i laughed when i saw that.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'advertising, women, sex, objectification, violence, kate winslet' to 'jean kilbourne, advertising, women, sex, objectification, violence, kate winslet' - edited by xxovercastxx

Thanks for Sifting this. I just came from an article where a guy was complaining about people who complain about booth babes at video game industry conventions. His question literally was, "What's the harm?" I'll pass this on to him.

@crotchflame I think the ads are both the cause and effect at the same time. They're the effect of a cultural norm that says its okay to treat women as (usually sexual) objects but they also cause that norm to be reinforced--so much so that some women even embrace that norm to their own detriment.

Breaking the cycle requires us as a society to re-evaluate what's most important to us. Videos like this and the actions of people like Kate Winslet are a great start, but for real change to happen I think it has to come from within each and every individual. We all need to stand up and call bullshit on this kind of advertising. We need to educate our kids better not to fall for this stuff--to be more critical and suspicious of what mass media is trying to tell them--this doesn't just apply to advertising but to pretty much everything including the nightly news as well. I think it has to be a bottom-up thing where it just becomes culturally intolerable, rather than a top-down thing where they try to legislate it away.

Yawwnnn.. Women's movement is getting old.

>> ^The_Ham:

Of course not...You're right! Men are not objectified like women! Especially not in Calvin Klein ads!
Oh, wait....
http://ficdn.fashionindie.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/jimmy005.jpg


>> ^ctrlaltbleach:
^Mainly because men are not objectified like women are although I have been hearing a lot of criticism lately about men always being shown as stupid in ads.
also promote



This is a tiny bit of a longer speech (which used to be here, but has been pulled from youtube ) and she covers the objectification of men too, but also points out that by and large they are shown as strong, empowered etc. where women are the opposite.

The talk in whole is fascinating, scary and can really open your eyes, and should be required viewing for anyone with a daughter.

People saying here that it's all just a bunch of ugly, whining feminists really need to have a look at themselves and the sort of chauvinistic dick they really are.

Who the fuck is this broad speaking on behalf of? Every fucking woman I know has a reasonable expectation for her own body. Sure they might be unhappy about this or that, but nothing that makes me think that there's this fucking epidemic of depressed anorexic, bulimic women walking around and wishing they looked like the models in the ads.

Yea we get it, ads are ridiculous.

>> ^yellowc:

Look can you stop associating "feminism" with bad/crazy/bitch/whatever other bullshit you want to sprout, it's getting old. First of all, she is completely level-headed and talking in a clear and concise manner, she didn't belittle the models choice of career, she isn't ranting, she didn't do anything to deserve your "feminist" comments.
All you see is a women talking and instantly turned to hate. Ridiculous.
Also you men who think you're amazing for being a man with no influential problems of this nature. When was the last time you cried publicly or even cried? Guess why you don't? Guess why you don't talk to your mates about your problems? You've had "be a man" drilled in to your head since birth...guess what you're a product of.
Disclaimer: I'm a male, I'm also a feminist.


The fact that she's got these people's attention with this self-important non-issue is annoying. The undertones are simply: She thinks women are dumb enough to be affected negatively by these obviously distorted ideas of beauty.

If you think this way too then you're no feminist. You're pandering to women as if they're dumb pets that can't think for themselves.

>> ^Stu:

It's always feminist who complain about it. See the trend? It's women bitching about women. You ever see men bitching about men? No, because we bitch about women because they never shut up about other women. Whens the last time one of your buddies walked up to you and said, man I wish I had his ass...Exactly. I'd down vote this bullshit if I could.
You can't fix stupid. You feel good about yourself. Great for you! Want to get an eating disorder? Great! Thin out the gene pool.


Cleaning out the gene pool is my job, asshole.

The fact that women can think for themselves and not be effected negatively does not negate the problem that we allow and passively encourage the distortion and objectification of men/women in our media, nor does standing against that suggest you feel all men/women are stupid.

I don't think she's a particular good speaker and I find her strenuous link to violence rather baseless. Though no one was really deconstructing her views with any thought, it just went straight to "feminist!" as if it was wrong to be one.

>> ^rottenseed:

>> ^yellowc:
Look can you stop associating "feminism" with bad/crazy/bitch/whatever other bullshit you want to sprout, it's getting old. First of all, she is completely level-headed and talking in a clear and concise manner, she didn't belittle the models choice of career, she isn't ranting, she didn't do anything to deserve your "feminist" comments.
All you see is a women talking and instantly turned to hate. Ridiculous.
Also you men who think you're amazing for being a man with no influential problems of this nature. When was the last time you cried publicly or even cried? Guess why you don't? Guess why you don't talk to your mates about your problems? You've had "be a man" drilled in to your head since birth...guess what you're a product of.
Disclaimer: I'm a male, I'm also a feminist.

The fact that she's got these people's attention with this self-important non-issue is annoying. The undertones are simply: She thinks women are dumb enough to be affected negatively by these obviously distorted ideas of beauty.
If you think this way too then you're no feminist. You're pandering to women as if they're dumb pets that can't think for themselves.

Has anyone heard the story about the SNL skit from the Dan Akroyd/Gilda Radner days where they reversed the roles? The women played the construction workers and Dan played a man walking by the construction site wearing shorts.

It was just a skit, but he ended up deeply upset by it.

All you guys who think this is nothing, just imagine... just imagine... if all you EVER saw of male images was young, taut muscled, and passive. No fighter jocks. No big funny guys with beer bellies. No firemen. Just... pretty body parts.

After you have spent ten minutes thinking about that, really thinking about it, then you can talk.

Until then, just shut the fuck up already. You don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Disclaimer: I'm only quoting to illustrate an issue. This is not a personal attack and all references to "you" are to be taken as the collective "you".

>> ^The_Ham:

Why is it the people complaining about this are always ugly women?
When was the last time you saw a male saying they are tormented by the ads in mens magazines?


I haven't read the rest of the comments (yet) so if this has already been addressed, please overlook this comment.

that said, the comment I quoted illustrates exactly the issue. it is your opinion, solely, that dictates her/them being "ugly"...
you must now ask yourself what has affected your opinion of what is considered "ugly"... advertising? thought so... (excuse my assumption for the sake of arguement).

advertising in this fashion affects both men and women, but doubly for women (when it is the attractiveness of the woman in question). advertising attempts to tell you what you want, so men will tend towards finding a mate that resembles this subconscious expectation. there's all kinds of research that shows this is true. I could link them all but I'm not going to when a quick keyword search on google will suffice, and that is what i would likely be linking anyhow.
for women though, they are not only affected by attempting to resemble this physical fantasy, but upon failure they are also shunned by the opposite sex due to those fantasies.

mind you, this doesn't apply to everyone, but when this message has been banged into your head for 100+ years anyone will have a moment where they start to question whether their own opinion is wrong when contrasted to the status quo.

--

on a slightly different note, advertising has its affect on men as well. there's a reason some shave their chests and get all guido'd-out. if that's what women dig, or you are told that's what women want, you'll mold yourself to a certain extent (some further than others) to the fantasy image that allows procreation.

>> ^rottenseed:

Who the fuck is this broad speaking on behalf of? Every fucking woman I know has a reasonable expectation for her own body. Sure they might be unhappy about this or that, but nothing that makes me think that there's this fucking epidemic of depressed anorexic, bulimic women walking around and wishing they looked like the models in the ads.
Yea we get it, ads are ridiculous.


I know this is contrary to the comment I just posted, in a way, but I agree with you. I would think the issues would be more pronounced in an LA/NY type of environment though. Areas that are constantly under the scrutiny of social commentary, as it were.

To all of you guys and girls that are accusing the advert and/or company for their commercial be aware that you can and sould not buy their stuff ... duh !

As for the bad image ... don't kill me ... just look away and talk to your kid about what is real and what is pure BS (like a skeleton wearing crap on a runway, made by and destin for the innner circle of fashion or a six foot tale plastic women and/or man on the cover of a magasin) !

I'm with rottenseed on this one. How bad can it be that a lemming tinks that weighing 88 pounds is ok. Where are the parent of that girl that lost her life of anorexia ?

Like always, nobody talks of the solutions only of the problems ...

PS : by telling me to shut up I needed to vent ... don't try to stop people from talking, the person with a brain tend to be difiant and would prefer to be dead then not speak out.

This comment section is a sorry sight. I apologize for my gender, women of videosift.

>> ^The_Ham:

Why is it the people complaining about this are always ugly women?


I don't think Kate Winslet is ugly.

>> ^SDGundamX:


@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/crotchflame" title="member since June 26th, 2007" class="profilelink">crotchflame I think the ads are both the cause and effect at the same time. They're the effect of a cultural norm that says its okay to treat women as (usually sexual) objects but they also cause that norm to be reinforced--so much so that some women even embrace that norm to their own detriment.


Our own detriment how, though? What social ill is growing as a consequence? Violence against women? Divorce? Low self-esteem? I would take any such argument seriously but most the commentary here seems to be at the introduction and not the conclusion.

There are counterpoints as well. Such as advertisers using artistic license in presenting an ideal of female beauty that we can't just assume people are taking seriously. There are women that match better to the ideal than others and we can't pretend that isn't the case any more than we should shut down the NBA because we can't all dunk a basketball. It should also be remembered that it's the ad's job to catch people's attention and it does that by bending cultural norms. We all spend much more time interacting with real people than with photo-shopped magazine prints.

I'm not defending anything here. I just feel like the subject is a great deal more complex than it's being made out to be. Not that that justifies the ugly, whiny feminist line of thought in the comments though.

How many women's libbers does it take to change a light bulb? None, women's libbers don't achieve anything.

Where did I say unattractive or a bitch? Oh wait, that's you putting words into my mouth. And trying to say other people are to blame for someone's insecurity is another copp out. You show me guys who want women to look like skeletor. Oh can't find one? That's because guys don't want them. Guys don't create the image, women do. You can call me an asshole and down vote me all you want, it doesn't change the simple fact that its women who start the image and then compare themselves against it. I completely understand the damage it causes. I also understand why it's getting worse: because people are looking at the wrong source for the problem, just like you did. >> ^Januari:

Wow those are some ignorant comments... If you truly don't understand the damage this kind of thing causes it's because you don't want to... you truly have to turn a completely blind eye and outright ignore it.
Just so we're clear stu... a female talking about female issues is automatically a feminist... unattractive... and a bitch...
No no... clearly you arn't a product of exactly whats shes talking about...

Just look at actors and actresses that are on most television shows. They have people who in most locations in their viewing areas would be considered much more attractive than any of their viewing audience. So much so that when they have to portray someone as someone who was picked on due to their looks......they also tend to be maybe one notch below these actors and actresses, but still way beyond the typical audience.

It's just what people expect to see and probably want to see. If they stuck a bunch of normal "ugly" people on television, without the make up, lighting, hair, etc.....unless it's some sort of comedy to make fun of the normal state of shows...is probably not going to make it.

As for how they portray men, they make special efforts for men to make sure the short but "hero" guys are filmed in ways where they appear as tall as any other man on the show. Often by having the "hero" stand on a curb or the other guy stand in a low spot. You'll especially notice this when they have basketball players making appearances on movies and such, they would probably be lucky if the typical male reached their shoulders in height but often they are face to face.

I am sure if you looked for heroes/heroines and such you'd notice there's something specific Hollywood does with lighting, make-up and music to ingrain into our minds when the hero is on screen versus a villain on screen. Often using males with larger noses, heavier brows, scars, etc...whether natural or cosmetic to portray villains. And never forget the villain "cackling" laughter for both genders.

I think it's a little more evident in women because both men and women pay attention to the women on screen. Men mostly out of attraction, and women out of their "catty" natures. You can see catty-ness in person when you see women who work in service places like a bank, and a woman comes in dressed provocatively...you'll see the women at the bank whisper to each other and often be rather rude. You might see similar behavior in them when a man comes in, but they are pleasant even flirty toward the man, not rude. You might get rude behavior if a homeless guy comes in. Women are also really rude to any woman they feel use their good looks to get anything. IE if a woman is a dancer/stripper/porn/model/nude model/trophy wife/etc. They are looked down upon by all women but women who've done something similar in the past or were on the verge of doing something like in the past (IE they could, but didnt..not they wanted to but no one would have them). You'll see something similar to this in males when it comes to sports. Especially when it comes to how much the sports stars earn or if they screw up a play.

I am not saying it's not a real issue when they tamper with bodies via photoshop and what not, but I also think it's got a lot of jealousy mixed in as well.

I can only imagine what women have to go through, but yes, this stuff also has an effect on men. It took years before I felt comfortable taking my shirt off at the beach and I'm just an average-sized guy.

They definitely do this with men in advertising. Just watch any Gillette commercial. Huge bulging muscles and a penchant for ridiculous technology. A very poor representation of the majority of men.

I agree that it is terrible that this is happening to men now. I don't think that is progress, I think it is a disease that is spreading.

The point you are missing, though, is that these are the VAST MAJORITY of the images that women see. Pay attention to the next movie or TV show you watch. How many "normal" guys are cast in parts? How many "normal" women?

While you are watching, switch the genders in your mind and imagine a woman who is of the same attractiveness level as the men. I think it will shock you when you realize that you see normal looking men ALL THE TIME and rarely do you see normal looking women.

What percentage of all posters/images are JUST male body parts? What percentage of men in the media fit this impossibly high standard?

You can count on one hand the number of "normal" looking women on TV.

It is so pervasive you guys who think we are whining don't even see it.

Compare that to British TV. Men and women both are routinely ... normal. They are chubby, plain looking, balding if they are male. It is a relief to watch British TV.

And I didn't tell you to shut up, @ala_bala. I said think for ten minutes and then speak. Which clearly you didn't do.


>> ^schlub:

They definitely do this with men in advertising. Just watch any Gillette commercial. Huge bulging muscles and a penchant for ridiculous technology. A very poor representation of the majority of men.

This is all bullshit. If you want to empower women, don't treat them like victims of society -- treat them like they're adults capable of making their own choices in life and are responsible for their own happiness.

I think a discussion like this makes sense as a way to help people understand themselves and how humans behave and relate. But it's not like we can just turn this stuff off. Monkeys want to look at celebrity monkeys. Beetles keep growing bigger horns, well beyond what makes sense.

Human females compete with each others' appearance, even to their own detriment.

And yeah, Suzie might feel bad that she doesn't look like a celeb - but I don't think that's usually what makes Suzie starve herself. It's her peer relationships that are going to have the biggest influence. I don't think it's even "boys she likes" (and, in general, it's not boys who are pushing for ultra-skinny girls.. runway models are satisfying a distinctly female ideal of beauty). I think it's mostly her female peer group - if her friends (or enemies) at school are at a healthy weight, chances are she'll be fine. It's when girls tease her in the locker room she's in danger.

It's perhaps more dangerous now, because the current female ideal of beauty is so skinny, and relationships and information are more wide ranging - but it's always been the case and will be until humans can really remake their brains.

I've been objectified by women and I can truly say that it is deeply disturbing to be regarded as a piece of meat instead of a person. It really affects you.

I don't think the speaker is ugly either. @The_Ham must not get laid with standards like that. >> ^Opus_Moderandi:

>> ^The_Ham:
Why is it the people complaining about this are always ugly women?

I don't think Kate Winslet is ugly.

No offense - but boo freaking hoo.

Through all history, art (and by extension, advertising) has idealized the human physical form to represent the societally desired standard of beauty. Some folks (vid chick especially) needs to spend a bit less time whingeing about things that are absolutely, unequivocally, 100% unchangeable. What are you going to do, toots? Pass a law that forces people to only portray human figures in a way that you personally approve? Get over it.

By the way, males get the same treatment too. Avertising, movies, TV, and pretty much all forms of media portray the male figure in an exaggerated fashion. Males are shown in two ways... 1. They are shaped like tent-pegs, tall, muscle-bound, and have physically impossible abs. 2. They are the icky "metro-sexual" waif-like douche with a shirt half open, popped collar, and an expression like he is about to commit suicide. So don't give me this bullcrap that men are not also objectified, idealized, cut up, and treated like meat in ads & the media. Of course they are.

But you don't hear stupid moronic men giving speeches about how it this trend 'damages' boys because it doesn't. Why? Because boys have the ability to not care squat about how the male body is portrayed in media. The only area men tend to be insecure about body image is (A) going bald and (B) the size of thier junk.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

This comment section is a sorry sight. I apologize for my gender, women of videosift.


shame on you...you're married. Trying to fish for cyber-tang...tsk tsk

name me one woman devoid of dick because of the social image of beauty, and I'll show you a broad who is unfuckable by anybody's standards...

What I mean to say, in a less crass fashion now, is that I like what I like, despite what these ads tell me is beautiful. I think a majority of men will agree that the love of their lives aren't represented by these ideals of beauty, rather they fulfill their own interests and fetishes. Unfortunately, in America, there's not a shortage of obese people perpetuating the gene pool, so that just goes to show you that these ads mean nothing other than to those that decide to make them an issue.
>> ^bareboards2:

I agree that it is terrible that this is happening to men now. I don't think that is progress, I think it is a disease that is spreading.
The point you are missing, though, is that these are the VAST MAJORITY of the images that women see. Pay attention to the next movie or TV show you watch. How many "normal" guys are cast in parts? How many "normal" women?
While you are watching, switch the genders in your mind and imagine a woman who is of the same attractiveness level as the men. I think it will shock you when you realize that you see normal looking men ALL THE TIME and rarely do you see normal looking women.
What percentage of all posters/images are JUST male body parts? What percentage of men in the media fit this impossibly high

Okay, this has gotten pathetic.

Some of you are hopping on your soapbox and declaring women to be mindless nimrods who've fallen victim to some insidious plot by evil male dominated advertising agencies. Women aren't idiots. They're not infants. They're capable of the critical perspectives any human is capable of, and that includes syphoning out the bullshit in shitty retouched ads.

Advertisers create specific visions of what they (or the creative directors) think are beautiful, whether that's anorexic girls, beefcake men, gender-neutral models or fucking Lara Croft/Sucker Punch badasses. You're all persecuting the advertisers because they're not putting fat and unattractive people in ads. But who wants to see that?

This has nothing to do with equality or feminism. This is just fear politicking motivated by some woman's perverted sense of feminism. I accept women as my complete equal in every regard, and I love my fiancée and think she's the most beautiful woman I will ever know and every word from her mouth is a blissful miracle to my ears, but don't think for a second I don't check out other women who are thin, young and attractive. And that ain't because some douchebag at the advertising agency told me that's what I should I like. No. That's because I'm an instinctual animal behind these opposable thumbs and cognitive thought, and my brain tells my dick what I like and it ain't gelatinous thighs and muffin shaped asses.

>> ^rottenseed:

name me one woman devoid of dick because of the social image of beauty, and I'll show you a broad who is unfuckable by anybody's standards...
What I mean to say, in a less crass fashion now, is that I like what I like, despite what these ads tell me is beautiful. I think a majority of men will agree that the love of their lives aren't represented by these ideals of beauty, rather they fulfill their own interests and fetishes. Unfortunately, in America, there's not a shortage of obese people perpetuating the gene pool, so that just goes to show you that these ads mean nothing other than to those that decide to make them an issue.
>> ^bareboards2:
I agree that it is terrible that this is happening to men now. I don't think that is progress, I think it is a disease that is spreading.
The point you are missing, though, is that these are the VAST MAJORITY of the images that women see. Pay attention to the next movie or TV show you watch. How many "normal" guys are cast in parts? How many "normal" women?
While you are watching, switch the genders in your mind and imagine a woman who is of the same attractiveness level as the men. I think it will shock you when you realize that you see normal looking men ALL THE TIME and rarely do you see normal looking women.
What percentage of all posters/images are JUST male body parts? What percentage of men in the media fit this impossibly high


Good fucking point. If this is such an epidemic why are there so many fat people spawning?

This isn't feminism. This is more alarmist nonsense from people who want to shape society in their image or in a way that contradicts aspects of our instinctual humanity which makes them uncomfortable. The vocal people in here are the new prude prohibitionists who see what they perceive as ills in society (sin by another name) and want to stamp them out somehow. In this case, photoshop is the weapon, the cigar-gnashing Mad Men executives at the advertising agency are the culprits, and the mindless impressionable women are the victims.

Give it a rest. You want to be proponent of feminism? I say stop putting women down and making them into victims by reducing their intelligence to mindless sponges that uncritically absorbs everything fed to them. You know, maybe treat the women you're trying to claim are intelligent as actually being intelligent. That's probably a good place to start.

Why so angry, @rottenseed and @blankfist? You are worse than a couple of bitchy cunts.

>> ^Issykitty:

Why so angry, @rottenseed and @blankfist? You are worse than a couple of bitchy cunts.


Back in the kitchen, you!

I didn't hear her advocate that. I heard her shine light on a disturbing trend of modern society. One that I think it's good that a new generation of women (and men too) knows about, so that they can use their sharp, empowered wits (that the apologists here trumpet so loudly) to not let the trend affect them negatively. And if at all possible, turn around.

It's telling how many of the commenters here try to groundlessly assign motivations.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

What are you going to do, toots? Pass a law that forces people to only portray human figures in a way that you personally approve?

Whatcha cookin' up, Blanky? Another steaming pile of bullshit??? No thanks. RON PAUL!

>> ^blankfist:

>> ^Issykitty:
Why so angry, @rottenseed and @blankfist? You are worse than a couple of bitchy cunts.

Back in the kitchen, you!

>> ^Issykitty:

Why so angry, @rottenseed and @blankfist? You are worse than a couple of bitchy cunts.


How can a couple of bitchy cunts be worse than a couple of bitchy cunts? Answer me that, kitty cat!

Ron Paul 2012!!!11!!1

It's telling how many of the commenters here try to groundlessly assign motivations.

Except this woman (Jean K) is heavily involved in politics and makes all her fortune based on peddling her particular line of phycho-babbble and fearmongering.

Give it a rest. You want to be proponent of feminism? I say stop putting women down and making them into victims by reducing their intelligence to mindless sponges that uncritically absorbs everything fed to them. You know, maybe treat the women you're trying to claim are intelligent as actually being intelligent.

Agree 100%. Jean K's entire argument is the same "people-are-helpless-morons" argument that I so despise in so many ways. It presume people are idiots, morons, and helpless puppets of powers beyond their control, and that the "evil" thing (whatever the self-appointed nanny says it is) must be excorsised. Bull - freaking - crap.

JP assumes all females are stupid, helpless, unintelligent twits who mindlessly dance to the image of any ad they see. And JUST as bad (but often ignored) is her presumption that all men are evil, horrifying, selfish, sex-crazed brutes that love to carve up women, beat them, or otherwise abuse them because of what they see in TV, or whatever.

Give me a break. The only this worth censoring here is this woman and her stupid prejudices about males & females.

>> ^bareboards2:

I agree that it is terrible that this is happening to men now. I don't think that is progress, I think it is a disease that is spreading.
The point you are missing, though, is that these are the VAST MAJORITY of the images that women see. Pay attention to the next movie or TV show you watch. How many "normal" guys are cast in parts? How many "normal" women?
While you are watching, switch the genders in your mind and imagine a woman who is of the same attractiveness level as the men. I think it will shock you when you realize that you see normal looking men ALL THE TIME and rarely do you see normal looking women.
What percentage of all posters/images are JUST male body parts? What percentage of men in the media fit this impossibly high standard?
You can count on one hand the number of "normal" looking women on TV.
It is so pervasive you guys who think we are whining don't even see it.
Compare that to British TV. Men and women both are routinely ... normal. They are chubby, plain looking, balding if they are male. It is a relief to watch British TV.
And I didn't tell you to shut up, @<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/ala_bala" title="member since February 9th, 2007" class="profilelink">ala_bala. I said think for ten minutes and then speak. Which clearly you didn't do.

>> ^schlub:
They definitely do this with men in advertising. Just watch any Gillette commercial. Huge bulging muscles and a penchant for ridiculous technology. A very poor representation of the majority of men.



Thank you for posting this, because i was just about to say - from what i see on tv, there is a roughly equal number of "perfect" men in adverts about aftershave, deodorant, shaving utensils, alcohol adverts, etc... If i compare, on the tv i watch, the number of perfect men to women? I'd say it was equal. Then i was about to say - does this say something about the difference between the sexes if it's only women who cannot help but judge themselves?

So there was my rant which never quite was, because i appreciate your comment and maybe i'm spoiled after all, perhaps it's not so bad here.

However, i really don't like the direction her argument takes, and i had to stop the video because i was that pissed off with it. "Objectifying is the first step on the road to abuse!" I'm sorry, but i can't buy into that and i never will. I don't like the logic whatsoever. It reminds me of the "violent video games cause violence" nonsense. There's always been violence, always will, video games won't change that.

In the same way, there's always been abuse and i would argue that abuse nowadays is far less accepted in our society than ever before. Racist, homophic, whatever. We are completely intolerant of those things now. Historically "raping" your wife wasn't really seen as rape, you were allowed to beat your wife if it was deemed reasonable, that kind of thing.

Absolutely unacceptable nowadays since the ADVENT of the objectification of women in advertisements - the evidence is hardly on her side. Cmon lady... I *hate* that argument.

Seriously, didn't we leave this kind of sexism behind in the 80s?

I don't fully understand why my fellow white males get so uptight and defensive when it comes to the topic of sexism, racism and other types of prejudice. Is it some kind of misplaced guilt? Is it that we subconsciously know we have a good thing going on and don't want others rocking the boat? Is it that we don't understand the advantages white maleness has bestowed upon us and cannot empathize with those who do not have those advantages? Are we just over-sized monkeys? I really don't know.

I don't think there is anything even vaguely controversial about the points she is making here. Advertising is sleazy. It preys upon our fears and insecurities. It promotes greed and self loathing. It promotes mediocrity in film, news media, television and music. It provides financial support to the worst elements of both government and business. And, it targets men too. How many of you drones use overpriced "Axe" deodorant because your subconscious mind thinks it will get you laid.

This presentation is smart, pithy and right on target. Those who don't get it should keep watching it in a continuous loop until your consciousness evolves to a higher level, you fucking primates.

Play us out Frank: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfUB4Wv5ooI

I agree with most of what she says, but for a 68 yr-old woman it's surprising that she has not a single gray hair.

Seriously, didn't we leave this kind of sexism behind in the 80s?

The point is that it ISN'T sexism. It is the refutation of a patently insulting and illogical argument that demeans human beings far more than the so-called 'evil' it decries. This woman's argument goes much further down the road of dehumanizing people than any of the ads she whines about. The only differences is that she is hiding her argument, and advertising isn't. I respect a good ad 100X more than this fool and her fear driven lies.

white males

And you're doubling down on it by being a racist. How do you even know if anyone here is white? Between her insulting mysoginy, her evil misandry, and your stereotypical racism we've got a real intolerance trifecta going on here.

Advertising is sleazy. It preys upon our fears and insecurities.

So is this woman, and her stupid arguments. Regardless, advertising does one thing and one thing only... It creates product awareness. When you march into a retail store to purchase deodorant, you don't buy Axe Body Spray because you actually believe women are going to chase you down. You buy it because you saw the ad, thought it was funny, and decided to give it a shot. And in doing so you decided that you LIKED it. I bought a can of Axe (Sharp Focus) because I saw the black can in the aisle and liked the scent - not because I thought some woman in a schoolgirl skirt was going to maul me. The argument that people are puppets of "sleazy" ads is complete bunk. Ads create awareness. Awareness leads to trial. Trial leads to consumption. It's that simple.

Those who don't get it should keep watching it in a continuous loop until your consciousness evolves to a higher level

That happened a long time ago - and without any assistance from this woman and her abbevillian stupidity. And my higher, evolved consciousness tells me that this woman - and her clearly prejudice hate of men and women - can go cram it sideways with walnuts.

68 yr-old woman it's surprising that she has not a single gray hair.

Because quite clearly this hypocrite buys into the "evil" advertising image that grey hair is bad. Oh - but I'm SURE when this dingus walks into the salon to get her hair done she doesn't feel for one second that she's a stinking, slimy, self-righteous hypocrite for dying her hair with one of those hair care products all those "evil" advertisement pimp in their demeaning, insulting, culturally poisonous advertisement. :eyeroll: What a piece of work that pathetic specimen is.

>> ^rottenseed:

Who the fuck is this broad speaking on behalf of? Every fucking woman I know has a reasonable expectation for her own body. Sure they might be unhappy about this or that, but nothing that makes me think that there's this fucking epidemic of depressed anorexic, bulimic women walking around and wishing they looked like the models in the ads.
Yea we get it, ads are ridiculous.


Also, @crotchflame (because I think my comment here relates to your question)

So just because you don't personally know anyone who has this problem, the problem doesn't exist? Well, I DO personally know women who are anorexic and depressed because of their perceived negative body image. I happen to be a university teacher and I meet far too many of them. I also know women who refuse to leave the house without make-up on. I also know women who think they are too fat when in reality they are at a (medically-speaking) ideal weight. All of them are comparing themselves to these images--and unfortunately to each other. There is a real problem going on here. Just because you personally aren't affected by it doesn't mean it isn't real.

@yellowc @dannym3141(and anyone else who questioned what she said about violence) At 2:20 she quite clearly says these advertisements don't directly cause violence. However, these advertisements often portray women in a dehumanizing way, and dehumanization happens to be a pre-requisite for violence, unless you are a psychopath. Read this article in Forbes for some more info.

In other words, she's saying the media helps create and maintain a social climate where it is okay to objectify women. And such a social climate tacitly endorses violence against women--both physical and psychological.

WTFLOL! Did you just call DFT a racist??? LOLOLOLOLOL! This is fucking retarded, seriously! Outraged Bitchy cunt thread on steroids... and I am not referring to FEMALE commentary. OMG, Pennypecker's gonna call me a manhater now!!!! LOL!

this thread got tldr.

here's my 2 cents. an over abundance of advertising is damaging. not just for how it portrays women, not just for impressionable girls and boys who are possibly likely to grow up with a skewed sense of identity and self worth. it's just damaging. to everyone. to cultures. to the psyche. it's too much. and it's constant.

women are intelligent and can think for themselves. i'm not falling for the "you don't look like kim kardashian?!? get your fat ass some slim fast and some loreal, dye your hair, wear this underwear, smell this way, use this roller ball crunch machine you fat fucking ugly cow" ads. and neither is my daughter (so far). because we are not at all exposed to it consistently.

know what it takes to brainwash someone? a few hours a day of content and a peer group who agrees with said content. that's it. period. so you take 10 elementary school kids who watch television 2 or 3 hours a day and have them all hang out together 8 hours a day at school. eventually you will get a generation who eat doritos and snack cakes and think that their bodies and their make up and their shaving cream represent them. thats not just damaging to women. its damaging to culture. period. my complaints are not as feminist, but as a human being. enough is enough already. can we please quit buying sooo much stupid shit already?!?!??

^@peggedbea, I was going to say this video made me think of your Sift Talk Post: http://kids.videosift.com/talk/On-the-over-sexualization-of-our-daughters
as I'm sure it did for you. This is something most parents should be thinking about concerning their daughters.

as far glass ceilings and sexism being a nonissue in western society, @blankfist ...... and others for that matter.

i lived in so cal for a while, but i never worked there... so maybe you do live in a mecca of enlightment or some bullshit... but...

have you ever been threatened and written up for telling your boss you weren't going to press charges, but you also weren't going to work 12 hour long graveyard shifts alone with the dude who pins you to the wall and tells how he likes to be touched and constantly tries to fuck you in between patients?? have you ever found out that your male coworkers were given raises because they "had families to support" ??? have you ever been written up for not attending a meeting due to child care issues and then found out 2 of your male coworkers were exempt from attending any meetings ever because they watch their kids during daytime hours??? ever been patted on the head like a dog when you figured out how to fix a technical malfunction that your opposite gendered coworkers couldnt?? ever been treated like some kind of freakish savant when the dudes you work with figured out you were really intelligent??? ever find out that all of your female friends have been victims of rape, molestation or incest??? ever had a "friend" give you some "tylenol" at a concert and wake up 3 days later?? ever see television reports about the outrageous number of teen fathers, or are they all about teenage mothers?? ever hear derogatory remarks about "welfare fathers", or is it all about "welfare moms"?? ever have people assume that you must be a poor, slutty, uneducated, night shift denny's waitress because you're divorced???

sexism is alive and well, it might look differently than you imagine it, it may not effect your bubble of existance, and it's probably more likely the result of 6000 years of systematic female subordination and oppression than advertising executives with boners for hot skinny models. but it's real and pervasive and it exists.

i think the point is, it's gotten a bit out of hand. agreed. fuck, it would be nice in film to see some actors who can actually act...rather than just look pretty and read a script.

but maybe a bigger problem is that the only time i'm not advertised to and marketed to (in our uber-consumer society) is when i'm asleep. fucking leave me alone for 5 minutes.

and there is a significant difference between what we see as a realistic "perfect" human form and something photoshopped to physical impossibility.

Starting to sound as bad as 4chan in here...

Um... ...?

I'm a little late to the party, but my $0.02 on this topic is that I think most feminist groups are focusing on the wrong things. It's not that advertising has such a relentlessly high standard on female beauty, it's that our culture seems to accept and reinforce people making judgments about women based on their appearance.

Right now, it's socially acceptable for women to hold high-paying jobs, or act in a professionally aggressive manner, but only if she's attractive. If you're plain, or god forbid, downright unattractive, you're just a bitch, possibly a "cast-iron" bitch if you attain a position of power, and assert that power in the aggressive way men are always encouraged to.

There's a heavily reinforced cultural undercurrent that a woman's worthiness as a person is tightly connected to her attractiveness. Part of that comes from the pervasiveness of female beauty in American media -- even the "ugly" women are beautiful (take Tina Fey on 30 Rock as a prime example), because actually plain or unattractive women aren't allowed to be cast as anything but totally unsympathetic bitches, or maybe some sort of lovable grandma character if she's grey haired and wrinkled.

But I think this particular screed is missing the point -- the issue isn't advertisements with their objectification (of EVERYTHING), with overt sexual imagery, and impossible standards of beauty, it's the way that gets carried over into all the other aspects of mass media. There are no plain female musicians rocketing up the top 40, no average looking female news reporters, no sitcom with a normal-looking female character, no dramas where the sharpest intellect is a unremarkable-looking woman in her 40's...that's the real issue, not what they're doing in the ad world.

In the parlance of our times: hurr durr

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

Seriously, didn't we leave this kind of sexism behind in the 80s?
The point is that it ISN'T sexism. It is the refutation of a patently insulting and illogical argument that demeans human beings far more than the so-called 'evil' it decries. This woman's argument goes much further down the road of dehumanizing people than any of the ads she whines about. The only differences is that she is hiding her argument, and advertising isn't. I respect a good ad 100X more than this fool and her fear driven lies.
white males
And you're doubling down on it by being a racist. How do you even know if anyone here is white? Between her insulting mysoginy, her evil misandry, and your stereotypical racism we've got a real intolerance trifecta going on here.
Advertising is sleazy. It preys upon our fears and insecurities.
So is this woman, and her stupid arguments. Regardless, advertising does one thing and one thing only... It creates product awareness. When you march into a retail store to purchase deodorant, you don't buy Axe Body Spray because you actually believe women are going to chase you down. You buy it because you saw the ad, thought it was funny, and decided to give it a shot. And in doing so you decided that you LIKED it. I bought a can of Axe (Sharp Focus) because I saw the black can in the aisle and liked the scent - not because I thought some woman in a schoolgirl skirt was going to maul me. The argument that people are puppets of "sleazy" ads is complete bunk. Ads create awareness. Awareness leads to trial. Trial leads to consumption. It's that simple.
Those who don't get it should keep watching it in a continuous loop until your consciousness evolves to a higher level
That happened a long time ago - and without any assistance from this woman and her abbevillian stupidity. And my higher, evolved consciousness tells me that this woman - and her clearly prejudice hate of men and women - can go cram it sideways with walnuts.
68 yr-old woman it's surprising that she has not a single gray hair.
Because quite clearly this hypocrite buys into the "evil" advertising image that grey hair is bad. Oh - but I'm SURE when this dingus walks into the salon to get her hair done she doesn't feel for one second that she's a stinking, slimy, self-righteous hypocrite for dying her hair with one of those hair care products all those "evil" advertisement pimp in their demeaning, insulting, culturally poisonous advertisement. :eyeroll: What a piece of work that pathetic specimen is.

Apparently I'm a race traitor. Good to know. >> ^Issykitty:

WTFLOL! Did you just call DFT a racist??? LOLOLOLOLOL! This is fucking retarded, seriously! Outraged Bitchy cunt thread on steroids... and I am not referring to FEMALE commentary. OMG, Pennypecker's gonna call me a manhater now!!!! LOL!

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

How many of you drones use overpriced "Axe" deodorant because your subconscious mind thinks it will get you laid.

One nay vote here.

I know. It's like, some women think I'm only a penis, and it hurts, you know..?

>> ^bareboards2:

Has anyone heard the story about the SNL skit from the Dan Akroyd/Gilda Radner days where they reversed the roles? The women played the construction workers and Dan played a man walking by the construction site wearing shorts.
It was just a skit, but he ended up deeply upset by it.
All you guys who think this is nothing, just imagine... just imagine... if all you EVER saw of male images was young, taut muscled, and passive. No fighter jocks. No big funny guys with beer bellies. No firemen. Just... pretty body parts.
After you have spent ten minutes thinking about that, really thinking about it, then you can talk.
Until then, just shut the fuck up already. You don't have a clue what you are talking about.

lol

>> ^gwiz665:

I know. It's like, some women think I'm only a penis, and it hurts, you know..?
>> ^bareboards2:
Has anyone heard the story about the SNL skit from the Dan Akroyd/Gilda Radner days where they reversed the roles? The women played the construction workers and Dan played a man walking by the construction site wearing shorts.
It was just a skit, but he ended up deeply upset by it.
All you guys who think this is nothing, just imagine... just imagine... if all you EVER saw of male images was young, taut muscled, and passive. No fighter jocks. No big funny guys with beer bellies. No firemen. Just... pretty body parts.
After you have spent ten minutes thinking about that, really thinking about it, then you can talk.
Until then, just shut the fuck up already. You don't have a clue what you are talking about.

@sgundamx I still think my comment stands - article or no article. Unless you can categorically state that there was no abuse before advertisements, there's no evidence for the sentiment that she's insinuating.

There's so many people in this thread arguing with other people, often times even two people in agreement are having some sort of tiff. I'll tell you why;

Firstly, males are less likely to notice sexism towards females because it doesn't affect them, doesn't even happen when they're around perhaps.
Secondly, women are more likely to notice sexism towards females because it only happens to them or around them, and women who are aware of sexism (or perhaps anti sexism campaigners) are more likely to see false positives, times when there was no sexism, just plain ignorance or rudeness, and it's chalked down to sexism.
Thirdly, everyone is different - some guys think they wouldn't be bothered if they were a girl and all they saw were skinny girls, and then you'll get girls saying "how can you say that? oh yes you would!" and then they'll get a reply saying "how can you say i would? oh no i wouldn't!" and so on.

But let's at least be fair about the matter. People saying "how would you feel if ALL YOU SAW was toned and fit handsome guys?" - this is not the situation. If that were the case, all your friends and relatives and everyone you ever saw or knew about would have to be skinny, and you were the only one that wasn't. In actual fact, advertisements display something utterly bullshit but then you go out into the street and see a load of perfectly average people. I'm not saying whether you should or should not get offended, but at least make the argument fair - it is advertisements and media, not *everything*

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/28/an-older-generation-falls-prey-to-eating-disorders/?hpw

Women have eating disorders at a rate 10 to 1 over men.

But it's nothing. Ignore the facts. Pretend something else is going on.

Call it attempted censorship by an ugly feminist. A culture of victimization by whining women.

I don't care. Because unless you actually spent even ten minutes imagining what it is like, I repeat myself -- shut the fuck up. You don't know what you are talking about.

I'll also repeat myself -- it is horrendous that this trend is spilling over towards men.

She says it just because she is fat, old and ugly.

I think this one is a pretty good (and funny) summary of how commercials aimed at the different sexes work:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9fFOelpE_8

You're missing the point. Yes, perhaps fully formed, rational, emotionally mature personalities are not susceptible to suggestive advertising. However, there's a process to becoming mature, it's called growing up, and along the way people are not so capable of differentiating the real from the not-so-real. Along the way, people's ideas of body-image get polluted by all manner of external influences. Some people have enough positive input from others close to them that they are able to defend themselves from this brain-washing. Some don't.

Clearly you have your own issues with women to deal with. My guess is that you should learn a lot if you talked to one.
>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

Seriously, didn't we leave this kind of sexism behind in the 80s?
The point is that it ISN'T sexism. It is the refutation of a patently insulting and illogical argument that demeans human beings far more than the so-called 'evil' it decries. This woman's argument goes much further down the road of dehumanizing people than any of the ads she whines about. The only differences is that she is hiding her argument, and advertising isn't. I respect a good ad 100X more than this fool and her fear driven lies.
white males
And you're doubling down on it by being a racist. How do you even know if anyone here is white? Between her insulting mysoginy, her evil misandry, and your stereotypical racism we've got a real intolerance trifecta going on here.
Advertising is sleazy. It preys upon our fears and insecurities.
So is this woman, and her stupid arguments. Regardless, advertising does one thing and one thing only... It creates product awareness. When you march into a retail store to purchase deodorant, you don't buy Axe Body Spray because you actually believe women are going to chase you down. You buy it because you saw the ad, thought it was funny, and decided to give it a shot. And in doing so you decided that you LIKED it. I bought a can of Axe (Sharp Focus) because I saw the black can in the aisle and liked the scent - not because I thought some woman in a schoolgirl skirt was going to maul me. The argument that people are puppets of "sleazy" ads is complete bunk. Ads create awareness. Awareness leads to trial. Trial leads to consumption. It's that simple.
Those who don't get it should keep watching it in a continuous loop until your consciousness evolves to a higher level
That happened a long time ago - and without any assistance from this woman and her abbevillian stupidity. And my higher, evolved consciousness tells me that this woman - and her clearly prejudice hate of men and women - can go cram it sideways with walnuts.
68 yr-old woman it's surprising that she has not a single gray hair.
Because quite clearly this hypocrite buys into the "evil" advertising image that grey hair is bad. Oh - but I'm SURE when this dingus walks into the salon to get her hair done she doesn't feel for one second that she's a stinking, slimy, self-righteous hypocrite for dying her hair with one of those hair care products all those "evil" advertisement pimp in their demeaning, insulting, culturally poisonous advertisement. :eyeroll: What a piece of work that pathetic specimen is.

Clearly you have your own issues with women to deal with. My guess is that you should learn a lot if you talked to one.

Ad hominem balderdash. I respect and honor all women far more than most - but JK voided any intellectual respect with her foolishness. She is foolish not because she's a woman, but because she's prejudiced toward others and treats them with disrespect on a far deeper level than any advertiser does. My attitude towards her is not because I'm a man - but because she's a hypocritical git. I rarely unload at a person as I did above, but this lowly cockroach deserves it 10 times over.

Not saying all ads are great. They're not. But the presumption that they are the primary motivating factor in creating societal mores is a canard. Ads do not create society. They reflect it. If we waved a magic wand and all ads vanished tomorrow, the bedrock of "what standard to people hold themselves to?" would not change one iota. Cram a bunch of average, plain folks into sitcoms and movies and the "ideal beauty" will still be what people look for.

And for this hypocritical sleaze to insult the character and nature of countless men and women because of her own insecurities, prejudices and cowardice? For money? There is no language fit to sufficiently convey just how low that is.

"Over 60 percent of U.S. adult women are overweight, according to 2007 estimates from the National Center for Health Statistics of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention."

Doesn't look like the advertising is having much of an impact, to me.

*controversy

Adding video to channels (Controversy) - requested by MrFisk.

I have to say that I used to work at Nordstrom's. Men clothing is pretty familiar, but ALL THE TIME, everyday, we got clothes in for the womens area that was the "mirrored version" of the males department. EVERY piece of clothing that came into that department WAS sexualized. We even had a shipment of thong underwear for 12 YEAR OLDS.

Needless to say I found it to be a very disturbing trend; so did my other male co-workers. Especially with the thongs; that was disgusting.

This is a marketing/sexism/foundation. Everybody "gets" their role by the end of high school and it persists. Males continue with the sins of their fathers and anyone saying women have an ultimate choice to this simply doesn't understand the psychology involved: some WILL see through the facade, but just as many don't. The same is exactly true for the men that perpetuate their part.

The clothing is just an aspect of psychology that shows us that manufacturers fall for their own tripe; and the perpetrator can easily be a women as a man.

My biggest criticism regarding this whole "killing us softly" dialog is that it's always presented as a clear cut crime, there's an offender (media) and a victim (women).
While this is true at a very basic level I find it to be a very innocent approach. If you're going to be candid regarding this whole image issue then at the very least you have to ask yourself, what is my part in this, as an individual?
The answer in my opinion is a sad one, we perpetuate these concepts, we reward this behavior, not just the media, not just men or women, almost all of us. In the company of most women I know I find myself to be (sadly) more of a feminist than they all are combined. Sure, they're quick to fire criticisms about these issues, but when it comes to their part in playing the role that mainstream media and history has defined for them as women they are usually not only content in abiding but find satisfaction in perpetuating these anachronistic concepts.

What I'm basically trying to say is that this issue, to me, is very similar to the whole fast-food industry problem. The industry provides fast, cheap and extremely unhealthy food. People consume, then they rage about having been harmed by these companies. Of course there's an argument to be made against these companies, but to view yourself as a helpless victim is just immature. What are you doing to denounce these concepts? To say, as an individual, I refuse to abide, I refuse to play along, I refuse to eat up what is served to me just because it's being served.
We are not helpless. We need to understand the part we play in a capitalist consumer-driven society, not just cry out as victims.

>> ^dannym3141:

@sgundamx I still think my comment stands - article or no article. Unless you can categorically state that there was no abuse before advertisements, there's no evidence for the sentiment that she's insinuating.
There's so many people in this thread arguing with other people, often times even two people in agreement are having some sort of tiff. I'll tell you why;
Firstly, males are less likely to notice sexism towards females because it doesn't affect them, doesn't even happen when they're around perhaps.
Secondly, women are more likely to notice sexism towards females because it only happens to them or around them, and women who are aware of sexism (or perhaps anti sexism campaigners) are more likely to see false positives, times when there was no sexism, just plain ignorance or rudeness, and it's chalked down to sexism.
Thirdly, everyone is different - some guys think they wouldn't be bothered if they were a girl and all they saw were skinny girls, and then you'll get girls saying "how can you say that? oh yes you would!" and then they'll get a reply saying "how can you say i would? oh no i wouldn't!" and so on.
But let's at least be fair about the matter. People saying "how would you feel if ALL YOU SAW was toned and fit handsome guys?" - this is not the situation. If that were the case, all your friends and relatives and everyone you ever saw or knew about would have to be skinny, and you were the only one that wasn't. In actual fact, advertisements display something utterly bullshit but then you go out into the street and see a load of perfectly average people. I'm not saying whether you should or should not get offended, but at least make the argument fair - it is advertisements and media, not everything


Sorry, what?

I don't see anywhere in my comment or the video where people are insinuating that there was no "abuse" (I'm not sure what you mean by the use of this word) before advertisements. I stated--in several posts--that the advertisements are both a cause (maintaining the status quo) and an effect of a societal norm that makes it okay to objectify women. And both I and the presenter in the video pointed out that objectifying a person is one of the first steps taken when someone wishes to commit violence against another person. Therefore, these ads are basically fostering a social atmosphere where it is okay to dehumanize women, to value them only for their appearance, and that seems extremely dangerous to me.

The objectification of women is a problem that extends way beyond just advertising--it pervades all of our mass media: movies, tv, and music. And why does it pervade our mass media? Because it works. Because we've accepted it as normal. It's no fluke that the cosmetics industry is a $1.9 billion dollar industry with around 3% growth a year and fantastic profits or that the diet industry rakes in $55 billion dollars a year (as of 2006) and is still growing. It's not a coincidence that rates of eating disorders in adolescents are rising. It's not solely the ads that are responsible for this, but the message--that gets reinforced constantly by the media and often by our own peers--that our worth as a human being is directly related to how well we fit the images we are bombarded with daily. Like she said in the video, we may walk out the door and see that what is being presented is impossible to obtain but that doesn't seem to stop us for striving for it anyway as the statistics I presented above show.

>> ^imstellar28:

"Over 60 percent of U.S. adult women are overweight, according to 2007 estimates from the National Center for Health Statistics of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention."
Doesn't look like the advertising is having much of an impact, to me.


And the diet industry is over $55 billion a year (as of 2006, see my previous comment for the source). Just because we aren't achieving the impossible figures that are presented to us in the mass media doesn't mean we aren't striving to reach them.

"Of all the things we could be exporting to help people
around the world, really negative body image and low
self-esteem are not what we hope is going out with public
health messaging." ALEXANDRA BREWIS, executive director
of Arizona State University's School of Human Evolution
and Social Change. http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/30/spreading-fat-stigma-around-the-globe/?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha3


Not the best article, scientifically. And I think they give too much credence to their fights against obesity and ignore.... movies and tv and advertising that is being exported.

>> ^SDGundamX:

>> ^dannym3141:
@sgundamx I still think my comment stands - article or no article. Unless you can categorically state that there was no abuse before advertisements, there's no evidence for the sentiment that she's insinuating.
There's so many people in this thread arguing with other people, often times even two people in agreement are having some sort of tiff. I'll tell you why;
Firstly, males are less likely to notice sexism towards females because it doesn't affect them, doesn't even happen when they're around perhaps.
Secondly, women are more likely to notice sexism towards females because it only happens to them or around them, and women who are aware of sexism (or perhaps anti sexism campaigners) are more likely to see false positives, times when there was no sexism, just plain ignorance or rudeness, and it's chalked down to sexism.
Thirdly, everyone is different - some guys think they wouldn't be bothered if they were a girl and all they saw were skinny girls, and then you'll get girls saying "how can you say that? oh yes you would!" and then they'll get a reply saying "how can you say i would? oh no i wouldn't!" and so on.
But let's at least be fair about the matter. People saying "how would you feel if ALL YOU SAW was toned and fit handsome guys?" - this is not the situation. If that were the case, all your friends and relatives and everyone you ever saw or knew about would have to be skinny, and you were the only one that wasn't. In actual fact, advertisements display something utterly bullshit but then you go out into the street and see a load of perfectly average people. I'm not saying whether you should or should not get offended, but at least make the argument fair - it is advertisements and media, not everything

Sorry, what?
I don't see anywhere in my comment or the video where people are insinuating that there was no "abuse" (I'm not sure what you mean by the use of this word) before advertisements. I stated--in several posts--that the advertisements are both a cause (maintaining the status quo) and an effect of a societal norm that makes it okay to objectify women. And both I and the presenter in the video pointed out that objectifying a person is one of the first steps taken when someone wishes to commit violence against another person. Therefore, these ads are basically fostering a social atmosphere where it is okay to dehumanize women, to value them only for their appearance, and that seems extremely dangerous to me.
The objectification of women is a problem that extends way beyond just advertising--it pervades all of our mass media: movies, tv, and music. And why does it pervade our mass media? Because it works. Because we've accepted it as normal. It's no fluke that the cosmetics industry is a $1.9 billion dollar industry with around 3% growth a year and fantastic profits or that the diet industry rakes in $55 billion dollars a year (as of 2006) and is still growing. It's not a coincidence that rates of eating disorders in adolescents are rising. It's not solely the ads that are responsible for this, but the message--that gets reinforced constantly by the media and often by our own peers--that our worth as a human being is directly related to how well we fit the images we are bombarded with daily. Like she said in the video, we may walk out the door and see that what is being presented is impossible to obtain but that doesn't seem to stop us for striving for it anyway as the statistics I presented above show.


In the same way - sorry, what?

I originally stated that insinuating that abuse came from adverts objectifying women was a poor argument, and then when you replied saying abuse comes from objectification, i replied saying that it wasn't fair to say adverts cause abuse. I haven't read your massive post because the snippets i skimmed through didn't even seem to relate to what i was saying.

Nice talking with you, but i don't think we're having the same conversation.

>> ^Opus_Moderandi:

>> ^The_Ham:
Why is it the people complaining about this are always ugly women?

I don't think Kate Winslet is ugly.


Strangely enough, Kate lost a LOT of weight from her Titanic days (no pun intended). I actually preferred the way she looked back then... these days shes in quite a lot of movies/commercials looking a bit like someone who needs a cheeseburger.

The person downvoting every single comment i make on here - a perfect example of how emotion can affect people's judgement in a discussion like this one!

All i've said was "insinuating adverts lead to abuse is a poor argument, abuse was more socially acceptable pre-adverts," and that's not even controversial. It's unfortunate that emotions so often get in the way in these sorts of discussions

LOL! You just went and downvoted all of my comments! Awwww! Monocle fucking SMILE!

@dannym3141

Nice talking with you, but i don't think we're having the same conversation.

In your original post, you expressed disbelief that objectifying women leads to violence against women. You also seemed to think the speaker was arguing that ads directly cause violence against women (as in, some guy sees it and decides to smack his wife or something). This seems to me to be misrepresenting the speaker's argument. She's not arguing that if we get rid or these ads violence against women disappears. Nor is she arguing that violence against women didn't exist before advertising. In other words, your original statement, which you seem so intent on defending, is based on completely false assumptions.

I was just trying to point out to you where you were mistaken in these assumptions. I gave you evidence that objectification is indeed one of the first steps on the path to violence. And I showed you in the video where she directly contradicts your assumption that she believes ads directly cause violence against women (around 2:20). I then tried to reword her argument, as I understood it, so that maybe you could better see where she was coming from and why these ads have a connection to violence against women (but not a direct causation). I recommend you do read the "snippets" I provided because they are highly relevant to the conversation.

I really do appreciate your comments--you've voiced your opinions constructively and contributed meaningfully to the conversation. I restored the comment upvote balance on your comment because I'm pretty sure there was no malicious intent involved on your part--there certainly isn't any in mine.

You know how we look back on the dark ages and laugh at how stupid and primitive all the knuckleheads were back then? In a few hundred more years, people are going to laugh at us for the same way, and deservedly so.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

You know how we look back on the dark ages and laugh at how stupid and primitive all the knuckleheads were back then? In a few hundred more years, people are going to laugh at us for the same way, and deservedly so.


The prophet hath spoken! Go readth the Shock Doctrine and cleanse thyselves!

YEAH!^

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Whole lot of love in this thread ...

Yet you use ad hominem attacks to deride the speaker. You, sir, are a hypocrite of the highest order.

GOOD DAY SIR.>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

Clearly you have your own issues with women to deal with. My guess is that you should learn a lot if you talked to one.
Ad hominem balderdash. I respect and honor all women far more than most - but JK voided any intellectual respect with her foolishness. She is foolish not because she's a woman, but because she's prejudiced toward others and treats them with disrespect on a far deeper level than any advertiser does. My attitude towards her is not because I'm a man - but because she's a hypocritical git. I rarely unload at a person as I did above, but this lowly cockroach deserves it 10 times over.
Not saying all ads are great. They're not. But the presumption that they are the primary motivating factor in creating societal mores is a canard. Ads do not create society. They reflect it. If we waved a magic wand and all ads vanished tomorrow, the bedrock of "what standard to people hold themselves to?" would not change one iota. Cram a bunch of average, plain folks into sitcoms and movies and the "ideal beauty" will still be what people look for.
And for this hypocritical sleaze to insult the character and nature of countless men and women because of her own insecurities, prejudices and cowardice? For money? There is no language fit to sufficiently convey just how low that is.