I heard an advert this morning for some new men's grooming product, and the ad was about some guy called Martin being 'man enough' to get a vasctomy with no anasthetic. But the op goes wrong and his penis gets cut off, and he runs off with the sugeon calling "Martina, Martina" after him.
At the time I felt it didn't sit right with me but couldn't quite put my finger on why. But after digesting it all day, it comes down to this:
The man, after losing his penis, is apparently now a women.
Firstly, a man who loses a penis is still a man. A woman is not a man without a penis.
Women lose bits of their reproductive system all the time to hysterectomies, mastectomies, ectopic pregnancy etc etc. No-one ever suggests that they have become men. And why is this?
Because a man becoming a women is of course a demotion to a lesser human being, so that's why it's 'funny'. A women losing parts of herself does not earn her a promotion to 'man'
So, in general, grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr to that stupid ad.
Not necessarily, ecclesvet - presence or absence of a penis is relevant, but not the whole story. Men whose penis is lost through trauma do not become women, they become men with a disfigurement that can be very difficult to come to terms with. To cite a high profile case, Mr Bobbit did not become a woman either.
Trans-genderinng is about changing the body on purpose. It's not the same.
Annie I find it hard to get worked up by the latest bit if advertising cr@p - but I do wonder if "botched vasectomy" is a great association for any product? I've not hear the ad, though.
Do you not think meditrina, that we should point out and challenge anything in the media which stand out as particularly sexist and misogynistic? I realise that would be something of an impossible task given how much of this crap does come out. But isn't it a bit defeatist to just shrug it off?
As I said, I haven't heard this particular ad so am not in a position to assess just how awful it is.
I don't think I'm being defeatist. It's more a case of "pick your battles", especially as I become older and more cynical - an outcry just increases the effectiveness of a campaign (which would have been quickly forgotten otherwise). I'm thinking, for example, of how much more memorable the Tango "Happy Slapping" ads became precisely because of the ban. I'm not saying I like that as an outcome, nor that I think it is right, but it is a factor which should not be overlooked. And for that reason, can I add I applaud you for not mentioning the product in your post.