Do you think the Diet Coke adverts "objectify"
They've been going for years. It used to be a bunch of office women drooling over a window cleaner with his shirt off drinking the beverage.
The latest one a bunch of women in the park drool over a man who gets his shirt wet and removes it before proceeding to have a drink.
Isn't this basically the opposite of what we sometimes complain about?
On a similar theme This advert annoys me...all the attractive office women crowd round a man for his bread () but the comedy 'twist' is that a larger woman fancies him too? Just weird and insulting all round.
I see the male character in that ad as being a bit delusional and sad, but I do know what you mean PP, it's like taken for granted that all men no matter how old, fat or ugly will attempt to punch above their weight, and will continue to flirt with young beautiful girls no matter how old they get, but if a woman at work has her eye on her colleague that is "awkward". he is cringing at the thought of her liking him, and that guy seems a little bit mr bean ish to me. Maybe I need to watch the ad again but even he (not exactly mr charisma and presented as Unpopular with younger female colleagues) he is horrified at the thought of somebody less than 'young and pretty' noticing him.
It does make you angry when you analyse these crappy ads doesn't it?
These ads annoy me on so many levels.
They do objectify men, and I find that offensive because objectifying any human being is offensive.
And I totally agree with all above who say it feeds into the hands of MRAs because the situation is not symmetrical for all the power-imbalance reasons mentioned upthread.
But I'd go further and say that it's also a totally cynical ploy by the ad agencies to
1) Exploit the feminism-lite (choicy-choice feminism, aka neutered feminism) trope that's been invented recently as part of the backlash - part of the culture of "hey, look, pole dancing is cool, you're so empowered, and you get to ogle men too, so everything's equal now." (Not that it's actually a new strategy: think of the Virginia Slims ad with the famous "you've come a long way, baby" slogan back in the 70s).
2) Line up their defence strategy to help defend themselves against charges of objectifying women: "but we're not sexist, some of our ads objectify men, and that's just what the customers want, isn't it, just a bit of harmless fun?"
Yes, I think what was annoying me was that the joke is that the man, who is no great shakes himself, is fancied by a stereotypically unattractive woman and this is supposed to be awkward for him and hilarious for us. It's just such a stupid advert.
I read a great article once (by a man, I think) about how some men, especially in the younger generation have such high expectations because so many films/books/computer games have the geeky/social misfit boy/man as the hero who saves the day and wins the hottest girl as part of his 'prize'. So many generation-Y/Z men are waiting for the best looking girl they know to fall for them (no matter what the men themselves look like) because they are the hero in their own lives, so deserve it and are repulsed by approaches from 'un-hot' women. Will try find it later.
Re my earlier post...
Number #5 in this article.
Just watched that advert LaLa. I wrote a blog post on an blog about misogynistic advertising with regards another Warburton's advert in that range. It didn't surprise me. There seems to be a theme going on.
Weird, isn't it? It's fecking bread FFS.
I want to know what it tastes like, will it keep fresh, how much it costs.
I don't want sex/sexism/lust/comedy/close ups of schoolgirls in short skirts.
Advertising execs have far too much money and ambition and seem to be on glue! You're selling dough, not making a film
Objectification is objectification.
When I watch this ad, as a bloke, I feel a hot swell of anger at this man being treated as the women's eye candy. That his (menial labour) job is wantonly disrupted by the cackling she-bitches, and he's expected to laugh it off as they laugh it down and wolf whistle from their privileged position while he is expected to flex his muscles and preen prettily for them.
That women get objectified thusly too in other ads DOESN'T MAKE IT OK. I object to those ads just as much. But it is NOT a justified revenge to approve this simply because of historical patriarchism.
If you are a feminist you stand firmly against this ad, unqualifiedly and unreservedly so. If you do not, you are not a feminist.
I love it when men tell women how to be feminists and what they should believe and feel in order to be considered feminists.
Especially when they do it so masterfully.
I completely agree with you ayahushca. So many on here will try and devalue your points by expressing the view that female objectification is so much more worthy due to it's magnitude and historical context. The simple and crucial fact of the matter is that all objectification is wrong irrespective of sex.
God it's embarrassing just how thick the visitors are.
No one wd ever talk crap like that here.
As if anyone wd say "well men refused to marry women unless their feet had been broken so we're all good with the idea of breaking men's feet to even it up a bit. Let's stone a few to death while we're about it"
LOL, you said it with the requisite pith.
You need ejumacating too.
I'm sure ayahushca will oblige.
Number of fucks I could give about this ad: zero.
So according to some random mansplainer I'm not a feminist? Erm, okay.
And also - bloody "justified revenge".
Who is making these ads?
Who owns the product?
Who owns the agency?
Who trousers most of the profit?
Clue: I use the verb trouser deliberately.
It's not women making these ads and pushing this worldview. The people who control the media and advertising are in the main, men. Look at any advertising agency and any corporate company and the people who are the decision makers in those places are overwhelmingly men.
So please don't use the term revenge, as if it's women who are responsible for this crap. Men make the ads or at least the final decisions about the ads.
If women wanted to get revenge on men for the atrocities men have carried out throughout history, I don't think they'd be starting with a fizzy drinks ad. In fact ayahushca, women don't want to get revenge on men - we just want them to stop the atrocities, uppity bitches that we are.
Arf at not a fair trade.
No it doesn't seem to be does it.
If women wanted to get revenge on men for the atrocities men have carried out throughout history, I don't think they'd be starting with a fizzy drinks ad.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.