Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think these ads are offensive to all women and should be banned by a minority of them?

153 replies

Vittoria · 16/05/2009 08:29

msmagazine.com/spring2009/nocomment.asp

I think the first one is quite funny actually. And probably very true. Just because men like to think about casual sex more than women think about romance, I'm not offended!

The secoind one I imagine is offensive to some conservatives per se, but when are they known for reading rolling stone magazine? And soince when does one person getting personally offended by an ad in a mag they never read have the right to dictate what the rest of us see?

OP posts:
tattifer · 17/05/2009 19:15

Leather bound obviously, with a massive index

monkeytrousers · 17/05/2009 19:29

I agree with Custy when she says ?there are many many examples throught a childs life where you say - look, this is what you see or hear - but it isn't what you do necessarily.? If we bring our kids up to know their own minds also, to have confidence in themselves and their choices, it won?t stop them fucking up sometimes, but it will make the recovery much easier.

Hiya Iorek, the feminist fears are encapsulated within two words - 'biological determinism'

The scientific evidence that men and women have distinct yet also complementary sexualities is no longer conjecture or hypothesis - it's theory. It's as much fact as you can get. The flavour of those differences is still being fiercely debated within science - a debate which I feel feminists should be in on, but they are too busy denying psychosexual difference to do anything else.

There historical fear was that 'biology was destiny' - it's not. Women were proscribed roles in times past and treated like caged animals. That this is also a fact is also indisputable. But that sexism was culturally constructed not biologically constructed. As the biological sciences have progressed in the last 30 years its become very clear just how equally vital and powerful women are, and the force they affect upon nature itself. 100 years many biologists thought that a whole ?man? could be observed fully formed in the head of a sperm and than women were just receptacles or incubators. These misogynous ideas have permeated through human history. Aristotle counted fewer teeth in the female mouth and added this to the lexicon of female inferiority to men. He excluded women from serious consideration as moral entities. Its from him we get the idea that women are passive and men vital. It?s from Hippocrates that we get the idea of the wandering women and hysteria that Freud did so much to revive. He also claimed menstrual blood was ?poisonous? because, according to him, women lacked the male capacity to excrete unclean substances through sweating. Galen though menstrual blood was a residue of blood in food that the inferior female digestive tract could not digest. Those were just the ancient Greeks.

These ideas have held fast for thousands of years, because women were not allowed into the sciences. Well we have flooded the sciences in the last century and have eradicated these biases as a result. Are these triumphs celebrated within feminism? No. We are called ?anti-feminists? because we go where the evidence takes us not where any ideology does. If we had followed the ideology, there would have been no breakthrough in the sciences and we would still be saying women were at a disadvantage within the objective sciences. We aren?t.

It is now known beyond a shadow of a doubt ? and in the faces of those who believe ?god? created ?man? in his image ? that the default template for all mammals is female. The transformation to male comes in the first few weeks and is trigged by hormones that are themselves triggered by the Y chromosome from the father ? or are not, depending on how that particular chromosome is coded. If the androgens are not triggered the embryo continues uninterrupted as female.

Fuck me, I think this is an amazing scientific discovery! One that you?d think all feminists would be shouting from the rooftops.

DitaVonCheese · 17/05/2009 19:29

If you google "Calvin Klein jeans ad" then there are a series of these - some of them here. I actually find the one Ms. have objected to the least pornographic/offensive - possibly because, as another poster has said, it seems quite benign. The second one in my link is much more icky for some reason - too much going on and the girl on the floor being groped whilst looking out of it. There's also a video ad which is far more pornographic - once they all start squirming and frotting it's distinctly more unsettling. I don't object to the print ads but might to the moving one.

DitaVonCheese · 17/05/2009 19:33

A couple more and a link to the video ad here

ChippingIn · 17/05/2009 19:51

The first one is funny, the second one is sexy.

Degrading, gang rape, gang bang, porn, offensive.... FGS are you serious?? She looks like she's having a fab time - oh to be that young and sexy again - stop being so

tattifer · 17/05/2009 19:55

Fuck me, I think this is an amazing scientific discovery! One that you?d think all feminists would be shouting from the rooftops

Indeed - so why not?

scottishmummy · 17/05/2009 19:55

writhing around on a sofa with male models.yep it is a hard job.suppose someone had to do it

tattifer · 17/05/2009 20:02

Why her? why not me???

monkeytrousers · 17/05/2009 20:04

Because then they would have to admit they were wrong about biology, Tatt. Honest, I'vce been looking at this problem for years now, it will probably consume me for a few more, but the more I do look into it the more it just looks like an ego thing - 'oh, science tells us Brownmiller was wrong about her career defining ideas' reponse? Not, well it is possible, but, 'cheeky cunts, we'll never live this down - lets string em up and call them apologists for rapists'

Scientists actually find a lot of Brownmiller and Dworkins stuff helpful, but again, we only hear the negatives and the positives - the places where bridges could be buolt for the benefit of women - are torn down by feminists themselves and their determination to not engage with their historcal enmey. It's worse than bloody Gaza, I tell you.

monkeytrousers · 17/05/2009 20:05

lol SM. Yes, indeedy!

policywonk · 17/05/2009 20:06

'Fuck me, I think this is an amazing scientific discovery!'

Well, one reason we're not shouting it from the rooftops is that it's not exactly a recent discovery. I've known it for at least 20 years. And I don't claim to be a scientist.

IorekByrnison · 17/05/2009 20:07

Hi Monkeytrousers,

I had heard this fact about all embryos starting off as female, but have to say I'm struggling to find an application for it in terms of actual sexual politics. What do you think is its significance?

I understand what you are saying about an unhelpful reluctance to accept any innate gender difference when it comes to sexual behaviour (understandable when one of feminism's biggest battles has been overturning false assumptions about gender difference). But again I'm not sure where these gender differences leave us with regard to the politics of something like the Calvin Klein ad.

Starbear · 17/05/2009 20:08

There seems to be a denial of female fantasy & sexuality on this thread. I liked Hot Gossip in my youth & Electric Blue soft porn.
and Emmanuel books. Have things taken a complete U-turn in the the 90's and oo's???
Do we now have to be overtly prim and proper?

tattifer · 17/05/2009 20:12

Not from all of us starbear...

IorekByrnison · 17/05/2009 20:16

starbear, I don't think there is much evidence of a u-turn, do you? Your 70's pleasures look pretty tame by today's standards don't you think?

Starbear · 17/05/2009 20:17

tattifer. thank goodness. But I haven't seen any positive signs of real women having the sense that fantasy is one things & real life is something else. If we can figure it out, so can out daughters!

monkeytrousers · 17/05/2009 20:21

I didn't say it was a secret or recent PW. Just that feminists can't celebrate this and other stuff because they are ideologically opposed to the biological sciences.

IorekByrnison · 17/05/2009 20:22

That seems like quite a sweeping statement. There must surely be a lot of feminists within the biological sciences after all. What science-denying feminists did you have in mind?

monkeytrousers · 17/05/2009 20:25

From the perspective that the most misogynous cultures are also highly religious, and that it is often written in doctrine that man came before women, that man is superior to woman, etc etc and on infinitum, it simply pulls the rug out from under them and reveals the fallacy of male superiority in all it's ignobel glory. I think it will have much use in stopping religious bigots in their tracks actually. Just for starters!

Noonki · 17/05/2009 20:26

the boys look like they would be far more interested in each other than the girl.

don't like the one on the link where the girl looks drunk. Apparentlly there are websites dedicated to videos of drunk girls being raped which is on the increase esp in the USA

scottishmummy · 17/05/2009 20:26

Oi you feminist step away from the microscope put the pipette down

what a preposterous global statement

science is the evidence based pursuit and enhancement of knowledge.why would any woman deny science or be ideologically opposed

are you suggesting that anecdotal not tested knowledge is preferable to science

monkeytrousers · 17/05/2009 20:26

"But again I'm not sure where these gender differences leave us with regard to the politics of something like the Calvin Klein ad."

Um, no, the conversation has just moved on for some of us. You don;t have to come along if you don;t want to.

monkeytrousers · 17/05/2009 20:29

Hoots mon! What statement SM? What's yer referent?

scottishmummy · 17/05/2009 20:33

och aye the noo if we are doing sterotypical colloquialisms

Just that feminists can't celebrate this and other stuff because they are ideologically opposed to the biological sciences.

that had me snorting over the metaphorical petrie dish

images of science denying feminists.blockading the labs

tattifer · 17/05/2009 20:35

Starbear - isn't one of the problems with fantasy that we all want it to be real life, somewhere, sometime, some alternative universe. Those who don't spot the difference between representation of fantasy and real life probably still have that teenage (fantasy) that it's all too real? Or could be?