Another crass and sexist ad

[Lunaballoon]

Anyone else seen this new Pot Noodles ad? I'm really sick of this kind of crass, sexist crap. I'm thinking of putting in a complaint to the ASA. Anybody with me?

OxygenThief - No I didn't complain about those ads or a 1001 ads with beautiful dressed or undressed women or good looking men. Beautiful people and apparitional life styles sell stuff.

The end of that Pot Noddle ad and another for a car (Renault) where the can-can girls treat the car like a pole dancing prop. cross a line into soft porn.

I get your point, however, I dont see any difference between that and, say, the maltesers advert.

What relation does 2 women ogling mens groins (And talking about it) have to selling chocolate?

My whole issue is that you should be campaigning to stop all silly adverts (regardless of genders involved) rather than making out that its only women that are hard done to/ exploited - when that patently isnt the case.

And by "you" i mean mumsnet and not you as an individual.

I would have much more respect for "the cause" then. As it stands it just sounds like some very angry ladies being hypocritical.

If you don't like the malteasers ad then you are free to complain about it.

I for one haven't seen the malteasers ad, and so won't be complaining about it.

I thought the pot noodle ad, which I did see, was fucking awful, but I won't be complaining about that either.

It is up to individuals how they react to certain things that they see, and whether they are offended by them or not.

It is nonsensical to suggest that if people want to complain about an ad they have seen for pot noodles, they MUST also complain about a whole bunch of other ads, whether they have seen them or not, and whether they are offended by them or not.

Erm on re-reading your post, MN does not have a "cause" that it is pursuing, around advertising, AFAIK.

This is one thread in the feminism section. Maybe you are new to the site and haven't quite got a handle on it yet.

MN have supported many causes, a quick look indicates that some of them do focus on women though, so again, feel free to complain to them if you wish.

" encouraging women to fund raise for a disease that disproportionately affects them"

Well no..

"In general, men are at significantly higher risk than women of developing all of the common cancers that occur in both sexes [1]"

References

1. NCIN, 2010. The Excess Burden of Cancer in Men in the UK [online]. Available from: library.ncin.org.uk/docs/100809-NCIN-Male_Cancer-Report.pdf.

but that's not the point.. The bar must be raised for both sexes

Very many men want to celebrate the ones they love in the biggest way possible. It's a very personal thing and somehow a tiny local event doesn't cut it for most of us. Personally I'd love to race with both my Inlaws having/had Cancer in such an atmosphere, but hey ho.

how about seperate Women and Mens races on the same day? .

and think of that lovely extra cash-for everybody!

Anyway apologies for the intrusion.

"how about seperate Women and Mens races on the same day? "

Probably because the men will get the first start and the star billing. All the media coverage will be about the men. the women will be, at best, relegated to an afterthought

See also:
London marathon
Wimbledon
Tour de France
World Cup (any sport)
Womens sport in general

Ok, listen up MRAs:

Feminists do not condone, sanction or commission media and advertising that objectifies men

Dragging men down to be stereotypes and sex objects in advertising like women is NOT the equality we are looking for.

I don't approve of those adverts you mention, BUT THIS THREAD IS NOT ABOUT THAT.

It is not the duty of feminists to tackle everything you are unhappy with...do it yourself!

You also seem completely blind to the context in which female-objectification and male-objectification exist. There is a long, huge and depressing history of treating women like chattel or sex objects and we are still way of completely escaping that, even in the west.

You also conveniently ignore that the vast, VAST majority of harmful advertising and media affects women. Yes, one advert that objectifies a man or pushes harmful tropes is one too many but it is a drop in the ocean compared to the flip side. That's not to say you can't get irate about it, stomp your feet, start a campaign etc. Knock yourself out just stop expecting women to do it for you!

I would also say consider what it mean everytime a man is shown as being crap at housework or child care? It is reinforcing the idea that these are women's roles. Men: stay out of it and let the women, who are natural cooks, cleaner, carers to do it. Not great for men, but shit for women too. These ads are not written and made by feminists (or even women, most of the time). We do not want 'pay back' and I don't think you'll ever see us writing off casual gender stereotyping as 'just a joke.

You are incredibly rude in trying to derail a thread about a specific thread to make it all about you. It's fucking tiresome and you are completely barking up the wrong tree if you are looking for someone to blame.

So organise your own event GentlemanJ.

I'm wondering why women organising a space for themselves is so threatening. These spaces aren't for power or financial gain like a lot of male only/dominated/organised spaces. This is to raise money for charity in an environment where women feel comfortable and less self-conscious. The fact you want to invade that space means you don't understand boundaries and why they are there.

If you want to do something about why women feel more comfortable in women-only environments then feel free. Clue: the answer is not for men to include themselves in those spaces.

You want to raise money for charity then get up off your arse and do something about it. There are masses and masses of opportunities to do that.

You want to discuss the OP and the objectification of women, fill your boots.

I agree with the above posters.

Go and start a campaign about the adverts you mentioned.

The address for the ASA is included in a link above, I believe. Please, I'm all for it. I also promise not to troll your campaign with irrelevant asides about things I find more important. How fair is that!

As also mentioned above. There ARE men's cancer awareness things going on. The big one at the moment is Men United. It's endorsed by Bill Bailey. Get behind that, in memory of your family members. Run the Marathon for them, sit in baths of baked beans or whatever you fancy for them. I'll even sponsor you, if it will make you feel better?

Is it the success of R4L that you don't like? I can understand that. Prostate cancer kills a lot of men. It's never been as taboo as breast cancer was, but it still kills. Men's cancer charities are looking for people like you, who are desperate to see an end to men's cancers, so away you go. Be that difference!

Why can't people just have charity events which raise funds to fight Cancer in general instead of gender specific campaigns?

I think Men United was set up because some people felt that much more Government spending on health was aimed at women's health and that men were being overlooked.

Why can't people just have charity events which raise funds to fight Cancer in general instead of gender specific campaigns

Why don't you look on the CRUK website for the answer is there regarding RFL. In fact, it's right here on this thread

And RFL does help 'cancer in general'. All cancers and all sufferers, including men. It is simply an incredibly succesful gimmick for fundraising. Men are allowed to sponsor the women who run, y'know! And men can do the men only runs for CRUK or their own charities or run in mixed races such as GNR.

It's pretty obvious their market research must show the event would not be as succesful if it was mixed. I should imagine making it mixed sex has occured to them and been rejected, don't you think? Or do you really, really think CRUK want to limit their potential income just because they want to upset and exclude men. FFS.

Men are also affected by breast cancer BTW.

Women are certainly never affected by prostate cancer or testicular cancer but I don't get the arsehole about Everyman. Let alone go on their websites and tell them to STOP IT!!!!!

I think good for them

Shame so many men apparently can't do the same for women (judging by the fact that some ALWAYS come onto these threads and tell women to STOPIT).

And this thread isn't even about RFL FGS, yet still we have people on here saying women should stop doing it and support mens all cancers instead.

I don't really understand the hostility.

I couldn't join in with Movember, even if I wanted to, which I wouldn't as it's not aimed at me. But even if I did, I can't grow a tache.

It doesn't bother me in the slightest. I don't sit there on the train while it's on looking at the moustacioed men thinking "SEXIST SWINE". If a work colleague was doing it and asked me to sponsor them I'd be happy to.

The OUTRAGE seems bizarre.

Really they just want us to stop looking out for ourselves and look out for men like they think we ought to, because men are more important than women.

Men United was set up because some men looked at how successful things like R4L and tickled pink have been and thought, 'well, fuck me, maybe instead of whining that no one does anything for us, we could actually get off our collective arses and do something for ourselves, like those women did'

but yeah, see it from a poor poor men don't get enough spent on them if that makes you feel better

Anyway, back to the thread.

Sexist adverts, eh? Whodathunk?

Not only sexist but also pretty insulting to Brazil.

I'm still waiting to see man strength tampons for heavy flow days.

Did you guys have the "strong enough for a man, made for a woman" deo adverts? We had them (in the states) for years. I mean what does it even mean?

The worst ads are those Barbara windsor, Bingo ads.

One shows 3 scotsmen about to have their genitals exposed by having theirs kilts lifted (imagine if they were female? no way women could be so abused to sell products)

The other shows Ms Windsor 'goosing' or grabbing the buttocks of 2 servant men (men get sent to prison for doing just that)

Then there is the Amanda Holden yoghurt ad where she rests her feet on the back of a half naked male slave while 2 others stand by to attend to her every need.

Historically, the worst was an ad where a smart, savvy woman got a stupid man to clean the whole house with his tongue by her ingeniously pouring lager over everything including the toilet!

Pot Noodle pff

there are plenty of ads on Tv that are demeaning to men. Ads that show women as smart and competent, instructing their clueless husbands on how to use a computer or do this or that.

Complain then. The link is up thread.

RFL is a female only event because it started that way as an event women could run in, this was 2 years after an Olympics that had 19 athletic events for women and 24 for men. The 1980 Olympics had a maximum distance for women of 1500m.

Women had, quite literally, been fighting to run long distances, have a look at pictures of Katherine Switzer running the Boston marathon, or rather the officials trying to physically remove her from the race. RFL was not just a safe place for women to run, it was one of the few spaces they could run.

RFL does, frequently examine whether to include male competitors but at present they believe they will lose funding.

Do you see the difference? An event for one sex, developed because that sex had no place to run, with regular reviews as to whether it should open to both sexes and many many events (marathons in various cities and Olympics) were women were banned for, well why were they/are they banned?

How many Olympic events are there for men/women now?

Do you have a point or an opinion, rutters1? Feel free to share either.

Yes..how many events are there now?