The Sexist

Sexist Comments of the Week: Emasculated Dodge Charger Driver Edition

It seems as if my critique of last night's Superbowl ads struck a nerve with the most loyal fans of the Dodge Charger. These are their stories.

stann thinks that painting men as a bunch of emasculated wimps in order to sell a Dodge is just tellin' it like it is:

God forbid any commercial should be geared towards men, reflect the feelings of men or (worst yet) poke fun at women a little instead of making men look like idiots. The “Spine”, “Dodge Charger” and “You’re a man” commercials were some of my favorites and reflect what so many women don’t (or refuse) know about men. This may be why so many of them are divorced or can’t get a man.

gdmt is unconvinced:

stann, as a fellow heterosexual man, i think these commercials make men look totally pathetic. how can you relate to a commercial that makes men look resigned to spending miserable lives doing shit that they dont want to do all the time just so they can fuck a woman and drive a shitty dodge? maybe your life just sucks. sorry, stann.

stann insists that any man who doesn't like the Dodge Charger is either emasculated, or straight-up female:

gdmt: Any “man” who says a Dodge Charger sucks on anything but gas should just admit she’s really pretending to man so as to give some credibility to her point of view. It would be no surprise though, that complaints would come from the same emasculated men depicted in the commercials. Sorry to show you up to a mirror, but that’s life.

gdmt points out that that makes absolutely no sense, since "the same emasculated men depicted in the commercials" are the ones meant to be buying the fucking Charger. Therefore, if it is only the "emasculated men" who are complain about the Dodge Charger commercial, the Dodge Charger commercial has failed on its face:

stann: I’ll gladly be called emasculated if asserting my masculinity requires buying a dodge charger. also; those emasculated men depicted in the commercial are the ones driving the car i.e. you.

  • John Dias

    I think that the commercial made men look like idiots, since the solution to their supposed idiocy is to buy a vehicle. In the commercial, the joke is on men, not women.

    This is a commercial that shows emasculated men "taking a stand" after willingly accepting their emasculation. Dodge will accept their money, complement them for their faux-manliness, and yet those men -- after a supposedly exhilarating drive in their expensive vehicle -- ostensibly will return home to their eunuch existence, day after day. But hey, they "drew the line" on being allowed (?) to buy a car.

    Maybe all the misandry that we see in popular culture about the disempowered male is really a not-so-subtle clue, a taunt for men to grow a pair and stand up for themselves. In my view, the very idea of a man taking a "last stand" so that he can enrich an auto company is offensive on its face.

  • Dorian Smith

    I don't see what the fuss is about. It is Dodge poking fun at what has really happened with the feminization of men in our time. People that got offended by this commercial just need to "man up" and get a "funny bone".

  • John Dias

    Dorian Smith wrote (#2):

    "People that got offended by this commercial just need to 'man up' and get a 'funny bone'."

    "Manning up" is all about enduring and/or facing pain, hardship, shame and ridicule for following one's priorities and judgment. That's why historically misandry has gone unchallenged, partly because of the huge reservoir of male patience in the face of mocking and ridicule. But there's a limit to how much ridicule and self-abasement men can and should take, and at some point the misandry has to be challenged. It is being challenged.

  • Ken

    I find it interesting, women are complaining the ads are misogynist, men are complaining the ads are misandrist.

  • m

    John Dias is just a crackpot.

  • http://angryfeministdoc.blogspot.com Erica A

    It just tickles me to no end that this post is appearing on a Monday. Here's to hoping this'll be a great week.

  • Jenny

    John Dias, please seek some intensive therapy immediately. Hopefully they can stop you from going on a shooting spree at a gym.

  • David

    While I'm appreciative of the critique and dialogue, I'm saddened that little, in the comments to this article or the original, address what Dodge wants. Dodge, and the other truck and beer companies, don't care what it means to "be a man"; they just care that it leads to more sales. So Dodge has, for over 15 years, strengthened a dominant story of masculinity that tells men, at one and the same time, that there is something lacking in their gender identity AND the only way to address it is to purchase a Dodge. Everyone, all of us, men and women, should be furious whenever a company tries to manipulate us in this way (because as much, if not more, happens in advertising geared toward women). But instead, we argue over what it means to be a man, which is exactly what Dodge wants us to do.

  • Lizrd

    @ David: Exactly

    I think what is largely at issue here is the belief that these stagnant definition of "man" and "woman" is somehow handed down by birth, and that is simply not the case. I think the biggest blows against self-definition is that corporations realized that people, for whatever reason, cling very tightly to their socially constructed gender identity, and thus have attempted to define what it is to be a "man" or "woman" that suits their bottom line. This, compounded by our society's strict enforcement of gender norms (for example, the high rates of crime against trans gender individuals), has ensured that people continue to purchase things constructed as "male" or "female" so that they too can be constructed that way.

  • Lizrd

    @ John Dias
    I promise you that this commercial was not made by a feminist marketing department attempting to undermine men. You have only your patriarchal society to blame for that buddy.

  • Jenny

    David that's a really excellent point.

  • http://myblackbrick.com DoctorJay

    @David, Yup, that's the whole point. the advertising is setup to play on people's insecurities so they can sell more cars. Sure, it's just a funny exaggeration, but at its core it tells men they need to compensate for being courteous buy purchasing a loud, aggressive looking car.

    The car is designed to look mean, with headlights that form a frown and a deep exhaust note. Those aspects are created to make the men who test drive them feel like the car is giving them some sort of power, which the ad makes explicit.

    Dodge, if you want to make a car for a "real man", create something that runs reliably, that doesn't hog gas, gets strong performance, is safe, and allows a person with a little mechanical knowledge to work on it themselves.

  • Dawn.

    I agree, Jenny. David made an excellent point. This ad does nothing but uphold tired old gender stereotypes and packages it in the blatant manipulation of cultural masculine anxiety. Dodge's ad is an insult to both men and women, like most of the Superbowl ads were. Sexism hurts everyone.

    And in regards to stann's "you must be a woman cuz you hate Dodge Chargers" comment: I'm a young woman, and I think Dodge Chargers are sexy as hell. I'd drive one if it weren't for the horrible gas mileage. Thanks for yet another tired old stereotype, doucheface.

  • C. Boston

    I found in the comments that the majority of supporters of the ad keep talking about this horrible "feminization of men" that the feminists are responsible for. This notion is inherent sexist, because it:

    1. Implies that by giving women equal rights, we are turning women into men and men into women, and, as such:
    2. Women are naturally weak and inferior.

    The propensity to clean or be on time to work, as mentioned in the ad, have no biological basis. There will be no such thing as a "feminized" cisgender man until the day that men possess female reproductive organs.

    The other really disturbing thing intimated by the ad is that ultimately, men are required to make compromises and do things for their partner not because that's what goes on in healthy relationships, but because it's the only way for a man to get sex on a regular basis. It reeks of Sodini and the idea that women owe it to men to have sex with them, men have to trick women to get sex, and, if women will not give men the sex they believe they are owed, they will stop at nothing to punish them.

  • Xenu01

    Cleaning the sink after you shave and putting your underwear in a basket is a horrible imposition? I should make one of these:
    "I put my used tampon in the trash, instead of in our bed.
    I take my hair out of the drain when I'm done in the shower.
    I pretend to like you sometimes, but that is only so we can have the sex."

  • http://toysoldier.wordpress.com Toysoldier

    David, Dodge does not care whether people argue over what it means to be a man. Dodge's concern is only the effectiveness of its ad and whether it prompts people to talk about or buy their cars. Considering that the ad has spawned dozens of posts and articles, it appears Dodge's spot was quite effective.

    As for the negative feminist response one sees, it has nothing to do with the ad. There are hundreds of ads portraying men as dimwitted, barely human, marginally intelligent, grunting masses annoyance while portraying women as morally, intellectually and socially superior that prompt no complaint from feminists.

    The negative response is pure hypocrisy and a beautiful irony that makes the satire of the ad all the more sweet.

  • http://www.harpyness.com SarahMC

    I'm baffled by the defenses of the sexist ads. Walking your dog and showing up to work on time and respecting your in-laws constitutes the "emasculation" of men? You need to rebel against this horrible "feminization," as you call it, by treating yourself to a new car? What a fucked-up idea of masculinity. Only an immature boy would whine about that shit. You think you're oppressed because you have to put your own dirty clothes in the hamper (instead of leaving them wherever you want for your lady to pick up)? Jesus Christ. You're not manly. You suffer from anxious masculinity and misogyny and it's positively pathetic. Grow up and quit complaining about things ADULTS HAVE TO DO. Including women.

  • http://www.harpyness.com SarahMC

    Do you people realize that "satire" has a definition? And it doesn't mean "dudely humor denigrating anyone who's not a straight, white Christian male." If you're going to claim these ads are satirical at least make an attempt to explain how they qualify as such.

    Feminists *have* been complaining about "ads portraying men as dimwitted, barely human, marginally intelligent, grunting masses annoyance while portraying women as morally, intellectually and socially superior." But since you consider feminism the enemy you're not aware of it.

  • Fuchsia

    @Ken

    "I find it interesting, women are complaining the ads are misogynist, men are complaining the ads are misandrist."

    I think if you examine what the commenters are saying more carefully, you'll find that both men and women are complaining that the ads are both misogynistic and misandristic. Which is exactly true. The patriarchy hurts everyone. It's misanthropic.

  • http://toysoldier.wordpress.com Toysoldier

    Sarah,

    If you know the definition then you should realize the Dodge ad clearly fits the definition of satire and does so in its most common form. From Dictionary.com:

    "Satire, the general term, often emphasizes the weakness more than the weak person, and usually implies moral judgment and corrective purpose"

    That is precisely what the ad does. Satire generally involves extremes, so that you object the extreme portrayal only benefits the satire's premise. The ad is no different than the Colbert Report. If people on the right object to his show, it demonstrates that Colbert's criticism is valid, and if people on the right actually believe the things he says it also validates his criticism. The only way of avoiding the win-win is to actually address the premise being satirized, which no one does. The same is true here, although with the addition of men's opinions and feelings being characterized as "whining."

    Coincidentally, framing a person's concerns and feelings as "whining" is probably not going to convince them to listen to you, so if your intent is to demonstrate that feminists are on their side, you are essentially destroying the foundations as you try to build the bridge.

    And please provide a link to a popular or prominent feminist blog where feminists regularly take issue with such ads or a link to where feminists supported efforts to pull anti-male commercials off the air or out of print.

  • LeftSidePositive

    No, Toysoldier, it's pretty clear that you don't understand the definition of satire. What, exactly, is the "moral judgement or corrective purpose" being shown in this ad? None. It doesn't tell these men that they should grow the fuck up and do things that any competent grownup would (go to work, eat healthy, be civil to others, etc.). No, it tells them to go right ahead and stay just as immature at heart as they want to be. In fact, it is positioning their car as a means to maintain that immaturity.

    Just because something is "extreme" in its portrayal does NOT make it satire--satire indicates that the author is showing that the right thing to do is the OPPOSITE of what is portrayed. In "A Modest Proposal," the point is NOT that we should go around cooking & eating babies, the point is that our exploitation of the poor is morally wrong & we should treat them better.

    The point of the Colbert Report is that in his portrayal, he highlights the inconsistencies and fallacies of the conservative movement. Colbert's statements like "Bush believes the same thing on Wednesday as he did on Monday...no matter what happened on Tuesday!" are there to show the absurdity of fetishizing extreme steadfastness or dogmatic thinking. He is saying, "actually, believing the same thing all the time can be really bad sometimes." That's what makes it satire.

    This Dodge ad does not say anything on a deeper level than what it says on the surface, so it can't be explained away by calling it "satire."

    And, here is an article at Feministing that objects to the negative assumptions a sexist ad makes about men:

    http://www.feministing.com/archives/007501.html

    "Lastly, as all clever sexist advertising does, QSOL assumes that its customers are "in" on the joke. It doesn't entertain the possibility that maybe, just maybe, all men aren't assholes who spend every available moment running around trying to find random women to give them blow jobs."

  • http://www.harpyness.com SarahMC

    Thanks LeftSidePositive. You said it perfectly.

    This Jezebel piece about sitcoms also comes to mind; be sure to read what commenters have to say about these portrayals. You don't have feminists to blame for how powerful white men depict other men in the media.

  • http://www.harpyness.com SarahMC
  • Emily H.

    I'm a woman, and I've already been complaining that the ads are insulting to men. They're not "anti-male," per se, but they present being male as inevitable depressing and demoralizing, suggesting that family life and relationships are a matter of being henpecked by a person you have nothing in common with. They suggest that being in a heterosexual relationship is an emasculating grind, rather than a fun and sexy experience. So the sexist-ness of the ads are inextricable from the fact that they actually make men look bad.

    Feminists have been saying for, like, ever that sexism is actually bad for men, that mainstream culture portrays men as dumb, lazy, childish and sometimes violent. (At its worst, sexist culture condones crimes like rape and wife beating -- "he couldn't help it, that's just what guys are like"). These low expectations are meant to excuse men, but they're actually very insulting. They don't take into account the large proportion of men who are intelligent, sophisticated, and good partners.

    The men's rights dudes who are complaining about misandry here are missing the point. Feminists AGREE with you. We don't think men should or must be pathetic louts, and we don't think society should hold them to such ridiculously low standards.

    Oh, and Toysoldier wrote that women are seen as "morally, intellectually and socially superior." We don't want that either. Being seen as pure and selfless has never done women much good.

  • http://www.harpyness.com SarahMC

    And women *aren't* seen as morally, intellectually and socially superior. We're seen as frigid, bossy killjoys (in this context). It's not like women are portrayed positively in sitcoms and commercials. We're put-upon domestic slaves who, for some reason, put up with useless men we don't even like.

  • Ken

    Men are portrayed as bafoons, women as shrews I get it. Bottom line: no ad or sitcom will affect what I buy or how I act.

  • http://toysoldier.wordpress.com Toysoldier

    LeftSidePositive, the purpose of an advertisement is solely to get a person to either buy the product or mention the product to someone who may buy it. The company simply chose to satirize men's opinion, through parody, about how they give up their autonomy, dignity and interests for the sake of a relationship with a woman. The ad is pure marketing, and there is no deeper meaning or purpose. Dodge just wants people to buy their product, and they play on men's insecurities because it works.

    Anyone concerned about this would ask why men are insecure and why men feel they must give up their autonomy, dignity and interests for the sake of a relationship with a woman. Or in short: why are the ads effective. But as I said before, no one is actually interested asking that.

    As for your link, I asked for "a link to a popular or prominent feminist blog where feminists regularly take issue with such ads or a link to where feminists supported efforts to pull anti-male commercials off the air or out of print." What I got was two links with a throw-away one-line remarks. If you cannot provide a link to any feminist blog that regularly comments on anti-male commercials, can you at least provide a whole feminist post about anti-male commercials (perhaps one similar to this)?

    Emily, if feminists agree with men concerned about misandry, perhaps feminists should not frame men's concerns as "whining." Attacking men's concerns and men's group may be fun, but as I said before, doing that is akin to destroying the foundations as you try to build the bridge. None of those men (or those not associated with either group, such as myself) will consider feminist agreement genuine or sincere if feminists keep dismissing their concerns in such a blithe manner.

  • http://www.harpyness.com SarahMC

    Oh so you want us to do a research paper for you on how the feminist movement has made anti-male ads priority #1? Stop demanding that women do all the work for you.

    By the way, you can see how audiences reacted to the SB commercials here: http://www.usatoday.com/money/advertising/admeter/2010admeter.htm

    The sexist ones were not at the top, thankfully. Not all men are so anxious about their masculinity and bitter about losing unearned privilege. Patriarchy hurts men too. Feminists have been saying that for years and years. If you don't like it, I'd advise you to target your anger at patriarchy rather than those of us working to dismantle it.

  • LeftSidePositive

    Toysoldier...that's not satire. It's just burlesque.

    And, sorry, but all of this "I must give up my autonomy, dignity, and interests" is total bullshit. These things the men are complaining about are just juvenile--you have to clean the sink after you shave? Oh, I'm sorry!! What a terrible thought!! Showing consideration for a shared living space with another human being!! You have to be civil to someone's mother?? Oh, anything but that!! God forbid a person be expected to respect important relationships in their significant other's life!! Oh, no, maintain the basic standards of politeness and compassion that were taught in preschool!! What an insult to one's "dignity"!!!

    And, yes, anyone who seriously considers the above to be problems is just "whining." It's selfish, juvenile, and pathetic.

    Relationships are complicated. Relationships require people to take each other's concerns seriously, and both parties have to make compromises and put in a lot of effort to maintain a healthy relationship. That's just life. Vilifying the fact that your partner would like to be treated with respect (and then acting passive-aggressively and buying a stupid car to compensate) is incredibly immature and unkind and SHOULD be called out. Of course, not all men are like this at all, but it is denigrating to both men and women that major companies exploit these stereotypes for profit.

    I think you're taking advantage of a difference in focus in women's blogs and trying to frame it as a moral failing. Why on earth would women's blogs take the time to organize a call-in drive for an ad that is moderately rude to men? That's like complaining that the National Kidney Foundation doesn't devote enough of its resources to liver cancer. What do you expect?!

    Furthermore, this guy apparently brought it up and got it removed...well, good for him, but do you have any idea how hard it would be for women's groups to call out & remove every ad that indicated women were too fat, too shallow, constantly exasperated shrill mothers, only interested in getting married, sex toys who come free with a car/case of beer, fair game for spying on, jealous shrewish girlfriends, etc., etc.?

  • http://www.harpyness.com SarahMC

    If your concern is sexist portrayals and men and women on tv and in ads then I wouldn't, and haven't called it whining. If your concern is picking up your own laundry and walking your dog and being civil to your in-laws and your terrible gf or wife, that's what we're calling whining. You say you're against negative depictions of men but then you defend ads that portray men as martyrs for being decent, responsible adults.

  • LeftSidePositive

    And, let's add Sarah Haskins and her fantastic take-down of how husbands are presented in advertising:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7vtyheqPVU

  • http://toysoldier.wordpress.com Toysoldier

    Sarah, I wanted you to demonstrate that feminists actually do challenge anti-male ads. It is easy to say one is against something. Actually being against it is a different story and that is my point. If feminists regularly opposed such ads or supported campaigns like those launched by Glenn Sacks , one should have no problem finding examples. It appears, however, you cannot find any prominent or popular examples, and instead you fall back on sexist feminist rhetoric.

    LeftSidePositive, a one-sided compromise is an insult to one's dignity, and that is how many men feel, i.e. that it is always their interests, hobbies and autonomy that must be compromised. As I said before, no one actually wants to address why so many men think that, especially when it is much easier to mock them. Regarding feminists groups addressing men's issues, it is a matter of hypocrisy, not expectation. One cannot claim to oppose sexism yet in turn support or turn a blind eye to sexism against men.

  • m

    @Toysoldier: Why should FEMINIST blogs be worrying about men? Why is it their job to deal with YOUR problems? You're perfectly displaying your male privilege; you expect women do everything for you. Get off your high horse.

  • LeftSidePositive

    Toysoldier...please explain this to me: are you saying it IS or IS NOT acceptable for a man to complain about cleaning the sink, going to work, or being civil to another human being?

    I posit that these attitudes are, in fact, deserving of mockery.

    So, yes, let's address why so many men think that...

    Are you trying to claim that being rude and throwing dirty underwear around are "interests" and "hobbies"? How, exactly, is it a "one-sided compromise" to treat a person with the most basic level of respect? What, in your view, validates the position of the men in this ad that walking the dog or cleaning the sink is oh so unreasonable?

    Furthermore, like I mentioned on another thread here, women's groups have enough on their hands dealing with rape, domestic violence, workplace discrimination, groping, restricted access to health care, and on and on. Why does it shock you so that we don't devote our resources to how you're portrayed in an ad?! Again, the National Kidney Foundation might, when relevant, express support for victims of liver cancer. They're not going to devote their time and resources to activities that fall clearly out of their mission statement. Stop acting like this is some big hypocrisy; it's how every advocacy group operates, all the time.

  • http://toysoldier.wordpress.com Toysoldier

    LeftSidePositive, the things mentioned in the ad are satirical, presented in the extremes and are not intended to be taken seriously. Again, no one actually wants to address what the ad plays on, i.e. why do men apparently feel they are getting the short end of the stick in relationships with women.

    Regarding feminist groups, I thought preventing sex-based discrimination and violence was part of the feminist mission statement? It is a very good pitch to tell people one wishes to supports one's concerns that their concerns are beneath you and unimportant.

  • LeftSidePositive

    Toysoldier...I guess there's something about the concept of "satire" that you're just not getting. If you're trying to argue that these complaints are presented "satirically" and not to be taken seriously, then the point of the "satire" would be that men's complaints about their girlfriends are immature and pointless. This makes no sense, because the ad is targeted TO MEN.

    You've said "no one wants to address" the underlying issue several times, but you've not yet presented a case for it (although we've asked you to). Please present a cogent thesis as to the validity of the claim that men deserve to feel "they are getting the short end of the stick" (as opposed to the compromises that all rational adults must make to sustain relationships!), and why it is in any way appropriate to present it as it was in the ad.

    I'm sorry, are you honestly trying to claim that a less-than-flattering portrayal in an ad (which, I might mention, was nowhere near as unflattering as the implications about the girlfriends) is so important that feminists must drop everything they're doing to campaign against them? That's absurd. We've shown several examples where writers critique these stereotypes (because that's what writers do...they discuss & analyze things!!) and yet you won't be satisfied unless women's organizations put all their priorities aside and picket for your interests? Talk about unreasonable expectations!

  • http://toysoldier.wordpress.com Toysoldier

    It makes sense if the intent is to sell a product. The idea behind the ad is that men are whiny idiots, but buying a Charger will make them feel better. However, the satire is subtle, so if some people will actually agreed with the ad, it still works because then the premise becomes that men are spineless wusses and only buying a Charger will resolve that. That is Marketing 101: define the problem and then -- no matter how preposterous -- present the product as the solution to the problem. The only reason feminists objected to this ad is because women were presented as part of the problem. Had the ad been reversed, feminists would have applauded it, kind of like they are doing right now on this post.

    In case one did not catch this, I do not actually agree with the ad itself, although I find it to be brilliant marketing. What I agree with that is that some of the sentiments this ad plays are legitimate male grievances.

    As for the reason for men's feelings, the simple explanation is that males feel marginalized. The fuller explanation is much more nuanced. Regarding feminists groups, the issue is simply that feminists do not keep to their own mission statement. It is not about dropping everything; it is only about being honest and consistent. One cannot claim to oppose sexism against everyone, but when asked to address sexism against men suddenly become too busy. Likewise, one cannot claim one's plate is too full with more important issues while expecting men to drop all of their more important issues to address yours.

  • LeftSidePositive

    Toysoldier, you still haven't shown how it's satire. You can't just claim "it's subtle" when you've utterly failed to show how it operates as satire. If it were satire, the point would be that men need to grow the fuck up, NOT buy a car. The very fact that they're using these stereotypes to sell the car indicates that they are not trying to change them, they are EXPLOITING them to sell a product.

    Yes, women were presented as the problem AND NOT SATIRICALLY...the ad was straight-up using animosity against women to sell a product. We have every right to be upset about that.

    WHAT LEGITIMATE MALE GRIEVANCES?!?!?! You haven't mentioned a single one.

    As for males feeling marginalized, well, if you guys weren't every single president, 7/9ths of the Supreme Court, 82% of the House & Senate, 93.6% of Fortune 500 CEOs, THEN I might feel sorry for you.

    Other than that, I think the reason men like this feel "marginalized" is that they are totally insensitive to the compromises and difficulties that other people around them make, and can only see their own difficulties. They can somehow magically ignore the fact that their wives/girlfriends are probably cleaning the entire damn house and he's sooooooooo oppressed that he has to put his underwear in the hamper?! They have probably never seriously thought about what it would mean to "balance work and family," never been sexually harassed at work, never had anyone pass them over for a job because someone assumed by their gender that they were unqualified, and so on.

  • http://toysoldier.wordpress.com Toysoldier

    If you follow the link I provided your questions would be answered. However, it appears that you have already made up your mind before reading the link or waiting for me to provide more information.

  • LeftSidePositive

    I was reading the link as you typed. It's nothing more than classic conservative bullshit. From Kathleen Parker, no less!! Spare me this absurdity.

    Men are told to act & dress more like women? Are you mad? How much are women told to spend on clothing, cosmetics, etc.? IF women were told to change the way they dressed?! Have you never heard of the Power Suit? Have you not heard of the continual fashion debate about how women should dress to be taken seriously at work? What percentage of plastic surgery procedures are performed on women? 91%.

    I'm sorry...all this glorification of single mothers stuff is bullshit...single mothers are vastly more likely to be in poverty, undereducated, and in a generally very bad place all around. It's not "glorifying" them, it's providing support they desperately need, especially for their children's welfare. And why are they single again? Oh, yes, because the man LEFT in most cases.

    And then you have movies like "The Pursuit of Happyness" where the single father is treated as a highly praiseworthy character (a homeless woman with a kid? tramp!!). Never mind the classic Disney heroine and her perpetual motherlessness, even well into the '90s...Ariel, Jasmine, Belle, Pocahontas--all had fathers only.

    Where does this article get off claiming that only "masculinity" is tied to "honour"? That's not asking for equality...that's just whining that you want the old sexism back. Honor should be based on trustworthiness and treating people fairly, regardless of gender.

    Furthermore, "Women are the best caregivers" is NOT the product of feminism...that's good old-fashioned patriarchy, and "the cult of domesticity" from the Victorian era. Read something from the late 1800s...it will tell you how "morally superior" women are, as a way of telling them they shouldn't aspire to do anything outside the home, be corrupted by political rights, or--God forbid!--have sexual autonomy.

    So, nice try, but no.

  • Dorian Smith

    Satire and comedy are just lost on some people. You can't reason with people who just don't get it.

  • LeftSidePositive

    From the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

    http://www.bls.gov/news.release/atus.nr0.htm

    Household Activities in 2008

    --On an average day, 83 percent of women and 64 percent of men spent some time doing household activities, such as housework, cooking, lawn care, or financial and other household management. (For a definition of average day, see the Technical Note.) (See table 1.)

    --On the days that they did household activities, women spent an average of 2.6 hours on such activities, while men spent 2.0 hours. (See table 1.)

    --On an average day, 20 percent of men did housework--such as cleaning or doing laundry--compared with 50 percent of women. Thirty-eight percent of men did food preparation or cleanup compared with 65 percent of women. (See table 1.)

    and

    Of those who engaged in leisure activities, men spent more time in these activities (5.7 hours) than did women (5.1 hours). (See table 1.)

    and

    --Men were more likely than women to participate in sports, exercise, or recreation on any given day--21 versus 15 percent. On the days that they participated, men also spent more time in these activities than did women, 1.9 versus 1.3 hours. (See table 1.)

    Now will you shut the hell up about men getting "the short end" in relationships?!

    As for being taken seriously as fathers:

    On an average weekday, among adults living in households with children under 6, women spent 1.2 hours providing physical care (such as bathing or feeding a child) to household children; by contrast, men spent 0.4 hour (25 minutes) providing physical care. On an average weekend day, women provided an hour of physical care to household children, while men provided half an hour. (See table 9.)

    So, it sounds like all those conservative men just want to whine, whine, whine about why they're not worshipped like those old "Father knows best" fellows of the 1950s, but they forgot about that pesky detail about actually putting in the work to raise their family!!

  • http://TheFunion Women Suck (It)

    Wow. Do you not see how strikingly equitable those figures are, once you take into account that mothers are less likely to work full time than fathers?

    And as for you, idiot who thinks this is satire: how does complaining about men satirize men basically complaining about themselves?

    You'll note, astute reader/idiot, that the things listed in the charger ad are all things that seem quite reasonable. Wash the sink, walk the dog, etc. This is because the point is that men are such bums that they don't just do these things out of the goodness of their hearts.

    Now, in contrast, in the satire we are presented with women listing things that are completely unreasonable. Taking care of the kids by yourself, getting cheated on, being called a bitch, etc.. If we assume that the structure of the ads is the same, then it must be the case that in the parody, these are all things men want women to do. Because men are cheating, bitch-calling, force-you-to-have-kids-and-then-raise-them-by-yourself-even-though-it's-partly-your-fault-you-let-him-stick-it-in-you-and-then-carried-the-thing-to-term you stupid, un-self-aware misandrist.

    And of course, all us men out here are totally in favor of laws fixing the gender-wage ratio at the ratio of the most weight lifted by a man to the most weight lifted by a womin.

  • LeftSidePositive

    And, idiot, don't you see that women being less likely to work full-time is a PROBLEM?!

    Yes, the ad does show men being bums...but bums who should feel entitled to go and get themselves a car to congratulate themselves on their slackerhood.

    And, yes, the things women are asked to do ARE unreasonable, and yes, they DO happen--frequently.

    And your solution is what? Women who want self-respect should just give up having meaningful relationships, children, and companionship? Fuck you.

  • http://TheBunion Storke Power

    It certainly might be (I don't know whether it's more societal restriction on women's hours or more personal choice, but I'd agree that it's bad if it's the former). But then you should complain about that instead of using the statistics which you used, because whatever the actual situation, those are skewed by the fact that men work more, and without pointing that out, you can't really understand what they say.

    And feeling entitled to go get a car is a far cry from "calling the uppity ones bitches".

    No, what I'm suggesting is that a woman who's tasked with taking care of the kids all the time, doing all the housework and letting her husband cheat on her should maybe make better choices in her personal life.

    And excuse me, but I'm pretty sure that EVERYONE gets plenty of unreasonable demands. The problem with the spoof is that it makes the claim "Males in general are responsible for these demands, rather than shitty males"

  • LeftSidePositive

    Storke Power, how does the original ad NOT make the claim that females "in general are responsible for these demands"??

    And the fact "that EVERYONE gets plenty of unreasonable demands" was THE POINT of the women's satire--to show that the men in the Dodge ad were being petty and ridiculous for acting like they were so oppressed.

    As for the more serious concerns--wage disparity, sexual harassment, political interference in women's lives--these things are pretty generalizable to society at large. While it may be just the "shitty" people who cause it, that's a lot of shitty people, with a lot of far-reaching effects.

  • Pingback: from the bottom of my twisted, thorny heart

  • Carlos

    wow, some of you have lost the point, completely. Namely, the posters who have gone on for 20+ posts. The advertisement displays a bias, aimed to make profit for the entity it represents. Yes, some of the stuff said in the advertisement was skewed to represent the two genders in an inaccurate light. but you know what? MOST ADS FUNCTION IN THAT CAPACITY. This includes advertisements for female stuff too.

    Point is, sometimes guys who have girlfriends get together amongst themselves and gossip about their respective girlfriends. . .this holds true for most women in relationships too, I would imagine. This universal activity of gathering in small groups to discuss the state of one's own relationship has been going on for a while, probably as far back as when many of our fathers lived. Subsequently, the Charger used to be an old muscle car that a number of our fathers drove, as well. The memories of bitching about our girlfriends/wives and working on cars is a cultural reference that many modern males can easily recognize and associate with. Dodge plays on that.

    This ad isn't the first ad to say disrespectful shit about ladies and it wont be the last. But it goes both ways, there are also advertisements that depict guys in a bad light too. If you just chalk it up to good bull, its a whole lot easier to get along. I know, I know, I'm a communist.

...