Sexism on television

iwantmydinner

The sexist tripe that ad-makers come up with drives me insane on a daily basis, on radio and TV. The men are thick and the women are eye-rolling naggy types in sooo many ads... it's actually scandalous. I remember my mum giving out about the way both men and women are portrayed in ads when I was a very young child - how in the name of god is it still happening??

Anyone seen the ad where the woman is in a bath and being sexually pleasured by a man with a fire hose? Seems a bit much.

The Black Oil

A lot of the TV I watch is fictional drama, and funnily enough, most of the characters I've liked over the past 3-4 years have been female. And actually, their being female wasn't really the main reason I liked them. It was that they had confidence, intelligence, balls and were capable of making decisions.

I tend not to watch as scheduled, so a lot of the time I'm not really aware of the reality stuff. I hear the odd bit here and there. With most reality stuff, isn't it basically scripted, by the numbers to cringeworthy levels anyway? Not that this makes it OK if there's sexism involved.

As for advertising, again I may be a little sheltered here as I don't watch a lot of stuff with ads. Mr. Muscle oven cleaner ads have been pretty stupid over the years, iirc. Cinema ads are sometimes a bit off, though. For example, the Club Orange 'bits' one, which is heavy on cleavage. It just seemed a bit…'is that the best they could come up with?' (on my personal offend-o-meter :P), which is usually what they're trying to do half the time - to stir a reaction, and that this can end up with greater media exposure than how the ad was originally packaged. Like a Ryanair stunt that becomes a bit more known for something O' Leary says or does rather the original message.

It's a bit odd that we're living in the Mad Men watching generation, hearing people wince at some of the comments by its characters, usually directed at woman. Some of that has changed in the workplace, of course (with exceptions, obviously), but advertising probably has a long way to go re men, women, and children.

Daveysil15

Sexism on TV is nothing new. Take me out is not the worst of them, and I do recall Jennifer McGuire hosting a dating show where a group of guys got to judge one woman at a time and they were fairly blunt in their opinions. Although I think it worked both ways in that show. At least they mixed it up a bit.

cantdecide

I remember watching Grey's Anatomy because a housemate was a fan for a while. I'm not a big TV fan and was happy to stare at the TV at that time of evening. I don't have examples or evidence. I don't even remember the characters but I just remembering the women were mostly portrayed as proactive go-getters and the males were shown as spineless, fickle or borderline sociopathic. It got too annoying too quickly so I went for evening walks instead!

wallycharlo

Peppa Pig sums it up perfectly for me.

Silly Daddy Pig :-)

brianwarren

HI, Good Topic for discussion.
My opinion is the there is too much Sport on TV, Radio aimed at men, and too much Sexist trash programs aimed at women. The women who watch these programs should be giving out that small minded stereo typed programs are all they have to choose from.
While I have never seen these programs, I think the men are ridiculed to make the female audience feel good about themselves. Not everyone has a good job, not every one has good work mates, not everyone has a good family life, and not everyone has a good marriage. Some women unfortunately see men as an easy target to relieve what ever problem they have.

It is like the joke, did you hear about the Female Gay couple who broke up, it was the mans fault.

Sometimes our attitudes are made by rubbish programs like these which is the dangerous thing, especially for young kids growing up.

An example of attitude is the following;
There was a critical report on Madrid TV last week. The question was regarding whether women should be the home makers in a family with children.
Both women and men were asked, and both agreed women were better. Which is a compliment to women. But the reporters commented that the attitudes were sexist.
This was especially aimed at a young guy, who to be fair gave the impression of not having much of a clue. But for those who are in the know, until you get to a ripe old age one really doesn't have a clue.
While the guy was whole heartily in favor women being the home makers, what a few years will help him realize is that he should have added, but he would prefer it was him.
If we are to learn from our Scandinavian brothers, one of the parents is best based at home ( although present living patterns make that is impossible. )

Sexism is a very important thing, especially what women have been through, and continue to go through.
As James Connelly said, Women are the slave's slave, and it was true. But what he forgot to mention was that Children were the slave of the slave's slave, often sold in Ireland right up to the 60s.
What I think he meant to get across by this was that while women of means fight for equal rights, what they should be fighting for are equal rights for disadvantaged men, as this would benefit their wives, and hence their children.

Amirani

brianwarren wrote: »

HI, Good Topic for discussion.
My opinion is the there is too much Sport on TV, Radio aimed at men, and too much Sexist trash programs aimed at women. The women who watch these programs should be giving out that small minded stereo typed programs are all they have to choose from.

Sky Sports should be closed down...:rolleyes:

You do know that women like sport also?

Guyanachronism

Have people seen the new ad for Paco Robanne cologne ad? It has some stupid name like excelsior. But basically at the end the guy walks into a locker room with a trophy on his shoulder and there are five women waiting for him.

It's just insulting that they think they can sell cologne with such a stupid ad. I know the lynx ads were bad, but they were tongue in cheek, this is one of those serious artsy looking cologne ads, but still has the same stupid tropes.

brianwarren

HI

Of course Women follow sport, but as all sport on TV is male based, most people who watch are men, so the shows are focused on men.
If more women were as daft as some men, watching so much sport, rather than practicing it, then there would be Women's Golf, Football and more on prime time TV. As generally women are less attracted to sports programs, the Dope Men's programs are focused on them.
It really is a sad and lazy type of broadcasting as well. If Rugby is in season, RTE lives and breaths Rugby, while most people couldn't care less.
If it is football, football everywhere. Is it so narrow minded and lazy.
There should be more information on TV, given by interesting interested people.

Like a program on Africa and the countries that are still not independent.
A program on the Democrat Party in America on how they fought against American Slave Rights, only to become the Party of the African American.
A program on how women were treated as 2nd class citizens until very lately.
How social progression for the Poor, is social progression for Women and Children
A program on how spoiling our children does not make them better people.

wallycharlo

brianwarren wrote: »

...Of course Women follow sport, but as all sport on TV is male based...

It's not.

Take a look at Eurosport, they have plenty of women's sport on.

Arawn

Currently watching a film atm with Kirsten Bell called the lifeguard, She's almost 30 hooking up with a troubled teenager in school and yet it's portrayed as a mutual relationship and not her preying on him. Only one mention of it being illegal so far and the movie is 70 mins in

Galwayguy35

The Diet Coke ad, yer man out mowing the lawn and one of the women throws a can in his direction, it splashes all over his T shirt and he slowly takes it off while the women watch.

Reverse the sexes and it wouldn't last long on the tele methinks...

jaffacakesyum

I agree with most of what has been said on the thread. Advertisements to do with cleaning products, cooking etc. in particular drives me nuts. The man always portrayed as the stupid one, the women always the one who does the cooking and cleaning.

But with regards to diet coke ad, minstrels etc. I see no problem with it. And I see no problem with the club orange ad either. The club orange ad did get a lot more complaints than any ad objectifying men, but the thing is, if men feel offended at the diet coke ad or minstrels ad they have every right to complain. It's not womens fault that these ads are still on there. I personally see no problem with the ads but if a lot of men complained and it got taken off the air I'd say no problem, fair play, you guys obviously think it's inapproriate and it's your right to complain about it.

Tv soaps do nothing good for domestic abuse and physical violence against men either. But there's a load of rubbish on soaps in general.

source

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

But with regards to diet coke ad, minstrels etc. I see no problem with it. And I see no problem with the club orange ad either. The club orange ad did get a lot more complaints than any ad objectifying men, but the thing is, if men feel offended at the diet coke ad or minstrels ad they have every right to complain. It's not womens fault that these ads are still on there. I personally see no problem with the ads but if a lot of men complained and it got taken off the air I'd say no problem, fair play, you guys obviously think it's inapproriate and it's your right to complain about it.

It's not about that, it's about the very obvious double standards that are at play on our TV screens.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander doesn't hold true when it comes to the portrayal of the two sexes on TV.

um7y1h83ge06nx

Remember the RSA's "Slow Down Boys" campaign?

People here, myself included, complained about that one on the basis that it was a gross generalisation, sexist and sought to demonise men.

Nothing was done about that.

Zulu

Mavis Glamorous Designer wrote: »

Remember the RSA's "Slow Down Boys" campaign?

People here, myself included, complained about that one on the basis that it was a gross generalisation, sexist and sought to demonise men.

Nothing was done about that.

I was one who complained. No one wanted to entertain the complaint. The ASAI are useless and do not wish to hear from men re sexism. They are only happy to work with feminist lobby groups.

I have yet to see one single ad be pulled for being sexist towards men.

GalwayGuy2

I's day this video would be portrayed differently if Frank was female.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1bYABgsmlI

jaffacakesyum

source wrote: »

It's not about that, it's about the very obvious double standards that are at play on our TV screens.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander doesn't hold true when it comes to the portrayal of the two sexes on TV.

Do you mean that the same women who would have no problem with minstrels and diet coke ad are offended by club orange ad and that's a double standard? I'd agree with you there if that's the case. I don't know, I can't really comment as I don't know any men or women offended by either ads.

But my point stands. Men have every right to complain about ads objectifying them but they don't. Why? Men are either upset about the ads or they're not. I don't think they are, I think they're just annoyed at women complaining about ads objectifying them? Am I right do you think?

newport2

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

Do you mean that the same women who would have no problem with minstrels and diet coke ad are offended by club orange ad and that's a double standard? I'd agree with you there if that's the case. I don't know, I can't really comment as I don't know any men or women offended by either ads.

But my point stands. Men have every right to complain about ads objectifying them but they don't. Why? Men are either upset about the ads or they're not. I don't think they are, I think they're just annoyed at women complaining about ads objectifying them? Am I right do you think?

You are right when you say this. I think a lot of these ads don't really bother men (not all), it's what is perceived as double standards that's annoying.

How men are portrayed in ads doesn't bother me, what bothers me is how this effects kids. Boys grow up being told via TV that they're useless around the house, arrive home with the wrong child when they're looking after their children, that they're stupid and women are smart, etc. Any chance that influences what some of these boys will become and how they see themselves? I think so.

Women tend to see themselves as a "group" for want of a better word. My wife might be outraged by seeing a woman getting a raw deal on the other side of the world - because she's a woman. I on the other hand, do not get angry if Joe Smith down the road gets slighted. I only really care when it's someone - male or female - that I know.

I think straight white men are the only "group" that don't see themselves as one, usually don't take offence on behalf of each other. They have no recognised "ism" to apply to themselves in the same way that women, black people, gay, etc do. It's far easier to make a complaint when you can identify yourself with a group and apply an "ism" to it. Generally when men make complaints they get belittled or just laughed at, so they don't do it.

um7y1h83ge06nx

newport2 wrote: »

I think straight white men are the only "group" that don't see themselves as one, usually don't take offence on behalf of each other. They have no recognised "ism" to apply to themselves in the same way that women, black people, gay, etc do. It's far easier to make a complaint when you can identify yourself with a group and apply an "ism" to it. Generally when men make complaints they get belittled or just laughed at, so they don't do it.

Fair point. It probably doesn't help either that throughout history white males have been the most likely to be in power and the aggressor (even though there would have been millions and millions of downtrodden, poor white men though throughout history too).

That makes it very difficult for society in general to see us as victims sometimes, because we're all Prime Ministers, CEOs etc..

newport2

Mavis Glamorous Designer wrote: »

That makes it very difficult for society in general to see us as victims sometimes, because we're all Prime Ministers, CEOs etc..

That's the key issue, we're not.

A tiny minority of priviledged people at the top are taken, say 80% of these are men and then it's implied that this same percentage of men across society are better off. If we're looking to improve society as a whole, we should be looking at society as a whole to observe how things are, not a skewed minority.

Guyanachronism

newport2 wrote: »

That's the key issue, we're not.

A tiny minority of priviledged people at the top are taken, say 80% of these are men and then it's implied that this same percentage of men across society are better off. If we're looking to improve society as a whole, we should be looking at society as a whole to observe how things are, not a skewed minority.

It's called intersectionality.

Daveysil15

Mavis Glamorous Designer wrote: »

Remember the RSA's "Slow Down Boys" campaign?

People here, myself included, complained about that one on the basis that it was a gross generalisation, sexist and sought to demonise men.

Nothing was done about that.

God yes, that one really irritated me. The "He drives, she dies" slogan was absolutely appalling. I was a lot more offended by that than the Diet Coke ad.

clairefontaine

newport2 wrote: »

You are right when you say this. I think a lot of these ads don't really bother men (not all), it's what is perceived as double standards that's annoying.

How men are portrayed in ads doesn't bother me, what bothers me is how this effects kids. Boys grow up being told via TV that they're useless around the house, arrive home with the wrong child when they're looking after their children, that they're stupid and women are smart, etc. Any chance that influences what some of these boys will become and how they see themselves? I think so.

Women tend to see themselves as a "group" for want of a better word. My wife might be outraged by seeing a woman getting a raw deal on the other side of the world - because she's a woman. I on the other hand, do not get angry if Joe Smith down the road gets slighted. I only really care when it's someone - male or female - that I know.

I think straight white men are the only "group" that don't see themselves as one, usually don't take offence on behalf of each other. They have no recognised "ism" to apply to themselves in the same way that women, black people, gay, etc do. It's far easier to make a complaint when you can identify yourself with a group and apply an "ism" to it. Generally when men make complaints they get belittled or just laughed at, so they don't do it.

When you over identify with your gender, or any particular facet of your identity, like race or religion, you can lose objectivity, while also inhibiting empathising with the other. Ironically this was the main energy behind some of these groups who ended up practising it themselves.

Panthro

Mod Note:
I think I'm going to have to pull this thread back a wee bit.
It was set up to discuss any tv shows/adverts which can be perceived as being sexist against males.
Lets leave the history lessons out of it folks, and focus on the here and now on our televisions, please and thank you.

eireannBEAR

Sexism on tv doesnt bother me but sexist laws against men disgust me,when my son was born any of you posters had as much right to him as i had...none!! as i wasnt married i had to go to court to get guardianship and access,i got guardianship,but on access the judge said ''my daughter just had a baby and babies need their mammys...ehhhhhh you can have one hour each day of weekend'' i lived 50 miles away!!!

claypigeon777

Gandhi wrote: »

I saw something very subtle on TV a few hours ago.

I was in the gym at lunchtime, where they have the TV on with the sound off, and one of those Jerry Springer-type shows was on. I think it was Maury Povich.

At the start of the show they were showing a man and woman (separately) backstage who were going to have their dispute on stage, and were interviewing. At first, I thought the man was being interviewed from inside a prison cell, and then I realized that the backdrop was a black trellis against a blue wall.

The woman was sitting in front of part of it with some vertical, horizontal, and diagonal beams that actually looked like a decorative trellis. The man was sitting in front of part of it that only had horizontal beams, and the more I looked at it the more I thought it was meant to look like prison bars. The thickness and spacing were bang-on, and there was a cluster that were out of sequence and looked like a prison cell door.

They also had all these incidental shots of the man standing there with folded arms and an angry look on his face, while the incidental shots of the woman were of her sitting in a chair with a forlorn woe-is-me expression.

I couldn't hear what they were actually saying, but it was interesting how they were using camera angles to frame the man as the villain before they even got on stage. Obviously, they were also being sexist to the woman by portraying her as a helpless little victim.

That's just to fool the crowd and the TV audience.

The Maury reveals that the man is NOT the father and then he'll do a celebratory dance and gets lots of whoops from audience.:D

Feathers

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

But my point stands. Men have every right to complain about ads objectifying them but they don't. Why? Men are either upset about the ads or they're not. I don't think they are, I think they're just annoyed at women complaining about ads objectifying them? Am I right do you think?

I don't think it's unreasonable to complain about a double standard, even if at face value you were reasonably happy to begin with. If you're happy with your wage but found out your colleague was on twice as much, most people wouldn't shrug it off as "well I could have asked for more I suppose". You'd say either we're both worth £X or we're both worth £2X, but we should be paid the same.

Advertising standards are drawn out from precedence. & a precedence set by an upheld complaint against an ad objectifying women should apply equally to future ads objectifying women or men.

If objectification is tolerable in advertising, equality would have it that it's tolerated towards both sexes. If it's degrading, it's degrading to both sexes. Surely this is the whole point of having Advertising Standards.

JamJamJamJam

Feathers wrote: »

I don't think it's unreasonable to complain about a double standard, even if at face value you were reasonably happy to begin with. If you're happy with your wage but found out your colleague was on twice as much, most people wouldn't shrug it off as "well I could have asked for more I suppose". You'd say either we're both worth £X or we're both worth £2X, but we should be paid the same.

Advertising standards are drawn out from precedence. & a precedence set by an upheld complaint against an ad objectifying women should apply equally to future ads objectifying women or men.

If objectification is tolerable in advertising, equality would have it that it's tolerated towards both sexes. If it's degrading, it's degrading to both sexes. Surely this is the whole point of having Advertising Standards.

Sort of just playing devil's advocate here, but the comparison to a workmate being paid more might be more complete if we said that your better-paid workmate also needs the money really badly, but you're getting by okay! By this I mean that male objectification isn't rife in the media, and a small amount is unlikely to cause society overall to reduce men to sexual objects. Particularly since the media tends to take a very male view from the start, rather than a neutral view. Women's objectification, which is far more common, is related to the higher rates of female harassment victims, higher rates of female domestic abuse victims and the high level of rape experienced by women.

I don't think that objectification of anybody is okay, but because men and women are coming from different places in society, and because the amount of female objectification is far higher than that of men, sexual objectification of women is a much more urgent problem.



However, non-sexual, physical violence against men in the media is everywhere and that isss a major problem. I always think of the scene at the start of Pirates of the Caribbean 1, when the Pirates raid the town where Elizabeth lives, and tens or hundreds of innocent men are beaten or killed, and one of the pirates finds Elizabeth and slaps her across her face, and only then violence becomes a problem!