Hehehehehehe! I love this! o.O

Spots like that make you feel like 'copywriter' must be the greatest job in the world.

Just as the Israelites wandered through the valley in search of bountiful pastures....

Oh look. A responsible, caring, mature woman is contrasted against an irresponsible, narcissistic, juvenile man, who ends up being seriously harmed.

Is it possible, just even slightly possible, that the ubiquitous repetition of this particular narrative is one of the reasons why we can't get male genital mutilation equally outlawed in this country?

Because, no, it's not just a joke. If it were as consistently a case of responsible, caring, mature anglos being contrasted against irresponsible, narcissistic, juvenile blacks or jews or asians, who end up being seriously harmed, it wouldn't be a joke. It would be racism.

And that's what makes this sexism.

Amy, if you're at all wondering why we still can't get male genital mutilation outlawed in this country -- this is why. It's because people like you, who get it on MGM, still don't get it on the bigger picture, and self-defeatingly promote crap like this as though it were positive and worthwhile.

> Is it possible, just even slightly
> possible, that the ubiquitous repetition
> of this particular narrative is one of
> the reasons why we can't get male genital
> mutilation equally outlawed in this country?

No.

Stow it Acksiom, did you follow the youtube daisy chain to see other comercials by this company?

There are other making women out to be the but of the joke as well

Hey, thanks for demonstrably supporting my broader point about such messages tending to lower the threshold for abusive behavior, luljp.

And no, I didn't follow it. But since you raised the issue, and I possess at least a modicum of intellectual integrity, I went looking.

I've seen three more now; in the vet one, the original pattern of sexism holds, although the contrast is much less specific; in the stun one, there's no woman, but this time an innocent male coworker is harmed, and in the fourth one, a father is depicted as pathologically overinvolved.

So as it stands, the evidence actually supports my position. And I think that's more than enough generosity of effort on my part, despite your rudeness, so if you want to keep criticizing me, bring something yourself.

Ax, what's it like to live a life of unremitting fear and unseen conspiracy? Do you ever feel sad?

I have this coworker who is always emailing funny commercials from Europe, they slay me. Sometimes I wonder why we can't have funny commercials in America (other than Super Bowl Sunday). Thanks, Acksiom for stepping up and reminding me why.

Good luck with your crusade against male genital improvement.

Well, I did cry a bit the other day, when I was putting some groceries away and had to move the applesauce that I bought for my father just before they brought him home from the SNF to die. He stopped eating the next day, and about a week later some combination of the dehydration, starvation, and brain cancer killed him.

-H-i-s- The twinpack of applesauce is still in there, next to the boxed rice pilaf. I don't want to get rid of it. I don't want to lose another connection to him, even one as trivial as a couple of little cups of applesauce that he never even knew were in the house.

But as to the whole unremitting fear and unseen conspiracy, um, I wouldn't know. I don't believe in conspiracies and what I most fear is dying alone, unloved and unwanted, as Dave Sim put it.

But I do think I know why people laugh at violence done against men; it's because we're still not willing to pay the higher costs for resources, infrastructure, manufacturing, defense, and so on that would occur if we stopped devaluing the well-being, safety, health, and lives of men and boys.

We teach everybody to devalue and dehumanize men and boys, themselves included, so that we have a constant resupply of willing self-sacrificers to do the dirty, dangerous, deadly supply and maintenance work needed for for our civilization at lower costs than we would have to pay otherwise.

That's why people get all bent out of shape when this kind of discrimination against men is pointed out and criticized. It's not only threatening to their property and status, but because they're basically decent and fair, it rubs their own guilt about their participation in the whole scheme kind of raw.

Acksiom sounds just like the feminazis in the one women's studies course I took in college.. except they kept complaining about how women were portrayed as sex objects.. "I mean, look at the hair commercials, even THOSE have naked women in them washing their hair!!!" Seriously, you can find offense in anything if you try hard enough.

>>Well, I did cry a bit the other day, when I was putting some groceries away and had to move the applesauce that I bought for my father just before they brought him home from the SNF to die.

Acksiom,
It's not kind to yourself to get into debates when you're grieving. Take it gently. And condolences.

Amy dear what is your obsession with cell phones? You remind me of my neighbors who I'll call The Dufus Gang. These Dufuses are always complaining about how my dog, Johnpaulgeorgeringo, likes to while away the hours barking. How many times must I explain to them that that is how dogs COMMUNICATE and they have some nerve in their arrogant human way to insist that somehow in their braindead world view that Johnpaulgeorgeringo's message is somehow inferior to their human claptrap.

Jody, thank you for your condolences.

I also appreciate the intent behind your sympathetic advice, but -- despite how ungrateful this might seem -- I'm afraid it just makes things worse.

You're assigning the agency for this to me when you should instead be criticizing the behavior of others. That's part of the same pattern I'm pointing out here. Being told merely to withdraw for my own benefit tacitly implies that other people's treatment of me has been acceptable, and should not be criticized. Why? Because we must not defend men against attacks, which in turn is because we must not question and thereby weaken our cultural attitude of male devaluation and dehumanization, which in turn is because we don't want to pay the higher costs for the material benefits we receive from the self-sacrifice of their well-being, safety, health, and lives.

So basically you're telling me to be quiet and go away and stop rocking the boat. Yes, I know that's not what you consciously intended, but that's how it ends up working. You're trying to have it both ways -- to express concern and sympathy for me, but without actually blaming anyone else for their unacceptable behavior.

If you really want to support people in situations such as this, you instead should agree with their points, and criticize the others castigating them. Because what we all need is not for them to withdraw and take it gently, but for them to be validated, and for the behavior of the people treating them poorly to be identified as unacceptable and criticized.

And yes, a contentious forum such as this is the wrong place to be actively seeking validation, nor am I doing so -- I was using Crid's mean girl behavior to make points about both male rehumanization and alternatives to the kind of insecure adolescent posturing of which he and many others here are so fond -- but that still doesn't excuse people for not providing such validation, and criticism.

Because we really do need more of that, and less attempts to become Queen of the Snark Hill.

(OSYCRIWIDTF)

Jody, you're a class act.

Take this one for example its not this phone company's but funny non the less

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wz5oReSa_U&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eadvicegoddess%2Ecom%2Farchives%2F2009%2F09%2F03%2Fcell%5Fphone%5Fkarm%2Ehtml&feature=player_embedded#t=15

And here is one from kyrocera

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLfAbuGtU8c&feature=related

And one more

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07rwFurzpw8&feature=related

All righty then.

http://www.glennsacks.com/volvo.php

http://www.glennsacks.com/why_i_launched_verizon.htm

http://glennsacks.com/why_i_launched.htm

So, does this mean Glenn Sacks totally trivializes real problems with his utter asshattery, too?

Oh, and Amy -- you're narrowing the goalposts just like the feminists do when you try to hide my my point about how in advertising overall, violence is almost exclusively targeted against males, and how this ad in specific presents a particularly blatant example of a contrasting gender narrative.

The Kyocera ad is very similar to the Verizon ad against which Glenn Sacks was campaigning. But by your non-reasoning, the Verizon ad should apparently also be considered non-sexist and non-objectionable because of how it was really just poking fun at parents, and it was HUMOR about homework and incompetence and it was FUNNY and there are plenty of other ads out there where women are made to appear incompetent too.

Um, no.

Likewise, just because these particular ads are also about cell phones and rude people does not in any way whatsoever make them any less about violence in general and against men in particular as well, nor does it all disprove that obvious overall pattern of discrimination.

You tried to move the goalposts, Amy.

Lujlp -- yes, thank you; I found the second two already on my own, and cited the third in my earlier post. Let's do the checklist, shall we?

1st: Violence against women = NONE

2nd: Violence against women = NONE

3rd: Violence against women = NONE

You're trying to move the goalposts too.

As I said, I do think I know why people laugh at violence done against men; it's because we're still not willing to pay the higher costs for resources, infrastructure, manufacturing, defense, and so on that would occur if we stopped devaluing the well-being, safety, health, and lives of men and boys.

We teach everybody to devalue and dehumanize men and boys, themselves included, so that we have a constant resupply of willing self-sacrificers to do the dirty, dangerous, deadly supply and maintenance work needed for for our civilization at lower costs than we would have to pay otherwise.

That's why people get all bent out of shape when this kind of discrimination against men is pointed out and criticized. It's not only threatening to their property and status, but because they're basically decent and fair, it rubs their own guilt about their participation in the whole scheme kind of raw.

But why should I go over there when I can get treated almost exactly the same right here?

I mean, you do realize that apart from the irrelevant rationalizations about how much you do for men's issues otherwise, you're reacting pretty much how they would if I pointed out the same things in the same way over there, don't you?

Forget the argument about whether the commercials are condone violence against men and women! Is the squirrel okay?

> Is the squirrel okay?

We see it bounding out of the grave at the end... A handsome detail.

But it's striking and pathetic that the meat of this thread was a collision of tastes in television programming.... Satiric commercials vs. zombie talk show hosts...

Acksiom, keep getting really upset about things!... Don't listen to Amy! Stiffen your resolve! You didn't pick that nickname for nuthin'.... Light candles, bow your head and promise yourself that you'll be even more enthusiastic about these fights tomorrow! The stakes are that high!

The Kyocera ad people were being mean to that man!

New details while rereading!

> a contentious forum such as this is
> the wrong place to be actively
> seeking validation

That understates things! A contentious forum –even such a MILD one as this– is the wrong place to even PASSIVELY seek validation.

Y'know, validation is not something most people worry about, especially. It's not even something that grown women worry about all that often. (Sorting out this distinction allows one to sort feminists from girly thinkers, which is both useful and rewarding sport.) Validation is self-esteem in good sportswear, and the key to self-esteem is doing something estimable. When you've done that, you don't walk contentiously through the world wondering why other people don't 'validate' you.

I mean, shit fuck, if your feelings are that brittle, they're going to be broken in short order anyway. When I see crème brûlée, I reach for a spoon and smirk, even if it ain't my serving.

Except I don't think it's horrible.

Sure, you're trying to throw a lot of crap at me that's straight out of the Catalog of Anti-Male Shaming Tactics -- Irascibility, with your gross misrepresentation of my posts as rants; Invirility, with your little sneer about panties; Hypersensitivity, with your bizarre characterization of my points as trivializing; Fascism, with your false accusation of Political Correctness; and, of course, the good old standard of name-calling Ad Hominem, with enough examples that I hardly need to single one out -- but that's quite a bit like Pandagon and Feministing, actually, and pretty much par for the course online for years now.

So therefore, why should I bother to go somewhere else only to have my well-put objective points similarly ignored in favor of someone else's only slightly different mix of snarcasm, put-downs, and other insecure adolescent attempts at rhetorical distraction from their abject failure to present any kind of even remotely rational or relevant counterargument whatsoever?

What was the upside in this for me supposed to be, again? Because I somewhat enjoy calling people out on their hypocrisy and inconsistency, and pointing out their blatant refusal to actually address my actual points as actually made. It's nowhere near as satisfying as an actual adult conversation, of course, but over the years I've learned to settle and like what I can get.

It's funny, really. This could all be over and done with in a moment. It's an amazingly simple and effective trick: all you would have to do is admit that I make some pretty good points, which you can't counter off the top of your head, and that therefore, I -- oh, and Glenn Sacks, you remember Glenn, don't you? -- just maybe might be right about this.

It's amazing how well that works. People will even praise you for it afterwards.

"But why should I go over there when I can get treated almost exactly the same right here?"

Really? I don't see Amy deleting your comments, banning you, or telling you to go F yourself, a staple of any discussion at Feministing and Pandagon.

You can have my serving of creme brulee, Crid, and gladly. I don't much care for the stuff, and over the years I've learned that being at all responsible for other people's happiness is one of the greatest and purest (yet, oddly, most unsung) joys in life. So be my guest; enjoy. I'll get my share of pleasure from just sitting and watching you be happy because of something I did.

A big girl's blouse. . .I have no idea what that's supposed to mean. A blouse for a big girl? An oversized blouse? A blouse for a girl who isn't supposed to be a clinging toddler anymore?

I suspect it's just more Charge of Invirility, though, so, y'know, yawn. Have you ever heard of English-Prime? Robert Anton Wilson wrote a good introduction to it, which also might help you understand why calling me names somewhat amuses me but mostly just disappoints me. I love observing competence and exceptionalism in other people; incompetence, and lowest-common-denominator behavior. . .eh, not so much.

Crella: no, but neither, apparently, do you see Amy ignoring my points, telling me to leave, or calling me the A word.

Those are differences only in degree, not of kind, and that in turn is why I used the term "almost".

And the fact that you don't recognize the similarities says far more about your personal perceptual filters than it does about the objective reality of the situation.

I suspect it's just more Charge of Invirility

I'm calling you a pussy.

I barely read your posts. Note that I don't ban you. But, you're boring and silly, and you keep posting the same thing over and over and wasting my time via e-mail, too. Yawn. Again, nobody here is biting. Which is why I suggested you might do better at Pandagon or Feministing, not go after somebody who's a staunch supporter of men's rights but simply doesn't agree with you about this commercial and remains unpersuaded by all your post-structuralist bullshit or whatever it is. Also, if you can't see the difference between me and Amanda Marcotte, what are you doing here?

Again, let's review:

You think this commercial is horrible. I don't. Boohoo.

(I'm enjoying Amy's irritation at this.)

Axy believes the children are our future! Teach them well, and let them lead the way!

somebody needs his mommy -- or maybe his daddy

Personally, I love Acksiom. He's the answer to the complaint that feminists have no sense of humor. The truth is, whatever their political leaning, some people are just douchy.

I agree Amy does indeed point out injustices against men in her columns. That of course offsets the efforts of 100 million people who do their best to make men miserable, right?

I also agree with Acksiom that shaming language was used against him. Shaming language is so Eighties. Men and women use it when they have nothing intelligent to say.

Question for Acksiom. So, why are you still there? Everything you say is true. But, you actually understate the case.

And, you can talk; talk; talk for ten thousand years with no gain. Both American Women (AW) and American Men for the most part simply have no real idea how men in general are being treated, from the day they are born until they die.

The AW simply don't care. They. Do. Not. Care. Which is why in 'comedies' such as Home Alone, humor is made out of injuries to male sex organs, while all the women laugh uproariously. Hee, hee.

Let's make a comedy movie showing women's breasts and vaginas being pounded with baseball bats. Just how much money do you think we will make with this light-hearted humor?

And, most men think they are special and different, etc,; etc. Plus they are very sexist, so they think weak fragile inferior women can't survive without being mollycoddled and protected by big strong men like themselves from vicious brutes like you and me. Google for mangina.

The most primitive African slave understood if he or she could get to Canada they should go. So, what is your problem?

You should either be in a nation which does not treat men as valueless, or making plans to move to one.

I am in Mexico, in a rural Third World village,surrounded by my wife's family. Men are not hated here. I walk down the street, and sweet little girls run out for their forehead kiss. Instead of calling the cops as the average AW would do, they smile because the old North American thinks their sweet and adorable little girl is sweet and adorable.

About a year and a half ago, an intermediary asked me if I wanted a very attractive young woman around 46 years my junior as my mistress. I pretended not to understand her Spanish to avoid offending by rejection, but I made a decision 34 years ago to be faithful to my wife, for my benefit, not hers. I believe she was an unwed mother, but a mature friend told me that young country girls are indeed attracted to older, sophisticated men. I don't consider myself sophisticated, but I do have a college degree which is a big thing out here, and when I go back to Hell, I do drive across the country which is a big deal for a girl who never goes more than 35 miles from home. Also, I talk to women with respect, which is not always the case here and some of them are very attracted to that.

Though I did not accept the offer, I did have hot flashes for a week. Heh, heh.

Men come down here, usually to Guadalajara, which I highly recommend, and when they get back, says, "It's true! You can tell AW from 20 meters by the pissed off look on their faces!"

This is called Get The Hell Out. Stop fighting an un-winnable fight, and GTHO. Life begins when you find a life in a country where you are not viewed as pure shit.

The Philippine Islands are good, too. No divorce. Zero. Zip. Nada. Forty year old men report beautiful women start following them around. Hit the small towns, and learn how to spot the toxic women. I read of one case where a 95 year old man from the Midwest found a bride from the PI. She was in her early fifties, and they lived happily until he died at 102, then she went back to be with her children.

Part of the ever ubiquitous shaming language is that FW only want your money and residency papers. That is why one must learn to test; test; test.

The truth is, once a man is freed from the misandry in the US, he learns not only aren't AM as bad as AW claim. Collectively, AW don't even deserve AM. And, women in Mexico and PI and Central America and Russia understand that very well.

Here, in rural Mexico, your reputation as an AM precedes you. Every community has had women in the last 50 years who married AM, and reported how well they were treated in the US by AM. You do have to watch out for gold diggers, so I recommend living in Mexico where adulterous women are not given everything, including your future imaginary income when they leave you for another man. Or woman.

You can find us if you have the Google skills of a 4 year old.

"And the fact that you don't recognize the similarities says far more about your personal perceptual filters than it does about the objective reality of the situation."

Sorry I didn't address all your issues, Acxsiom...screamingly busy these past few days, I didn't address the commercial either, didn't have time.

'similarities' are not what I was addressing, but site policies. Comparing this site to Feministing just seemed overboard, I've been there and gone several rounds with those people.Feministing is one of the most narrow-minded hot-on--the-delete-button sites I know I don't think I've seen anyone banned here just for being male, or just for having a different opinion.

If you have a problem with Amy's language towards you, have you addressed it? I haven't the time to read everything these next couple of days.

A few years back, I got a malicious temporary restraining order taken out on me for calling a woman a baaaad word after the woman made it clear that the business she ran would continue taking residents' parking up. (The TRO was dismissed. I'm not violent, just hostile.) In other words, you're not special, Axsiom, but you do seem especially dense!

Again, let's review:

You think this commercial is horrible. I don't. Boohoo.

Male genital mutilations? Is that in "the Healthcare reform" package?
Seriously, what in the hell is not funny about a guy getting face f*cked by a squirrel for talking on a cell phone at a funeral.

Well, jksisco, to begin with, it would presumably be the same thing that's not funny were it consistently a case of responsible, caring, mature anglos being contrasted against irresponsible, narcissistic, juvenile blacks or jews or asians.

Oh, and the violence being a lot worse than you describe. Such the whole smashing into a coffin, falling in a six foot hole, and then getting the filled coffin dumped on top of you. Or the laundry list of injuries done to another man in the Kyocera Vet's Office ad.

So before we move forward, perhaps you could actually address that actual point as actually made.

As for you Amy, yet again I ask. . .

. . .wait, how many times have I pointed this out now? Four total counting this one, without you ever once even just acknowledging the mere existence of the point. . .

. . .anyways, has Glenn Sacks, whom I believe you've cited approvingly in the past, hurt the men's issues movement by pointing out the sexism in similar ads and successfully campaigning against them?

Was Glenn Sacks taking offense at every turn and making it look like the men's issues movement is about trivial stuff, too?

And then there is this, in further support of my propositions:

http://mensnewsdaily.com/2009/08/22/the-psychology-of-hate/

"'What do you imagine,' I would ask, taking a strategic pause for a sip of water, 'that these answers tell us about the real nature of sexism in the way we view men and women?'

Asking them a question with actual spoken words must have thrown them for a loop, because the stock response to that question was almost invariably a room full of nonplussed, cognitively dissonant faces. And that confusion usually gave way to irritation, clearly at me, though every answer on both sides of that board had come from them. . ."

* * *

". . .I wanted a little more pressure so I asked more questions. 'How could this affect our therapeutic alliance with clients?- Could it make our relationships with females enabling?- Punitive with men?' And always, the final question I asked was 'Do we carry sexism, against men, unconscious or conscious, into our work with each and every client?'

With that question the anger usually intensified.

In one talk, a female participant, a social worker, jumped out of her chair and threw her papers everywhere. 'You’re the sexist!' she hissed at me, and stormed out of the room. She later wrote letters of complaint both about my topic and the fact I would not sign off on her attendance."

Cognitive dissonance, leading to irritation, and finally to anger and false accusation.

I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one seeing a pattern here.

But I appear to be virtually the only one here with the integrity to identify it.

But I appear to be virtually the only one here with the integrity to identify it.

Again, from my comment above:

Aksiom, see luj's comment. There are commercials (by this company) poking fun of women on cell phones, too. It isn't a cruel plot by the patriarchy, nor a plot against women at all, nor is it part of some societal scheme against men. It's HUMOR, and one of the rare commercials that's actually FUNNY.

Thank you a lot! I really enjoyed reading over this. It makes me want to create my own blog. I do not know what topic thought? I am a doctor but can't imagine a lot of people wanting to read about that! Perhaps Im wrong. Any ideas?