Dan, do you really think that Spreading Misandry was brainwashing? I'd be curious to hear if you think that. One of my criticisms of the book was that it was a bit too academic and research oriented and lacked a certain friendliness.
I'm saying that the book creates a perticular lense
in which to veiw the media. Which is what brainwashing fundementally is. It doesn't mean what they are saying isn't true, but, you have to use the formula correctly or your assumption can be flawed.
In this case I am not saying your assumption is flawed, I am merely asking a bigger question that is "Why?" Why did the advertiser do the comercial this way. And why did they show it specifically at a time when the majority of viewers will be male?
Are you saying that you think the Super Bowl ads are pointed solely towards men? I would have to disagree there. The Super Bowl provides advertisers with one of the years biggest markets. I think the last one was watched by over 160 million. Women are not a small portion of that group. How many women do you know who talked about the Janet Jackson wardrobe episode? They are watching...maybe not the game so much but they are watching. Advertisers know this.
I'm saying that the majority of veiwers would be male. Why wouldn't they direct most of their ads towards men?
Every single newspaper and newscast talked about JanetGate. It was hard to get away from.
If they're not watching the game, what makes you think they are watching the ads?
Though I'm not entirely dissagreeing with you , Doctor, what I am trying to do is see the bigger picture. And perhaps another possibility in Misandry in the media.
You say that men are made to look like bafoons. I agree, but I go one step further, I say that men are conditioned to be bafoons as well, and that this comercial may be doing just that. In order to do that they must target men as an audience, and honestly ads on sports are targetted to men most likely. And why is it not a possibility, in fact it makes perfect sense.
But wouldn't we have to get some proof? I mean it could be very well just as the other poster stated, that these ads are just good hearted jabs at family life.
How would we know for sure unless we spoke to the creator of the ad himself? Would he admit that he was using such a philosophy in marketting, is he intentially just following a trend, is he a part of the New World Order conspiracy, will he just say "This is what works best in ads"?
Do we really know until we do some research, investigation?
I say this because I do not believe that car companies or advertisers care any more about men than they do women or vice versa. I believe they only care about the bottom line. So I agree that these powerful companies create a culture based on the theory that women spend more money than men and that works to their advantage. But do they like women more than men? No, they are just able to manipulate them easier because of their nature.[/i]