Author Topic: Sexist Super Bowl Ad  (Read 1166 times)

Davin

  • Guardian of Reason
  • *****
  • Posts: 6134
  • Gender: Male
  • (o°-°)=o o(o*-°)
    • DevPirates
Re: Sexist Super Bowl Ad
« Reply #15 on: February 09, 2017, 12:14:24 PM »
That is something that is more complicated than you make it sound.
In certain areas, yes. Where I am at, not at all. (That being middle-middle class and above in an urban Northern European setting)
I couldn't say about there. It is here in all classes.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
I heard pretty much the same issues brought up by white dudes, "well, if I go in to get a job and I'm more qualified than a black guy, I still won't get the job." I have a lot of issues with such a statement.
If the statement is correct right here and now (Or, well, at the time it's made) is your issue with it objectively-ish valid?
It is not, that is why I have issues with it.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
For one, for a long time, the "black guy" had zero chance to get a job no matter how qualified he was because people were allowed to discriminate against race.
And if that is still the case, that issue may well require addressing, but not at the expense of any fucking body else. If, on the other hand, your use of past tense indicates a past issue, then maybe the current problem is something else?
The problem is still there, the people causing the original problem hove found other ways to discriminate. It's now not so easy to point to an example of it, though those still pop up every once in a while, now it's become a layered thing that is mostly only revealed in aggregate.

And when there are people oppressing other people, to equalize things, it necessarily is at the expense of the oppressors or at least those that the oppressors favor. And of course the ones favor are going to get all butt hurt about it. And I sympathize, it's not exactly all their fault, they were just favored while others were denied. However those that are denied are worse off than bringing down the favored a little bit will be.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
So which is more important to me, that I might be more qualified and lose a job opportunity, or that members of my country may never be able to get a job no matter how qualified?
I despise using the following statement, but this screams for a "The former president was African American." oO(Especially in light of how the oranger sort of gentleman seems to be going about running the "free world")
I don't see your point. This is also another commonly used statement that lead to a lot of jokes about racism being solved because we had a black president... then a bunch of unarmed black men got shot and their murderers walked free because black people be scary to the pale skinned.

Quote from: Asmodean
I do recognise the validity of your question, subjective as it may be. Me, I'm a strong proponent of a "Fuck you. Earn it." attitude. That's well-established. Thus, my answer to it would be "If they didn't earn it, it's only fair that they don't get it. If they did earn it, they should have it."
It's not a subjective question. If people are never given the opportunity, they will never grow and then never be able to break into the system. Even now there are people that work for things, and therefore would deserve it, but are denied it because of their race or gender or sexual preference.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
Another problem is that being qualified is somehow quantifiable.
Not really. I even have a formula for comparing qualifications around here somewhere, with weighing of education, experience, various personality traits, etc. Actually, written recommendations are not worth that much more than the paper they are printed on, according to that. Interviewing former co-workers does yield reasonable results though.

That said...
I know a lot of people have systems to attempt to quantify it, but if they truly were quantifiable in such a manner then the error rate would be much smaller, near non-existent.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
I get that we want to be able to code and rank things, but I don't see how that is possible. We can't look at the paper trail, so many people with good recommendations, good education, and great looking job history have turned out to be more useless than a high school student.

...this is a non-issue, because one has to assume that a person hired based on some affirmative action scenario would be just as susceptible to poor hiring practices as the rest of them. Just because you have to hire somebody to fill some bullshit government quota, does not mean that that somebody will turn out to be more useful than a high school student. At a certain point, you just take a chance on a person. Sometimes you get lucky. If you do your job right and preferably without interference, you are likely to get lucky more often.
Yes, that is true, but at least under an affirmative action scenario it affords people a chance who would never have gotten that chance otherwise.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
The other problem is that even if we could trust the papers, how is someone who is not going to be allowed to work, because of their gender or race, supposed to start creating their own job history and references?
Start at the bottom and kiss influential ass all the way to the top, just like the rest of us losers. Well, not necessarily, but this is also a non-issue. I was a useless-ass student without any sort of job history too at one point, and I'm doing OK. I wasn't just handed my victories to either. And I am far - FAR from unique. Most people I've had the misfortune of meeting have followed a similar path. Men, women, whites, Middle-Easterners, Africans... Whoever. You start with nothing - if you are lucky, with whatever your parents give you. If you are very lucky, that also contains a solid network which can propel you along. Then you build on that, one fucking brick at a time. From there, it's the proverbial "Be good, get good or give up."
Affirmative action doesn't just hand people things. Those people still need to have qualifications like education and/or training just like the others. They are not just picking up a random person off the street to make a quota. And it's great that you were afforded the bricks. Some people are not afforded the bricks to build with, and that's the point of it.

I'm not saying that people should just be given a job just because they fall into some group, if you think that or keep trying to argue against that position, then I'm not sure what I can do to correct it after this.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
I get that it's not a perfect system, but at times, some intervention is useful to try to get us as a society to a point where we don't need to police people being bigoted assholes.
Yeah... At the risk of sounding Republican, that's their bigoted asshole parents' job.
If you're part of a society as we wall are, it's all our jobs to take responsibility for it. Or don't complain when other people try to do something.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
It is, but the women oppressing men thing isn't even close to being a problem. It's like worrying about what were going to do when out planet is going into global cooling trend. Like putting the cart before the horse.
It's a moot point. People oppressing other people within their society is a problem for me as long as it affects me in any way, shape or form, which it often does (albeit indirectly)

Who is oppressing who and based on what traits is... An artificial issue, I'm inclined to call it. Are you a woman being oppressed by men, or an Asian being oppressed by Indians, or a G being oppressed by an H? I don't give a shit. You've had me at oppressed (If you indeed are, by any standard I am willing to apply to the term)

Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.

Pasta Chick

  • Guardian of Reason
  • *****
  • Posts: 5095
Re: Sexist Super Bowl Ad
« Reply #16 on: February 09, 2017, 01:49:21 PM »
To be honest my entire reaction here is pretty much "Aw, AN ad was sexist toward men? In the whole Super Bowl and maybe ever you saw ONE ad you perceived diminished your gender? That must be really awful for you."

Magdalena

  • Butterfly of Doom.
  • Guardian of Reason
  • *****
  • Posts: 6345
  • Gender: Female
  • Angry hippies need to smoke cheap weed.
Re: Sexist Super Bowl Ad
« Reply #17 on: February 09, 2017, 01:57:49 PM »
To be honest my entire reaction here is pretty much "Aw, AN ad was sexist toward men? In the whole Super Bowl and maybe ever you saw ONE ad you perceived diminished your gender? That must be really awful for you."
;D


“I've had several "spiritual" or numinous experiences over the years, but never felt that they were the product of anything but the workings of my own mind in reaction to the universe.” ~Recusant

"Color me fascinated..." ~Asmodean, The Gray God.

Arturo

  • Do Something Crazy!
  • Touched by His Noodly Appendage
  • *****
  • Posts: 2031
  • Gender: Male
  • Atheist, Humanist, and Champion
    • You two dig up, dig up dinosaurs?
Re: Sexist Super Bowl Ad
« Reply #18 on: February 09, 2017, 02:15:45 PM »
Two wrongs don't make a right.
But, uh...well there it is.

"Nothing's a struggle, but everything is a challenge" - Anon


Pasta Chick

  • Guardian of Reason
  • *****
  • Posts: 5095
Re: Sexist Super Bowl Ad
« Reply #19 on: February 09, 2017, 02:19:17 PM »
To be honest my entire reaction here is pretty much "Aw, AN ad was sexist toward men? In the whole Super Bowl and maybe ever you saw ONE ad you perceived diminished your gender? That must be really awful for you."
;D

My secondary reaction is

God, lighten up, it's just an ad/Children are starving in other counties, you could have it so much worse/this is why no one likes you people, always making problems where there are none/look those men all agreed to be in that commercial so clearly there's no problem here

Pasta Chick

  • Guardian of Reason
  • *****
  • Posts: 5095
Re: Sexist Super Bowl Ad
« Reply #20 on: February 09, 2017, 02:20:44 PM »
Two wrongs don't make a right.

It's not two wrongs. It's one (debatable) wrong versus millennia of wrongs.

xSilverPhinx

  • Non Dvcor
  • Global Moderator
  • Guardian of Reason
  • *****
  • Posts: 10754
  • Gender: Female
Re: Sexist Super Bowl Ad
« Reply #21 on: February 09, 2017, 02:30:39 PM »
Two wrongs don't make a right.

Sometimes you have to go from white to black to get to gray.
I'm just a student of the game that they taught me.


Arturo

  • Do Something Crazy!
  • Touched by His Noodly Appendage
  • *****
  • Posts: 2031
  • Gender: Male
  • Atheist, Humanist, and Champion
    • You two dig up, dig up dinosaurs?
Re: Sexist Super Bowl Ad
« Reply #22 on: February 09, 2017, 02:45:09 PM »
Two wrongs don't make a right.

Sometimes you have to go from white to black to get to gray.

In my experience that is never the case. Black people, as discriminated against as they are, can still be racist. I know because they all picked on me when I live in a black dominated city. They all assumed I was white, when my skin is brown. That's prejudice on a level of ignorance. And the elder's in my family has their own personal experiences about how they saw them picking on whites when they were young.

Not saying whites are any better, or anybody else. But once someone states they are superior or someone is inferior, then you have problems, and then I have an issue. Nobody is inherently superior to anybody else.

But it's just one ad so I don't really have a problem with it.
But, uh...well there it is.

"Nothing's a struggle, but everything is a challenge" - Anon


xSilverPhinx

  • Non Dvcor
  • Global Moderator
  • Guardian of Reason
  • *****
  • Posts: 10754
  • Gender: Female
Re: Sexist Super Bowl Ad
« Reply #23 on: February 09, 2017, 03:06:52 PM »
I wasn't talking about one group being superior to another, though that's an understandable reaction, I think. I was talking more about shaking things up. ;)

I don't think that any of the civil rights movements of the past would have gotten as far as they did if there hadn't been lots of noise, and noise can be offensive to those who oppress. It annoys. It shines light on a situation that they don't really want to see. These days things have gotten better for some minority groups but there is still some way to go.

Take the New Atheist movement for instance, which became more militant in recent years. Some alienated theists might tell you that atheists are not discriminated against in most parts of the world but we know that isn't true. When the oppressor isn't even aware that they are oppressing or couldn't care less it is a sad thing indeed.

As for women and equal rights, it hasn't been my reality thankfully, but there are some jobs that do discriminate against us when it comes to pay in Brazil. I don't know how it is in the States but I wouldn't be surprised if it's the same. I personally do not think that quotas and affirmative actions are the answer though as it's more of a patch-up solution and doesn't solve the underlying root of the problem.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2017, 03:32:20 PM by xSilverPhinx »
I'm just a student of the game that they taught me.


Pasta Chick

  • Guardian of Reason
  • *****
  • Posts: 5095
Re: Sexist Super Bowl Ad
« Reply #24 on: February 09, 2017, 03:47:58 PM »
Affirmative Action type programs are a catch-22. It's easy to say "fix the root" but how? If people are accustomed to never hiring X demographic they're likely to continue that pattern regardless of outside change, unless suddenly there is a complete lack of their accustomed demographic (which is not likely when we're talking about white men in the US). Even today ethnic-sounding names are less likely to be hired in the US than white-sounding names. Something has to break the pattern. But on the other hand, you do run to situations where you simply don't have the diversity of applicants needed to meet certain AA-type criteria. I honestly don't know what the best solution is.

I think the silliness of the ad in the OP is that it's just that - an ad. They're trying to work the "more" concept from two angles and imply that buying their shoes will help you fight the patriarchy, which is fucking stupid.

What they say, however, is true. Women are paid less overall (in the US) for the same jobs. They are not hired for better paying jobs, which is a problem in itself - women aren't just sitting there going "well shit, I really just wanted to be a secretary anyway." Pushing for more is seen as being brash and bossy and a cold bitch, which then gets you overlooked. Playing the balance is fucking exhausting. And god help you if you plan to have kids. This is part of why Hillary Clinton resonated so strongly with so many women. She played that game and came as close to winning as anyone has.

The "pink tax" as it's often called is real. I frequently seek out men's items because they are cheaper. Often I don't have a choice - my outdoor and working gear is predominately men's because I simply can't find quality products for women. Sometimes they exist but you have to special order at higher cost. (And yes, bras are underwear - I prefer to go without but see the prior paragraph about playing the game, in this case not being a gross slut. Even in my off time I usually wear one because getting leered at in Walmart gets really old really fast).

So by saying women should get "more" it's in answer to this. If we're expected to be wearing the right clothes, with the right hair and all the product that entails (have I mentioned I've been called into manager meetings because my hair wasn't straightened?) full make up, eyebrows properly waxed, touch ups throughout the day of course, and all the time that entails... Yeah, I would say we do deserve higher compensation in turn.

No one

  • Fought Curlett With Schempp and Won!
  • ***
  • Posts: 939
Re: Sexist Super Bowl Ad
« Reply #25 on: February 09, 2017, 03:53:23 PM »
Let's be clear. I consider myself a racist. A racist in the true sense of the word. There is one, and only one race of people on this planet, the human race. I hate them all!

xSilverPhinx

  • Non Dvcor
  • Global Moderator
  • Guardian of Reason
  • *****
  • Posts: 10754
  • Gender: Female
Re: Sexist Super Bowl Ad
« Reply #26 on: February 09, 2017, 04:31:56 PM »
Affirmative Action type programs are a catch-22. It's easy to say "fix the root" but how? If people are accustomed to never hiring X demographic they're likely to continue that pattern regardless of outside change, unless suddenly there is a complete lack of their accustomed demographic (which is not likely when we're talking about white men in the US). Even today ethnic-sounding names are less likely to be hired in the US than white-sounding names. Something has to break the pattern. But on the other hand, you do run to situations where you simply don't have the diversity of applicants needed to meet certain AA-type criteria. I honestly don't know what the best solution is.

I have no idea how to fix the root of the problem, at least not in the short term. Maybe the best solution is affirmative action because it gets practical results quicker, I don't know. I just think there's a hole somewhere.

Quote
I think the silliness of the ad in the OP is that it's just that - an ad. They're trying to work the "more" concept from two angles and imply that buying their shoes will help you fight the patriarchy, which is fucking stupid.

Yes, I don't get the link. :lol: Consumerism = fight the patriarchy.  :wtf: Looks more like a distraction than a solution, although with plenty of emotional appeal. 

Quote
What they say, however, is true. Women are paid less overall (in the US) for the same jobs. They are not hired for better paying jobs, which is a problem in itself - women aren't just sitting there going "well shit, I really just wanted to be a secretary anyway." Pushing for more is seen as being brash and bossy and a cold bitch, which then gets you overlooked. Playing the balance is fucking exhausting. And god help you if you plan to have kids. This is part of why Hillary Clinton resonated so strongly with so many women. She played that game and came as close to winning as anyone has.


This (bolded) really, really irks me. While men can be seen as being assertive, women are sometimes seen as brash and bossy bitches.
I'm just a student of the game that they taught me.


Pasta Chick

  • Guardian of Reason
  • *****
  • Posts: 5095
Re: Sexist Super Bowl Ad
« Reply #27 on: February 09, 2017, 06:13:41 PM »
I can't even begin to count the number of times I've asked repeatedly asked passively for information, gotten nothing, and finally been like "sorry, I really need clarification on this now" and gotten my answer followed by "geez, you didn't have to be such a bitch about it!"

Pasta Chick

  • Guardian of Reason
  • *****
  • Posts: 5095
Re: Sexist Super Bowl Ad
« Reply #28 on: February 09, 2017, 06:17:42 PM »
I feel like this ad was developed by a bunch of middle aged white men and maybe a Kellyann Conway type sitting around going "yes, that march has been very popular! Empowerment seems to be trending highly among the female 18-35 demographic!"

No one

  • Fought Curlett With Schempp and Won!
  • ***
  • Posts: 939
Re: Sexist Super Bowl Ad
« Reply #29 on: February 09, 2017, 06:23:46 PM »
I do not think for one second that a strong, determined woman is a bitch. To me, a bitch is an uptight, cold, demanding,  "I deserve this because" woman.