Is it only the fact that they're scantily clad?
Do women also find the fact that only women actors are used in cleaning commercials "fucking gross"?
OH HAI SEXISM
21–30 of 99 posts
Re: OH HAI SEXISM
#22I don't know if this is going to be an unpopular post, but I don't think this is such a clearcut case of sexism as the API Jam/"Lighten Up" stuff we've seen recently. I think we can all agree that using scantily-clad women as advertising objects is a bad thing- we were hating GoDaddy for it long before SOPA. But I think that everyone in this story went about things the wrong way. Shanley Kane had a legitimate complai…
>I think we can all agree that using scantily-clad women as advertising objects is a bad thing Nope. They're paid for it, there is nothing illegal about it and I fail to see anything wrong with targeting perceived likes of a segment of the population to move product. In fact, I believe that's what advertising is. I see no difference between a woman in a bikini or a celebrity in an ad.
There is a higher moral ground than just what is legal, and what people are willing to do for money.
Re: OH HAI SEXISM
#23I don't know if this is going to be an unpopular post, but I don't think this is such a clearcut case of sexism as the API Jam/"Lighten Up" stuff we've seen recently. I think we can all agree that using scantily-clad women as advertising objects is a bad thing- we were hating GoDaddy for it long before SOPA. But I think that everyone in this story went about things the wrong way. Shanley Kane had a legitimate complai…
> The actual root sexism isn't the story here. It's a story about PR, or about making- and dealing with- complaints.
Agreed. I'm kind of amazed how far it went. Regardless of if you think she was in the right or wrong in her arguments, Kane stayed reasonably on target with her comments while Sanz & co hung themselves.
At some point in time you have to throw a bucket of water on the situation instead of letting it turn into a wildfire. Even if it didn't necessarily start as a PR or customer support issue, it quickly became one, and you kind of have to recognize when that happens. Especially when you're talking about issues relating your company to people on something like twitter (i.e., a super public place where your words have some permanence and reach).
Re: OH HAI SEXISM
#24I don't know if this is going to be an unpopular post, but I don't think this is such a clearcut case of sexism as the API Jam/"Lighten Up" stuff we've seen recently. I think we can all agree that using scantily-clad women as advertising objects is a bad thing- we were hating GoDaddy for it long before SOPA. But I think that everyone in this story went about things the wrong way. Shanley Kane had a legitimate complai…
>I think we can all agree that using scantily-clad women as advertising objects is a bad thing Nope. They're paid for it, there is nothing illegal about it and I fail to see anything wrong with targeting perceived likes of a segment of the population to move product. In fact, I believe that's what advertising is. I see no difference between a woman in a bikini or a celebrity in an ad.
Many people can't see any difference between a snippet of code from the Linux kernel allocator and a MySQL SELECT statement. That doesn't mean there isn't a difference, just that they aren't educated on the matter. Same deal here. Studies have shown substantial and harmful differences in how people respond to the two scenarios above.
Re: OH HAI SEXISM
#25I don't know if this is going to be an unpopular post, but I don't think this is such a clearcut case of sexism as the API Jam/"Lighten Up" stuff we've seen recently. I think we can all agree that using scantily-clad women as advertising objects is a bad thing- we were hating GoDaddy for it long before SOPA. But I think that everyone in this story went about things the wrong way. Shanley Kane had a legitimate complai…
>I think we can all agree that using scantily-clad women as advertising objects is a bad thing Nope. They're paid for it, there is nothing illegal about it and I fail to see anything wrong with targeting perceived likes of a segment of the population to move product. In fact, I believe that's what advertising is. I see no difference between a woman in a bikini or a celebrity in an ad.
"They're paid for it, there is nothing illegal about it"
Ah, Hacker News, where all ethical questions boil down to "were they paid?" and "is it illegal?".
Re: OH HAI SEXISM
#26It wasn't offensive for girls featured in the video (or why did they?), yet it's immediately offensive for some random stranger on the net who then proceeds to command its removal. If something is gross here, this is. P.S. Objectification is a kind of strange word. Human body is an object. It's physical, materialistic. Now, if there would be objectification of human soul (or whatever other thin layer) that where we w…
When people talk about 'the objectification of women,' they're not talking about the dictionary definition of the word objectification. It's shorthand for sexual objectification.
Re: OH HAI SEXISM
#27I've watched the video ... if that is sexist, then what about this perfume commercial with a half naked Matthew M McConaughey? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HL83sQG8fFA
Or all those commercials with half naked men aimed at selling male underwear to women (so their man will look just as good).
Is that sexism too? Why does nobody cry about that type of sexism?
Guess what I'm asking, in general, why is sexism towards women so horrible and sexism towards men is simply accepted as the way things are?
Re: OH HAI SEXISM
#28Is it only the fact that they're scantily clad? Do women also find the fact that only women actors are used in cleaning commercials "fucking gross"?
"Do women also find the fact that only women actors are used in cleaning commercials "fucking gross"?"
It's not gross in the same way, but yeah, that is a great example of sexism!
Re: OH HAI SEXISM
#29Drama on twitter? Surely not!
Re: OH HAI SEXISM
#30I don't know if this is going to be an unpopular post, but I don't think this is such a clearcut case of sexism as the API Jam/"Lighten Up" stuff we've seen recently. I think we can all agree that using scantily-clad women as advertising objects is a bad thing- we were hating GoDaddy for it long before SOPA. But I think that everyone in this story went about things the wrong way. Shanley Kane had a legitimate complai…
Morally, I don't know what a good argument against using scantily clad women as advertising objects is - historically, scantily clad women have been used in advertising for thousands of years, and I think that's kind of the object of that particular advertising, and in some instances (Axe body spray), it probably works.
There's a wide margin between booth babes and sexual harassment, and conflating the two leads to people getting the wrong idea about sexuality, where to draw the line, and modern feminism.
I don't think you'll ever be able to take the objectification of women out of society, and I don't know if it's necessary to try - we've seen women begin objectifying men in some capacity in the last seventy-five years or so, and I don't know if that's necessarily an unhealthy thing. Better to let that objectification be out in the open than keep it locked up in your head.