|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:48 PM March 9th, 2004 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
"(yes, kicks, knees and punches to the groin qualify as second-degree sexual assault in most states) on school-age children in the U.S. The results were that approximately 10 percent of all boys per year are assaulted this way. About 1 in 50 of these boys suffer medically significant injuries,"
Thank you for calling attention to this neglected area of abuse in our society. One might even say this is an "abused" area of the abuse industry, given the pervasive, irresponsible, and unaccountable attitude advertisers have. They think nothing of "humorously" exploiting the pain and suffering of a group of human beings (males), thereby reinforcing the acceptability of such behavior in society as a whole. This must stop. Again, many thanks to you for your decency in having the gumption to write and send that letter. I salute you.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:19 PM March 9th, 2004 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
I see the whole kick-the-male-in-the-groin scenerio as a man in the same way I see the redundant images of Indian men being shot off horse back as an Indian.
Bot were\are gratuitous and both were/are meant to de-humanize.
Also don't forget the image I'm always harping about. The whole tie-up-and-gag-the-male while hooking up jumper cables to the genitals, kicking in the groin, or holding a gun to the groin.
I still can't get the image out of my mind of that scene from the TV show "24" where they had a guy completely naked, his hands tied over his head with an actual SnM type gag in his mouth. They were shocking him with a tazer gun. And yes, of course, they used it on his groin. I don't just THINK these types of scenerios are meant to be anti-male and sexualy arousing to women, gay men and wussy-poopie men, I KNOW for a fact that they are, simply by the way they're staged and executed.
The whole groin-kick and men-in-bondage scenerio is widely seen. The damage is insurmountable. especialy on young men and boys. I beleive the networks, the writers, producers KNOW what they are doing and do so intentionaly.
Yes they KNOW young men and boys see this garbage they WANT them to see it. Remember we live in a pop culture society that not only de-values men but wants to TEACH this de-valuation to the masses. They WANT young men and boys to feel that they are infirior to females. Why? I'm not really sure about that, but My guess would be that the male writers and producers feel that THEY THEMSELVES are infirior to women, ergo ALL males must be infirior.
They are saying with their "work"; "Look ladies, we're sensitive to women and we like women! See we hate men as much as you do!"
I know more than a few folks think I gripe about this stuff too much. I can understand that. However I still feel that not NEARLY as much attention is given to this subject. But I do understand that we have so MUCH to do that maybe that is why it isn't given much of a priority, at the moment. But the fact that some one, besides me, has posted something about anti-male violence in the media, gives me some comfort.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:31 PM March 9th, 2004 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
I remembeer seeing an episode of the "Power rangers" that had a rather graphic "male-bondage" scene in it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:05 PM March 9th, 2004 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
Was the guy Asian?
If so, I think I know which episode you're speaking of. I saw that too, if we're talking about the same show.
I don't know, I don't usualy watch the "POWER RANGERS". My nephew was watching it when that happened and I noticed.
Do you know if thet have alot of "Male-bondage" on that show?
I wouldn't be suprised if there was. I know there have been complaints about groin kicking, though.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Graham Greene mounts the podium..."And now for the Oscar category of Best Aboriginal Actor in the Role of Being Shot and Falling off a Horse...the nominees are..."
Hey...what can I say..as for getting kicked in the groin..I studied and taught martial arts for 25 years and had a very rough childhood and adolescence....believe it or not you can get used to and get over even THAT after it's been done to you enough times. It sure is rough on little kids though.
Problem is...sooner or later you will do it to someone who has no sense of humour whatsoever and the violence against women stats will take a spike.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:47 PM March 9th, 2004 EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
As far as the best "aborigional actor to get shot off a horse" I think it WAS Graham Greene!
(^_^)
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:31 PM March 9th, 2004 EST (#13)
|
|
|
|
|
Same here, I always liked Mr. Greene.
Although it could be a bit anti-male at times, he (Graham) was usualy hilarious on the PBS seiries "RED GREEN".
I've also been fond of Frank Sotonoma Salseido. He was in "CREEPSHOW II" and played Ed Chigliak's Uncle Anku on "NORTHERN EXPOSIER".
Neither of these guys ever did or do play "dumb Injuns" NOR "dumb men", for that matter.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actually he did that presentation as a gag at a Canadian Aboriginal Acheivements Gala and showed clips of himself in about a half dozen early western flicks...I just love his dry humour
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hey...what can I say..as for getting kicked in the groin..I studied and taught martial arts for 25 years and had a very rough childhood and adolescence....believe it or not you can get used to and get over even THAT after it's been done to you enough times. It sure is rough on little kids though.
Problem is...sooner or later you will do it to someone who has no sense of humour whatsoever and the violence against women stats will take a spike.
Sexual abuse is sexual abuse, and it's no different than raping and torturing someone. If anyone thinks it's funny, they won't mind being shot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I see the whole kick-the-male-in-the-groin scenerio as a man in the same way I see the redundant images of Indian men being shot off horse back as an Indian.
I don't think it's quite the same, in the second instance shows an enemy of war, while the other is a gross personal violation which destroys the sanctity and dignity of the individual just like public rape and torture in front of a cheering crowd.
I don't know how anyone can approve of these sick messages which demean maleness and masculinity; I think it's some sort of "castration" message or similar form of derogatory humiliation. However it would shock any decent person, and it needs to be stopped by any means necessary.
The simply fact that no such equivalent experessions toward women would ever be accepted, shows that this is a gender-violation and should be contested no matter what the genre, be it humor, drama or commercial.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 08:32 AM March 12th, 2004 EST (#37)
|
|
|
|
|
I just got a similar feeling when seeing an "Indian" get shot off his horse as when I see a man kicked in the groin.
But you are right it is NOT the exact same thing.
Though both are highly symbolic.
I also agree with you that the "groin-kick" is a sort of "castration" message. where in when the woman kicks him she is "strikeing down all that is male". And yeah, you're right again, when you say; "no equivilant expressions towards women would ever be accepted".
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well they are similar in that they are both subjective in terms of being personal to the viewer; the same might be said of a German being shot in a WWII movie etc. However war is a situational subject, while sexual violence toward men is not-- sexual assaults on men as a given thing, is like shooting an indian for fun not in a time of war, but just anytime and getting a big laugh out of it; this would be seen for the hate-crime that it is, while the anti-male sexual assault is not only accepted but celebrated. I don't know how things got so sick, but I do know that acquiescence to such violations had something to do with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My thanks to Doug Wells for pointing out the fact that 10% of boys experience this sort of attack and that a percentage of them sustain serious injury. Can anyone imagine a similar injury to women that would get this sort of treatment? Ha! No chance.
A local DC hospital had an advertisement not long ago featuring a man being hit in the groin and played it up as funny. I wrote them and asked just how an institution for healing could use someone's personal injury as a part of their advertising and to try and portray that injury as funny. We are living in a crazy place.
I'm with Ray in saying thanks to you Doug.
TC - Interesting the dehumanizaion of the Indians being shot off horseback. I never made that connection either but it is plain as day once you called attention to it. Thanks.
Mens Rights 2004 Congress
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John Sargent
Board of Directors
Washington Hospital Center
110 Irving Street N.W.
Washington D.C. 20010
Dear Mr. Sargent:
Both of my two children were born at the Washington Hospital Center. For this I am grateful and I feel a certain allegiance to your institution. It is partly due to this connection that I write you the following letter:
While attending the Redskins preseason game at Fedex field on Aug 23rd 2003 I was dismayed to see a commercial for your hospital on their big screen that depicted a man being injured. The man was rammed in the groin with a youngster's football helmet. How could an institution of healing use the depiction of an injury as an advertisement for their services?
To make matters worse the injury in your advertisement was apparently intended to create laughter. Why would any hospital lower themselves to the point of making fun of a personal injury? It appears that you are willing to do this in order to get a laugh and in turn create more business for your institution. I feel certain that the staff and administration of Washington Hospital Center don't laugh at their patient's injuries, but this ad certainly did. Is this the image you strive to portray? In my opinion this ad is not only lacking in good taste it also is hateful.
One definition of hate is "To feel hostility or animosity towards." Laughing at someone's misfortune, or someone's injury seems hateful to me. Laughing at this man's misfortune is a hostile act. The only reason you can't see this is because the injury occurred to a man. Just imagine for a moment that the ad had featured a woman. Same ad, same scenario, but let her be hit in a way that would hurt her in a similar manner to the man's injury leading to the need for an emergency helicopter. Would it have gotten laughs? No. People would have gasped. They would have been rightly concerned about her welfare. Would it have been taken off the air abruptly? Yes, it would have been rightly seen as hateful. Replace the man in the ad with a child or even an animal. Have them get injured in a comparable manner. No one would have thought it was funny. If anyone laughed they would be seen as demented.
Your ad people are correctly seeing that it is culturally permissible to hate men in advertisements. I'm not surprised to see the likes of Ford or Reebok take the low road and express misandry in order to sell their products. I am both shocked and disheartened to see the Washington Hospital Center do so.
Mens Rights 2004 Congress
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:42 PM March 9th, 2004 EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
Tom,
Your welcome.
Yes, the media ALWAYS reflects poorly and in a de-humanizing way those in society that are to be looked down upon.
In the 50's 60's and early 70's it was Indians.
In the late 80's through the 90's and now into the new milleneum it is Men.
I remember on saturday afternoons they would run westerns on TV. I would watch as the Indian characters said and did things that I knew of no Indians to say and do. Like saying stupid stuff like "Ugh", "Me wantum" and "Me getum Kimosabe". No one in MY family for as far back as I can trace EVER talked like that, even if it was in broken English we were and still are inteligable when we spoke\speak.
Indians were always getting tied up, too. or dying horrible deaths. We were always portrayed as dim-witted, superstitious morons who didn't know who and what we were. In every movie or TV show, even to this day, we still see at least ONE warrior featured who's only thoughts are "KILL, KILL, KILL!!!"
Notice any paralels yet?
In todays "entertaiment" media, Hell, even the NEWS media men are treated almost EXACTLY the way my people were\are treated and portrayed.
Men in general are rarely treated as haveing any sense, Just like Indians. Men are portrayed as brutish oafs, Just like Indians. Men are laughed at when injured or killed no matter how sadicticaly in fashion, Just like Indians. Men are routinely bound and gagged and tortured, Just like indians. Men are portrayed as murderous savages, Just like Indians. Men are portrayed much of the time as being sub-human, just like Indians. The media will sit on news stories conserning men's issues, Just like Indians. (They still to this day do that to us Indians) I could go on but I'm sure I've more than made my point.
Though now I am as proud as can be to be Cherokee, as a child, I learned it was okay to hate "Injuns" and I at one time CURSED my Indian blood and heritage. I hated Indians too.
...Just like a new generation of little boys are now learning that it is okay to hate males and are learning to hate themselves too...,
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
kicks, knees and punches to the groin qualify as second-degree sexual assault in most states
Maybe the Motion Picture Association of America (www.mpaa.org) needs a few letters asking why they consider sexual assault to be appropriate content for movies aimed at children. Granted, violence against men and boys is almost always seen as acceptable background noise in entertainment, but specifically addressing sexual assault might have an effect, especially since the Catholic church’s problems, Michael Jackson’s, etc.
Maybe someone has some good current examples; the last kid's movie I remember seeing was Daddy Day Care which had at least one crotch assault, but that's no longer a current release.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 08:10 PM March 9th, 2004 EST (#15)
|
|
|
|
|
In the movie I-Spy, there is a scene where a female hits a male between the legs. However, the male is not hurt because it turns out he was wearing a protective cup. What a surprise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 08:24 PM March 9th, 2004 EST (#16)
|
|
|
|
|
He should have kicked her back!
THAT would've been a suprise, too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:41 PM March 9th, 2004 EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
Growing up in the 80's, it was not too uncommon to see a little nudity in shows targeted towards teenagers. A quick shot of a topless female - who usually was an object of desire, and therefore was not dehumanized like a strike to the groin.
Today's shows have blunt trauma to the groin (i.e. moving objects, sporting balls, kicks, strikes...) so often it is almost expected that if a guy who is deemed uncool or jerkish, he is likely to get a groin injury during the show.
Feminist power surfaced in various magazines of the 70's, a common theme had groin attack played out as self protection themes.
As women and gays (many of which participate in S&M themed lifestyles) have gained access to develop productions, groin attacks have become common. Liberal men who run Hollywood don't care about right and wrong, as long as they can make a buck.
Feminists do not view or hold attacks on men's reproductive organs to the same standard that they have set for women. If a man places on finger on a female’s vagina, he risks jail time for sexual assault. Whereas a woman can intentionally kick a man with steel toed work boots and render him sterile, and it is assault and battery first in most states, and if a feminist DA is involved, nothing more.
My point is, feminism and alternative lifestyles such as homosexuality and fetishism exploit male vulnerabilities for the sake of power. Some women feel empowered when viewing a man getting hurt.
How attacks on male genitals have become a comedy item while any perceived aggression towards famales/gays is an issue for every front page across the county I don't understand.
You see guys; we have no representation on social issues. While we work, our opponents use government funding and serious networking to undermine the quality of our lives.
I hope the next generation of boys find ways to handle the abuses society has placed upon them. I personally support pro-male movies (LOR), and sporting events.
It is unfortunate that the people against maleness snuck that gross commercial into the Superbowl - where a man gets his groin mauled. It was the prime ad spot. Don't think for one minute that the placement of that ad wasn't well thought out and planned for...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:39 PM March 9th, 2004 EST (#14)
|
|
|
|
|
>"I personaly support pro-male movies"
You mean there IS such a thing???
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You mean there IS such a thing???(as pro-male movies)
It seems to me that Tom Hanks has been making quite a few recently. Apollo 13 and Saving Private Ryan come immediately to mind.
Larry
ADULT: What you are once you've run out of excuses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:42 PM March 9th, 2004 EST (#17)
|
|
|
|
|
"I personally support pro-male movies (LOR), and sporting events."
I remember reading a criticism of LOR as being old school white male stereotypical, privileged patriarchs, etc. Well, J.R.R. Tolkien in his time was surrounded in his school by other white males. He was English and using a Finish language for Elvish. He used his experiences with the 1st world war and the coming 2nd world war. In that sense the movie may seem anachronistic by some of today's out of touch politically correct historians (revisionists), but certainly one of Tolkien's main inspirations for the evil in the movie was the military conquests of Germany.
Here's a bit of Lords of the Rings trivia that I got off the preview screen as I was waiting for a movie to start playing last week. "All the people playing the 'Orcs' in LOR were women." I'm sure there's no connection to inherent evilness as men played other monsters in LOR, but when I heard that fact, it made sense. All of the Orcs were kind of medium sized physically. Now please, no comparisons between Orcs and gender feminists.
O.K. go ahead, gender feminists waste no opportunity to bash men. Lord of the Rings being, but one recent example.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:53 PM March 9th, 2004 EST (#19)
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I may not compare them to Orcs,
But I'll sure compare them to Trolls!
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:27 PM March 10th, 2004 EST (#22)
|
|
|
|
|
On the Orc's played by women.
Sorry, that is not true. There was 1 stunt woman (out of 6 - 8) in an Orc suit. The other 5 - 7 were stunt MEN. The extras were fairly mixed. Many of the Rohan on horseback were women in beards and armor. (There's a humorous story of Vigo Mortenson being sweet on a particular lady with a strawberry blond beard!!)
As I am constantly irritated by anti-male lies with stats, abuse, deaths, health, etc. I just wanted to keep the record straight when I could.
Thanks,
Agraitear
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some women feel empowered when viewing a man getting hurt.
How attacks on male genitals have become a comedy item while any perceived aggression towards famales/gays is an issue for every front page across the county I don't understand.
You see guys; we have no representation on social issues. While we work, our opponents use government funding and serious networking to undermine the quality of our lives.
You have to understand the roots of such matters; women's movements have been actively attempting to influence social attitudes for centuries, while men's movements-- well clearly there have been none, and hence all change has been one-sided. Thus, such demeaning images of men being degraded in the most humiliating manners imaginable have become commonplace via such social acceptance-- and social attitudes along with them. Thus, while women are still afforded the protection and respect which was formerly attributed to their perceived inferiority and position as male property, they still continue to demand social equality in addition, while extending no such reciprocity in terms of respect or defense-- i.e. they have become castrating competitors who both envy and hate all things male in sheer proof of Penis Envy.
When combined with fallen standards of decency, the admiration for attacks on men has made sexual attacks on men all but inevitable.
Fortunately, such messages are actionable in courts of law, and should be acted upon just as any other hate-messages.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here is the original letter that I sent to the Idaho State Journal, if anyone would like to read it...
---------------------------------------
Dear Editor:
I read your gentle chastisement of the NFL’s (faux) new-found modesty in your editorial of February 10 with some amusement because of what you did not say, as much as what you did say. It is now a week after the Super Bowl and, thanks in part to the editorials of many newspapers, such as the Journal, it appears that the Janet Jackson exhibitionism shenanigans will not be repeated for some time. I admire your commitment to keeping television (and movies) as family friendly as possible. After all of this has settled down, however, perhaps you should also pay some attention to the other elements of that broadcast that should be equally offensive to family viewers. By this I mean some of the commercials, with the Bud-Light dog attack on a man’s genitals foremost amongst them. While the Journal made it clear that it viewed the NFL’s new-found modesty as “false”, the strongest language that it offered in response to a commercial that, 30 or so years ago, would have been viewed as sadism and censored from television broadcasts, was “divisive”.
Unfortunately, in the last 30 years or so it has become so common in the entertainment industry to show or joke about sexually injuring men that prime time TV shows such as "America's Funniest Videos" routinely show men being sexually harmed for the sake of a laugh. That this is a huge (and anti-family, not to mention anti-male) cultural change is attested to by the fact that this was completely unheard of on, say, pre-1975 TV shows. This kind of humor has become so commonplace that almost no-one notices it anymore. It is found on TV commercials, as the above example illustrates, or the similar Dentyne commercial where a squirrel bites the (1 out of 5) dentist in the testicles (thereby explaining why only 4 out of 5 dentists said “yes” in recommending Dentyne chewing gum). It is found on most TV sit-coms, as well as “reality” shows, like “America’s Funniest Videos”. It is also found in talk shows such as, for one infamous example, when Katie Couric of the Today Show asked a jilted bride if she had “considered castration” for the man who had walked out on her. It is also found in the movie industry, where to give a recent example of children’s movies, “Cheaper by the Dozen” features a pit bull ferociously attacking a young man's genitals. That this kind of sexual violence has become the norm is well attested by the fact that movie reviewers, such as the Journal’s, seem completely blind to these scenes and almost never mention them in their reviews. It remains to be seen if the Journal’s new-found (faux) family-friendly front of “objection” to this as “divisive” can be maintained.
If this were simply an annoyance of adult foolishness, with little effect on children I would probably continue to ignore it. Unfortunately, like most adult foolishness, it is our children that pay the price for it. Recently, my 7 year old son was kicked in the crotch by another child in a dispute over a toy. When the little girl who kicked him was asked to explain herself, she said that "they do it all the time on cartoons, and it is funny". Of course, it is possible that this is an isolated incident, so I did a little homework. In 1995 David Finkelhor of the Family Research Laboratory (University of New Hampshire) published in an article in the Journal of the American Medical Association on the frequency of this kind of sexual assault (yes, kicks, knees and punches to the groin qualify as 2nd degree sexual assault in most states) on school age children in the U.S. The results were that approximately 10% of all boys PER YEAR are assaulted this way. About 1 in 50 of these boys suffer medically significant injuries and the majority of boys that are targeted for this kind of violence are what many would cruelly call "nerds" (boys that have asthma, boys that are not good athletes, or that wear glasses, or are generally bullied). In a nation of approximately 50 million school-age children (the U.S.), of which half are male, this translates into roughly 50,000 boys per year sustaining medically significant sexual injuries. I'm convinced, as was Finkelhor et al., that this high rate is due, in part, to the wide social acceptance of this kind of humor. The Journal, like society as a whole, has shown a moral myopia in failing to recognize and simply call for an end to this brand of “humor”.
While I understand that I am fighting a losing battle for movies, TV shows and TV commercials that target adult audiences, surely the effect upon our children is sufficient to cause us to think twice about this? Why doesn’t the Journal simply show the moral backbone to call such “humor” what it is: just another form of sadism? On that day the Journal will be able to claim that its new-found family-friendly views are something more than “faux”.
Best Regards----Doug Wells
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Celebrate that you got this published. They simply had to cut it down a bit; it's article-length. They trimmed it for size but left your overall gist in there.
That story about your son being assaulted by a little girl is extremely telling. Hold onto it; it should be used as Exhibit "A".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:52 PM March 10th, 2004 EST (#25)
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your letter. Perhaps one day in a glorious future "gender experts" will actually care about problems like this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I would consider a lawsuit against both the parents of this girl, as well as the television industry for portraying such images of sexual assault; these have been universally successful.
However the only cartoon I've heard this this is type of violence portrayed is "Beavis and Butt-head," which is NOT for children; clearly this child's parents are to blame for failing to monitor viewing-- and it's true that the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am happy that young men are waking up and realizing that the majority of society is against them.
Men are subconciously retreating from the continual attacks against them from television.
http://www.buffy.nu/article.php3?id_article=2754
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,103716,00.html
http://wsjclassroom.com/archive/04jan/medi_nielsen .htm
Here are three articles which are similar but different, they talk about how young men are retreating from television.
Considering that male role models in most sitcoms, and television shows are shown to be evil, violent, buffoons, tortured, idiotic, insane. Commercials are usually also biased towards men.
Fortunately there have been a few commercials out there that are showing men in a good light.
- Canadian tire has a father who actually gets his kid something, and has a nice comment about the dad.
- Playschool toys show images of fathers playing with kids.
- Jif Peanut Butter, changed their slogan Choosy moms (and dads) choose Jif.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I watch this show called Daly Planet that talks about a lot of things happening in the world. Normally the show focuses on ideas, inventions or shows how things are done, but they also do stories on studies and research.
An episode recently had a story of how the Sony company did some research that showed "video games" and "online gaming" as the reason that males do not watch television as much as they used to.
So, according to this "studies" it is not that males find less to watch on television and turn to video games for entertainment. No, no. It is video games that "pull" males away from the television. The constant anti-male, male as idiot, women power, stories and events that are frequently thrust upon a television audience has nothing to do with it.
R
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:52 PM March 11th, 2004 EST (#27)
|
|
|
|
|
I noticed that not one of those articles mentioned the fact that alot of men are "tuneing out" because we are tired of being represented as buffoons, sub-human and preditory. And that we are getting tired of the amount of sexualized and sadistic violence directed at male characters I.E. women beating the snot out of men, men tied up and tortured and men being the butt of any and all sexist humor.
when or if the networks ever come around to realizing these facts then, and maybe only then, do I beleive their "male viewership" will increase.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Did you read my letter in THE PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER in which I made these points?
bg
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anything you guys are seeing on the tube now is tame compared to the day I cut my cable. I came home from a union grievance hearing involving unmandated abuse of power by feminists in my workplace (which I eventually won) and EVERYTHING on the 200 channels on the tube was male bash. Oprah was doing a thing on men who get airsick and then expect female flight attendants to take away the barf bag and the VJ on much Music was featuring Lorraine Segatto and male bashing on EVERY breath. I just happened to get a Neilson rating questionaire and a CRTC evaluation in the mail. I wrote one of the best rants I have ever written and I stopped watching the tube. TELEVISION IS TO THE MIND AS SMOKING IS TO THE LUNGS!!! That's why I spend my evenings on the internet in the company of like minded men. I remember in a better era of television, one of my favourite commedians of all time, Red Skelton...a veritable genius of commedy..would end each of his shows with a humble,heartfelt and sincere "thank you for inviting me into your home".....to all of the arrogant, willfully ignorant, militantly mindless, voluntarily autistic assholes who force feed the public with culture of mysandry as if we were obliged to sit there and be indoctrinated...YOU HAVE NOT BEEN WELCOME IN MY HOME FOR NEARLY TWO DECADES AND YOU WILL NEVER BE WELCOME IN MY HOME AGAIN!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anything you guys are seeing on the tube now is tame compared to the day I cut my cable.
I disagree; 15 years ago, I don't remember graphic images of women literally castrating men as revenge for "cheating" on them, like I've seen recently over public airwaves on commercials for such everyday things like car-insurance (Progressive) and beer (Miller Lite).
This is a clear statement that men are women's exclusive property, within their rigt to be castrated for infidelity-- sound familiar?
I can't think of many things sicker or more defiant of human dignity than this type of sexual derogation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 08:37 AM March 12th, 2004 EST (#38)
|
|
|
|
|
OOPS! sorry B.G..
Yeah, I read it AFTER I made that post.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AFHV frequently thinks this is funny, and even had their end-title shot featuring a clip of such an "accident." Letters which threaten their profit-motive via lawsuit, would thus be more effective; demeaning men-- particularly to attract women-- is a pure admission of hatred and disrespect for a particular group, and would be no different than showing a comical showing of the Rodney King beating in order to attract racists.
It is surely no coincidence, that "Progressive" Insurance company pulled or changed their sick ad under threat of lawsuit, and it's time we accessed our rights in all instances to change federal laws in order to give men the same protection given to women and minorities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 08:43 AM March 12th, 2004 EST (#39)
|
|
|
|
|
What is ironic is that A.F.H.V., (the older ones featuring Bob Sagat) are being run on PAX. A supposedly "family freindly" network.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
