This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subject: Your TV commercial is demeaning to men
Last night I was watching TV (a rare occurrence these days) when a Kleenex commercial came on. It showed a young man walking along the side of a dirt road after a storm had passed by. An attractive young woman sped by in a sports car, which splashed him with muddy water. She stopped, and he looked at her like she was a goddess. Without a word she threw a box of Kleenex at his chest and sped off.
Why is it necessary for companies to humiliate men like this in order to sell products? Would you have run a commercial showing a woman being treated like this?
Please discontinue this offensive commercial (and any other forms of advertising that are demeaning to men and boys). Otherwise, I will simply purchase another brand of tissue in the future.
Remember, men are consumers too. I'll be waiting for your response.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dear Steven,
Thanks for your e-mail about KLEENEX® facial tissue.
We are sorry to learn of your feelings about our advertisement for KLEENEX® facial tissue. We can understand your concern and will pass your comments on to the people involved in our advertising programs.
Thanks again for visiting our web site.
Sheila
Consumer Services
Kimberly-Clark Corp.
007327685A
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:47 PM August 3rd, 2004 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
That seems like a reasonable response.
But I am always wary of any response that a company gives when it comes to their misandric treatment of men, in their ads. Most of the time it is just an empty generic response and the company freaquently has no intention of scrapping those types of offencive ads.
But as I said, I have to admitt, that reponse is one of the more sincire sounding ones.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There's a wonderful woman named Typhonblue who posts on SYG at times and has pointed out in situations like this that it is helpful to notice who has choices and who does not. Those in power will generally have more choices available to them and those who lack power will have fewer choices. She uses the example of a slave and slave owner to illustrate an obvious case where one has more choice than the other. She goes on to note that women in our culture have far more choices than men from reproductive choices to choices over full-time employment versus staying home etc.
It's an interesting thought and can easily be applied to this commerical. Who had choices here? Seems pretty clear that the woman driving had all the choices and the man was simply responding to her actions. Sounds familiar?
Do we have True Equality?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:03 PM August 2nd, 2004 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with ditto here...
The first thing I thought of was this add was showing, conciously or not, how some women can be spoiled be-yatches....
Although, I'm sure the target audience is women, since I myself do not know any men who care to buy kleenex when there is toilet paper close by...yet, still, it still is showing this woman as a spoiled be-yatch...
Plus, I personally don't mind a certain level of insensitivity....not that I thought this commercial was funny, but what good comedian isn't insensitive?
I'd care more if the guy was getting kicked in the nuts, or being controlled by a voodoo doll...
p. george
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quite agree that a kick to the nuts would be a greater offense. However, I think this commercial is misandrist. Just imagine that the driver was a white man and the person being splashed was black. Would that go over? Why not?
This commercial may not have the bite of the dairy queen or the progressive insurance piece but it is surely in the same genre. My guess is that the same ad agency is doing most of these. We will see.
T
Do we have True Equality?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:54 PM August 3rd, 2004 EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, the woman in the commercial is supposede to be one of those "EMPOWERED WOMEN". Ergo, at least in the media's mind, the only way a woman can be "EMPOWERED" is if the male half is DIS-empowered.
I have always wondered why the media and feminists believe that the only way to "EMPOWER" women is to destroy men, then call it "EAQUALITY".
Go figure.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|