|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The only thing wrong with this letter is that you're appealing to the person's best interest and moral sense, rather than standing on principle and your rights as a human being and US Citizen.
In this regard, the broadcast is a violation of every man's rights in terms of representing "fighting words" as well as being defamatory and bigoted against the male gender in a manner so as to deliberately or negigently offend a particular individual or group, and in a manner which demeans them or is intended to lower their public perception or self-eseteem.
Such defamatory portrayals are likewise a violation of FCC "acceptable use" laws regarding use of the public airwaves.
Such "Safe prejudices" are often used, but rarely in so brazen a manner, and ads such as these simply lower the bar for greater defamation, which is always an incite to dehumanization; if you can portray someone as less than human, it facilitates their treatment as such-- as history shows in countless cases of bigotry and hatred.
I would have called him a Nazi.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dear Regressive,
Since I am not actually a Regressive customer, I suppose my words will irrelevant. Nonetheless, I am writing to let you know that I will under no circumstances, ever purchase insurance from you.
It seems you've made a business out of misandry. You obviously have some type of hatred, or at best, dislike of men and masculinity in general. Your male-bashing commercials are proof, disguised as "humor".
I will also be urging everyone I know to avoid your company like the proverbial plague. Which I suppose is OK with you, since you obviously feel that you don't need mens' business anyway.
As far as your name is concerned, I refuse to call a company "Progressive" when it feels that it can place one gender on a pedastal while bashing another. You should seriously consider changing your name to Regressive Insurance.
Perhaps Geico will appreciate my business better than you would.
Sincerely,
[Name and addy omitted here for obvious reasons]
"Existence exists. A is A." -Ayn Rand
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday March 25, @12:26AM EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
((("Perhaps Geico will appreciate my buisness better that you would.")))
Napnip,
That's a great touch.
I like that little lizard, anyway.
Better to have a small reptile as a mascott than a big one as a company president.
Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The level of intelligence-- or lack thereof-- displayed by such commercials must be taken into account; seriously, when a commercial has to sink the the level of casting voodoo curses, or in a related commercial, magically turning everything in an apartment into something the person wishes for, you have to consider this as below even the intelligence of commercials which portray beautiful women springing from their brand of beer-bottles.
Additionally, providing women with this kind of fodder for their hateful fantasies agaist men-- not to mention the notion that they spend their time engaged in such-- represents a vicarious violation of men in general, while demeaning women as well-- if only as an abuser, which is hardly as demeaning as to the victim.
However, I do have to mention that the male-centered commercial didn't display a man torturing a woman, but rather changing his scrubby male room-mate into a beautiful model-- a commercial for which the word "dumb" does no justice; somehow I must have missed the part where he rips out her ovaries and uterus with a meat-hook to the sound of a laugh-track.
Stupid commercials are bad enough, but to make them personally offensive by pandering to the target-audience-- no doubt products of the failed public-school system- at the expense of the dignity of another group, is not only presumptuous, unethical and cowardly, but is also, technically, WELL outside of the penumbral protection of the First Amendment.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
