Eli Rezkallah, a 31-year-old artist and photographer from Beirut, Lebanon, recently created a photo series called “In a Parallel Universe.” he recreated 1950s sexist adds from a reversed gender roles point of view. I find them extremely funny.
Very interesting to see the roles reversed. I hope it made people reading this uncomfortable, because this type of sexism *should* be uncomfortable. The feminist remake is not to illustrate how things "should" be (that's not what equality is), it's to illustrate how absolutely insane those old ads were because people would have been outraged if it were men who were put in a submissive and ridiculed position like that. It's merely mirroring the awfulness of the ads, because nobody deserves to be treated like that.
I like the idea and concept. But considering those original ads would never be accepted today and any man* seeing them would react to how bad they are the message is a bit too on the nose.
(*Guys who think the original ads are ok are not men in my book)
@Nachowedgie is right
Cool
I DO love it!
Opinion
75Opinion
Some of them don't really come off as all that offensive.
Like, the one about not burning the beer. It doesn't imply anything, it's just a joke about the beer being okay when something else suffered because of cooking. The cook being female isn't that big of a part of the joke.
The next one about opening things, though silly, makes even less sense in regards to men because men are far more likely to be able to open hard to open things due to the difference in strength.
The next one about a vacuum cleaner is just targeted marketing. Regardless of gender roles, women use cleaning tools far more than men. Makes perfect sense to market them in a way that gets more women to use them - even if it's the men who get the tool for them.
Only 2 of these are sexist, the rest are just marketed at women at a time when women generally housewives.
1. Not sexist.
2. Sexist
3. Sexist or just foreplay.
4. It would be quite upsetting for a newly married housewife to burn dinner considering the amount of planning, time, effort and love she put into it. Her husband joke about not burning the beer would be just the kind warm hearted gesture that would cheer her up.
5. Men have much greater strength than women and at the time a lot of jars and bottles were tough for women to open so these new fangled devices on jars and bottles would have been appreciated by most women.
6. In the 1920's- 60s era yeah most housewives would have preferred a Hoover as a Christmas present because it was such a time saver giving her more free time to herself as at the time housework was extremely time consuming and hardwork.
7. Is kinda funny.
8. Is not sexist either, anything in this era that could help a housewife get her work done quicker and more easily was greatly appreciated.
9. Kinda funny.
Honestly the artist who recreated these was going for shock value but it's all been done before and misses the mark. It's kinda pathetic and a clear case of liberal virtue signalling.
I bet that she is really a grumpy old man
This is the Internet
That means that she is a second class citizen lol
I think traditional girls should be extinct
@Nadim171 do you not realise how what you just said is sexist? "submissive bimbo" seriously? From your other pots, we get that you want female power and male submission, doesn't mean we all have to conform to your worldview
*posts
Totally agree with the idea that these were targeted at a different era. Some of these aren't even sexist. I find a lot of the feminist photoshopped ones to be off-putting.
@NorthwestRider Women who choose to stay at home and are submissive are not second class citizens.
@GigiMary Submissive women are a massive turn off. I find them gross
@NorthwestRider to you, maybe. Everyone has their own preferences. Submissive men are a massive turn off to me - I like dominant men. Don't assume that everyone is exactly like you and wants to fit into the boxes you wish they were in - for better or worse.
@GigiMary Because you were brainwashed by the bible. The bible hates women
@NorthwestRider can you just accept that not everyone shares the same worldview, turn-ons, and beliefs as you? The world is an intellectually diverse place, and everyone sees it differently.
@GigiMary I bet that you would love Saudi Arabia, Iran or Uganda where women lack any freedom and must serve guys
@NorthwestRider of course not. My lifestyle choice does not dictate that I would like to live in a Muslim country where women are oppressed and have to serve men. I want all women to have the *choice* whether or not that is the lifestyle for them. I made my choice, and, for the record, would still rather live in this nation because it leaves the doors of opportunity open for me.
I value my freedoms, and I own a handgun to protect them - which is using that right in and of itself. I wouldn't give up my freedoms as an American for anything and am blessed to have them.
@GigiMary The last time I check, Uganda was not a Muslim country lol
@Britantic @GigiMary well said. The other 2 here are simply rigid and narrow.
I like it how that one kid referred to you as a submissive bimbo. Typical agenda of these types of individuals. Everything has to be how they want it. Equality doesn't mean you get to choose what you want to do; stay home and be a housewife or go out and work. No, equality means, to them, you must do what they think women should do. Which is literally no different than the "sexist pigs" of yester-generation. Some women I know are glad to be working and making their own money and living on their own while other women I know wish they didn't have to go to work and wished that they were born during a time when all that was expected of them was to stay home raise the children.
@Nadim171 go to school and learn the deam history. And how you even dare to attack her, to verbally attack woman. Dindnt you said woman happiness is your goal, so why attack this girl who gives you facts about 50s when your parents might not even lived in.
Go and educate yourself before writing next mistake, quiz i will rip it apart with citations if needed.
I get it, its trying to reverse it to show the pain women had to go trough and show how redicilous this is.
But there is quite a lot going on here on a lot of different levels.
At one point its making its intended statement that this is just weird advertising, we get that even if its not reversed. But at another point it also speaks on how men feel about feminism, like they are now forced to submit to female bullies that make them do things they do not wish to do or accept things they do not wish to accept. Forced into a feminine role because they are constantly blamed for being a man.
But in reality this is not depicting feminism at all, because feminism isn't about female superiority as some people may think. Its actually about eliminating strengths of both sexes. So if you really wanted to make feminism posters you'd add a few more posters to this about women suffering in the workplace. And depict both sexes suffering together as robots stripped from their strengths and identity. Because that is what equality is all about for them, the loss of your strengths and character. An attack on the successful in an attempt to make them more equal. But deep down its secretly because they are jealous of someone elses success.
Normally I have a real problem with this kind of pretentious "Look we finally got them! Those awful monsters!" self-victimising attitude. Especially when the real monsters are the handful of "Harvey Weinstiens" who are still getting away with it and caused problems like these in the first place. But this! This is actually really sobering... and strangely encouraging. As a woman, you get used to companies telling you how ugly/unprepared/guilty you are for not having a certain product it just becomes second nature after a while. But seeing it like this, really makes the awful stand out.
Not only was the guy awesome for helping out with these shoots but it shows just how far things have come and just how MUCH Western society has changed as a whole. I think if these pics were posted with the right article and captions, they could be really encouraging and a wake up call for discrimination towards either that's hanging around today. It's so easy for companies to exploit guilt and insecurity to sell products, unluckily for many today they've no idea of their worth. There will always be lazy, a-holes in advertising but these will make a pretty good yardstick for measuring sexist discrimination in advertising.
You can't use it to end it. The most you can do, is point out the absurdity of the thing. But if you enforce it going the other way, you accomplish nothing except to reinforce what came before, and make it feel validated.
Thus is the beginning of the folly of the zero-sum mindset. A better way to end such ads, is to simply not make any. And most advertisers wouldn't be caught dead making ads this horrible today. So to bring it back with a role reversal? Just more stupidity, but going the other way.
I once pointed out how monumentally uncool the song "Before He Cheats" by Carrie Underwood was, by making a parody called "Serial Bomber" going the other way. Except, nobody was laughing at the role reversal. A man trashing a faithless woman's car? Gasp! Not funny!
And then describing in graphic detail how he planted a car bomb in it to blow her up on top of it all?
And then going on a rampage of bombing any other cheating women he can find, culminating in nuking a motel because of a runaway bride inside? While laughing hysterically amidst escaping via helicopter?
Yeah. Nobody laughed. Which is why I couldn't understand why so many at the time were laughing at Carrie Underwood's song.
I can why some people are bothered by this. But they also don't understand what's the purpose of these ads. Women were humiliated and this shows how normal sexism was at that time.
This isn't about making women feel superior and men inferior, this is about showing how wrong those ads were.
Finally someone who gets it
@Iwillfindyou21 Thanks! 😀
Really? Humiliated? Because the ad mentions how the womans role is the kitchen and the mans role is working his ass off to provide for her? So its sexist towards the woman but not the man? Thats rather sexist, its almost as if your ignoring all the expecations that where placed on the man (again, like working long hours usually in grueling jobs (as most jobs where manual labor or factory jobs (office jobs is a very recent development (to put it more succinctly only a little over 100 years ago most men where farmers (women didn't farm because it was to physically demanding for most of history))). Basically no, women where not made to feel inferior, thast idiotically stupid. How can a woman be made to feel inferior when he is working and she isn't, where he is expected to buy her flowers and jewelry and she gets him, well, nothing? How can she be treated as inferior if he is expected to open the car door for her as if she was royalty, open doors for her as if she was royalty, hold her arm to ensure she wouldn't fall and she felt safe, to fight a man if he insulted her (thats how Al copone got the scar on his face, he hit on a mans sister and the man was required by social norms to fight him because his sister didn't feel safe only Al copone was a very strong man and had connections. As you imagine it ended poorly (he had to flee the city))? No women where never made to feel inferior, thats why in the 50s women where happier then they are now (by a substantial margin). The only thing women where not treated as was men, which is what your calling for. YOU think something is wrong with being a woman, that their is something wrong with the feminine role and so you are demanding that women act more like men. That IS making women feel inferior.
I really don't understand the need for these to have been made other than some radical feminist wanted to get her man hating on again. People know those ads were bad this is just another example of feminism being sexist and doing something that proves they don't care about real issues or women.
Some of these so called adverts are FAKE. The first one from Hardee's is a case in point. Hardee's DID NOT acquire "The Famous Star" logo until they merged with "Carl's Jr." until 1997 and both chains (Hardee's in the Eastern and Southern USA, Carl's Jr. in the Western USA) adopted similar logos.
And even the ones which are NOT fake, feminist criticism of those ads betrays a shocking ignorance of the times. See the Hoover Vacuum and Lux diswashing liquid ads. When powerful motorized vacuum cleaners and effective solvent detergents became more affordable to common people in the 1940's, they were a savings of oh so many "man-hours" (woman-hours?) of sweeping and scrubbing, and yes, women DID want such items, even as Christmas gifts. If any of you still have now very elderly grandparents alive from those times, ask them about this.
Okay, Now do ones that are sexist towards men (like how every Christmas I have to hear about how I'm suppose to want power tools and how I have to not be stupid and go to X jewelry store for her or I'm a deadbeat. Or how the add about women in the kitchen is incredibly sexist because it talks about the male role of provider and how he is expected to work his ass off for her (because apaparently it was only sexist when women had expectations not men (just like today) or how about the non stop attack ads we see today that are rampantly sexist (and the laws that descriminate against men, that would be an interesting take, sexist laws that descriminate against men (their is a lot of them) that affect us in the modern day vs. ads taken out of context from the fifties and sixties that are sexist (some of them are I guess)). I love how women being sexist today is justified by pointing to fifty years ago and proclaiming (quite frequently inaccurately) that men where sexist then.
No they wouldn't. Women can already be bread winners and they don't want to be. The more free the country the more we see a division of labor and interest not homogenization of interests from the sexes. We are different, that shouldn't even have to be said but here we are. Our bodies are different, our bone structure is different, our skin is different our biochemistry is different, our genetics are different, our brain structures are different. We are so different that these differences are even seen in other primates. WE. ARE. DIFFERENT. So suggesting we are the same and that sameness is also maleness is incredibly sexist, towards women. Their never was and never will be something wrong with being a woman and quite frankly I think that its really screwed up that feminist think that being a woman is something to be hated.
2.7% genetic difference between men and women. You know what the genetic difference between a human and chimpanzee is? About 2.7%. To say we are different is an understatement. I never once suggested we don't have similiarities, what I said is we have biological inclinations and biological differences that push us down certain paths, for men its to be providers which is why single women out earn single men yet when they get married women reduce their work load substantially and prefer to be home with their child (even expressing guilt for not being their) while men increase their workload in order to be the best provider. No one is forcing this, this is the natural choices they gravitate to based upon literally every single piece of data we have from what people say makes them most happy, from what they actually do, to what is the most common actions taken in EVERY SINGLE CULTURE IN THE WORLD WITHOUT EXCEPTION, to the fact that these same behaviors are found in other primates. You are categorically wrong.
That is one of the most idiotic statements that I have ever heard thus proving that your a troll. Did I mention women don't have equivalent IQ to men? Did I mention it even once? No. So why did you say it? Clearly your trolling (or just stupid). I don't have time for people who refuse to actually think (because thus far you have pushed an agenda without any kind of rational behind it). Women by and large don't want what your pushing, all data shows it. Proclaiming that female roles are sexist while saying that male roles are not is by its very nature, sexist. You are sexist and your either a troll or an ideolog.
Wow those ads were nothing but disrespect. I have no problem with a man being the leader or head of the household sense God appointed you to do that, however, that doesn't give you the right to treat me like shit. I think a lot of men let it go to their heads, God said to lead and provide for your family as men not disrespect your wife because your the leader/head or become tyrant.
hallelujah
I did find this funny, albeit in a sad, pathetic way. This guy is creating fantasy out of fact. He takes real ads which people responded to, paid for, and ran, and creates his own fictional world which never happened. In this time where everything is an -ism and nobody has a sense of humor, of course, the only person left to hate and to run over roughshod is the man. It's always so easy to engage in chronological snobbery and condemn the past because it isn't now -- never mind any deeper analysis. People take ads as though they were gospel. The same people believe what CNN reports, too. Rage on.
This artist should go work for a company that sells products that men buy. I hear Gillette's none too happy at losing $8 billion and would like for some other foolish company to lose more.
Oh I’m sorry, I thought feminism was for equality. That’s what they keep telling me and referring to the dictionary definition while they pull this crap, handwave any male specific issues and actively make them worse. You want examples? They are making it nearly impossible for a man to be a victim of domestic violence, being able to steal a man’s sperm by taping him and sue him for child support or chop a man’s penis off or force a man to jump off a balcony and a female talkshow host and her audience will laugh about it. Thanks for finally setting the record straight.
yeah... look, feminists are individuals with different opinions, identify with different schools of feminism and do different things from each other. Feminists contradict each other like all individuals from any ideology
Plus this is supposed to be art. artists don't always condone their subject matter. like Picasso painted Guernica but he obviously doesn't condone the actions depicted in the painting. This artist may have wanted men to understand how it feels to be degraded, mistreated and oppressed the way women were in the 50s. It was upsetting for u yeah? I'm a feminist and I found it interesting seeing these role reversals but it also makes me uncomfortable because ultimately what I want to see it equal partnerships freed from traditional gender roles, not a complete role reversal.
@Staiby I don't think the denomination matters. The politicians only listen to the ones who are the loudest and only want female supremacy. I just call myself an egalitarian because I don't believe that we live in a patriarchy that favors men to the detriment of women and several of the feminist conspiracies can easily be proven wrong if you look for any reason that any of the things that happen other than crying sexism such as the wage gap and rape culture.
Yes I get that artist make stuff like this all the time but at least they make them extremely ambiguous and left up to the interpretation of those who behold it. These don't even try to hide the messages and it is fallacious to assume that everyone back then had the same perspective, even the women. I'm sure some women were even okay with this back then just as much as mothers want to stay at home today as bad as these ads make it sound but treating women like slaves was a crime even back then.
I understand that you want to free us both from traditional gender roles but any man I know embraced the role that men are the providers and protectors of the ones we love and if it wasn't for those roles, humanity wouldn't have lasted a single generation. This kind of thing is biologically hardwired in our minds and it tends to conflict us when we go against it. That's why there is a lot of truth to the stereotype that men have fragile egos and cannot take failure lightly.
Now, I am not agreeing with these ads. If a woman wants to go a have a career that's her prerogative, I encourage it in fact, but if she doesn't that good too. My problem is that it seems that feminists love to make content like this that is antithetical to their cause and actually fool people to still think that they advocate for equality.
You should know where the artist is coming from. He's from Lebanon where women's rights have not progressed as far as women's rights in America, U. K, Australia etc. He spoke about a recent sexist ad in his country that was like "chocolates make her fat so buy her a dishwasher" which had inspired this art.
And what politicians are listening to what female supremacists? I'm sick of feminism haters making vague claims about the evils of feminists and just expect it to be a good enough argument. dates, names, citations etc. please
Also, Sexism does contribute to the wage gap. a big chuck of it is women leaving the work force to have children but after a woman has recovered from giving birth, why can't the father take paternal leave and the wife go back to the work force. Women don't earn as much because caring for children is still seen as the woman's job. and wouldn't fathers want to take time off to spend time with their children?
and there is rape culture, people trivialize rape all the time and people aren't taught what constitutes rape and what doesn't.
@Staiby (1/3)
Wage gap:
- Employers are required by law to not discriminate by gender and race due to the Equal Pay Act of 1963. This might not completely prevent pay discrimination but I doubt the disparity of pay has little to nothing to do with discrimination.
- The observed wage gap is just taking the average pay men get and divide it among the average pay women get. There is an indefinite number of reasons. Some of which include: Men tend to work higher paying jobs such as STEM fields, prioritizes earnings more, work more overtime, take less vacation and sick days even on days they are actually sick, more likely to take risks, ask for raises, more likely to work full time and mothers are more likely to stay home or work part time to take care of children. In general men tend to work more hours. If you want to switch roles, take it up with the father.
-If businesses could seriously get away with paying women less than men, why would men get hired at all? The notion that businesses are really such boys clubs that hiring men mean more to them than their profits and shareholder interests is absurd.
@Staiby
As for rape culture:
- Rape is a class A felony and it can land the criminal in prison for 10-99 years as well as a sex offender registration when they leave. A man who gets falsely accused of rape, regardless of the verdict, will have to live with the rape accusation and become a pariah for the rest of his life. It erroneous to assert that our culture protects rapists.
-RAINN: America's largest anti sexual assault organization even says that the rape culture idea is harmful. They say that the blame is placed on cultural factors than on the actual rapists. They go on to say: "This trend has the paradoxical
effect of making it harder to stop sexual violence, since it removes the focus from the
individual at fault, and seemingly mitigates personal responsibility for his or her own actions".
Source: www.rainn.org/.../...rce-RAINN-Recommendations.pdf
-The only things that I know that constitutes rape is the act of forcing sex by overpowering someone or threaten harm to the victim or others and drunk consensual sex (which I believe both parties should be charged if one or both are drunk). I have heard a lot of feminist fear mongers abuse the word so much that I have to wonder if a guy performed any of the acts I have mentioned or she had consensual sex but she regretted it the next morning, or if she is complaining that a guy looked at her and made her uncomfortable, changed positions without forewarning, he broke up with her when she cheated on him.
@Nadim171 (1/2) Are you sure EVERY right came from feminism? Rape was always illegal (if anything, rapists were hung) and women were never forced to wear hijabs even in America among other things. I like that they got the right to vote and outlawed workplace discrimination but I am not talking about feminism back then as that was the only time that it existence was justified in western culture.
I am talking about the feminism within the last 50 years and especially now where it became extremely hypocritical and started doing thing that are anti-egalitarian and justifying it by calling it revenge. Feminism now believes that we live in a patriarchy that is created by men to benefit men to the detriment of women. This makes it anti-male because they cannot acknowledge any men's issues such as:
@Nadim171(2/2)
-the high rate of male suicide
- biased custody courts
- the fact that 70% of the perpetrators of non-reciprocated domestic violence are females (https://www. ncbi. nlm. nih. gov/pmc/articles/PMC1854883/)
- The fact that men are 12 percent more likely to be a victim of IPV (5,365,000 men and 4,741,000 women) within a period of a year and the same study says that roughly 72% of severe forms of violence are men (2266000 men & 3163000 women)(https://www. cdc. gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_report2010-a. pdf)
-the fact that despite these statistics the standard of dealing with IPV (the Duluth Model created by a feminist named Ellen Pence) always assumes the man is the perpetrator in nearly every case
-the fact that only two abuse shelters for men exists (one in Dallas TX and in Batesville AK)(https://nypost. com/2017/10/29/these-shelters-help-male-victims-of-domestic-violence/) in the US while there are about 2000 for women (https://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Women%27s_shelter#cite_note-Clevenger-18).
Doing so will completely invalidate the movement because it wouldn't make any sense to assert that men have any societal and legal issues in a society that was made to put them at the top.
There is so much wrong with what you have said and stuff you don't know about.
I'm not getting into a statistics game because then it will just turn into a my-stats-says-your-stats-says mess
Put aside the existence of rape culture, rape has not always been considered rape on paper. And there are still some states that don't call rape rape in the law. www.theguardian.com/.../oral-sex-rape-ruling-tulsa-oklahoma-alcohol-consent (Oklahoma court: oral sex is not rape if victim is unconscious from drinking) There are still laws that don't consider is rape if you rape your spouse. www.apnews.com/3a11fee6d0e449ce81f6c8a50601c687 (Some states seek to close loopholes in marital rape laws) And there is a way to get around the age of consent. Just marry children. www.reuters.com/.../child-brides-call-on-us-states-to-end-legal-rape-idUSKCN1MZ024 (Child brides call on U. S. states to end 'legal rape') In all but 2 states, with the consent of the parents and a judge, a minor can be wedded legally in the U. S.
The article includes how easily controlled underage wives are and that they are a demographic that don't benefit from women's shelters because they don't accept minors.
And what is the prevalence? (https://www. independent. co. uk/news/world/americas/200000-children-married-us-15-years-child-marriage-child-brides-new-jersey-chris-christie-a7830266. html) (More than 200,000 children married in US over the last 15 years).
And in 2010s, feminists fought successfully by starting the Rape is Rape campaign to change the definition of rape in the FBI Uniform Crime Report as it hadn't been updated since 1921 when it was defined as "carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will". That definition excludes victims of forced anal or oral sex, rape with an object, statutory rape and male rape. Feminists fought to extend the definition of rape to include male victims. You're welcome. www.feminist.org/nomoreexcuses/rapeisrape.asp
And as for equality, men falsely accuse other men of rape as well. It's not something only a woman can do.
www.law.umich.edu/.../casedetail.aspx?caseid=4713
10 year old girl forced by her mum's boyfriend to lie and say that Quinton Carter had raped her, potentially motivated by drug money he had owed the boyfriend, Aurelias Marshall. Turns out he himself had sexually abused her.
Here are other cases, www.law.umich.edu/.../casedetail.aspx?caseid=3970, www.law.umich.edu/.../casedetail.aspx?caseid=5067, www.law.umich.edu/.../casedetail.aspx?caseid=5225
Pathological lying, Trump-loving, conspiracy theorist Jacob Wolh tried to organize women to accuse Robert Mueller, Special counsel of the completed Russia investigation, and men to accuse Pete Buttigeig, a gay democratic candidate for 2020, of sexual assault and rape. All men and women refused to do it.
Also for equality, women can be falsely accused too.
Here is a woman who was exonerated of sexual assault, www.law.umich.edu/.../casedetail.aspx?caseid=4834
Men AND women were accused of all that implausible satanic ritualistic day care child sex abuse in the 80s and 90s. Men AND women went to prison. So there are women who know what it is like.
I assume you believe that men commit suicide at a higher rate than women because society is horrible to men but not horrible to women.
If so, there is a big factor that you are missing. A big contributor to the high suicide rate for men is because they're is a gender difference in preferred suicide methods. Men tend to use the more successful methods and women tend to use methods that don't have a high success rate, which put most women who attempt suicide in the failed suicide attempt statistic.
If you struggle with suicidal thoughts then call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline (800-273-8255) and don't read this list. If you're fine then you go ahead and click just check out the table, it's very informative but light lostallhope.com/.../statistics-most-lethal-methods It shows methods and their success rates.
Men are also twice as likely than women to used suicidal methods that disfigure the face and head. When women use guns to commit suicide they are more likely to shoot themselves elsewhere on the body. So it's not so much that men are more suicidal than women, but when men commit suicide, they are more successful at ending their life than women are.
http://lostallhope.com/suicide-statistics, Women are three times more likely to make an unsuccessful attempt than a man, yet will attempt suicide two to three times more often.
You leave out so much context when you say there is a high male suicide rate and just leave it at that
@Staiby
1. I think you have made a good point with the oral sex exception
2. While I am not saying that it is a good reason to have any exception to marital rape, I believe that the reason why they put it there is because it is much harder to prove rape between two individuals who have legal documentation of partnership than it is concerning those without it. www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/...al-rape-laws.html
3. I am all for criminalizing child marriages as it makes laws concerning married couples very confusing because I would imagine those laws assume the both parties in the married couple are over 18. However, the example giving that the child was forced to marry the rapist to avoid stigma of having a child born out of wedlock is not a good reason to continue to want to marry him especially if the teenage bride is pregnant (which means one or both parties committed rape due to her or her groom being under 18 which I think would get rid of most of the stigma if she was the one who was forced to have sex against her will).
4. I looked at the source of the feminist. org article saying that they criminalized rape against a man and it says no such thing. In fact the glossary of forcible rape and rape "Forcible Rape—The carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will" and "Rape—The carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will." ucr.fbi.gov/.../ucr_handbook.pdf
@Staiby
1. No one knew that the girl was forced to lie until after Carter was sent to prison.
2. The first two of the three other links you provided seemed to have been erased for some reason so Ill leave those alone. You do make a good point for the third one though.
3. All I can say about the Wolh character is that I am glad he never got anyone to do it. I wish I can say the same for Kavanaugh.
4. I am very shocked that while Lawson was only charged with rape and illegal use of firearm yet got 72 year sentence and Yvonne got charged with all of them but only got seven years in prison.
I get that women can get falsely charged with rape too but my problem is the #believewomen campaign where they want to completely throw the presumption of innocence out the window and think that the mere accusation is enough to make someone guilty this is what disgusts me the most. I don't know what happens to a woman after she has been falsely accused of rape, but I know that men have their reputation destroyed. www.alllaw.com/.../...er-lawsuit-proving-harm.html
@Staiby
As for the suicide statistics: There are many theories on why the gender difference is so large. Some theories say that women attempt more as a way to communicate distress, women tend to think of her relationship with others and how it will affect them if the attempt was successful while making it, or it could be that they want an option to change their mind (https://www. verywellmind. com/gender-differences-in-suicide-methods-1067508).
As someone who struggled with suicidal ideation, I don't entirely agree with the male theory that the stereotype of being strong and masculine leads to more lethal deaths. I do agree with the notion that they have a harder time accepting failure but I think that has more to do with the pressure being able to feel useful and gain traction in society with the end goal of having a wife and family than anything else.
Dr. Warren Farrell puts it this way: "In love, when a man and woman divorce, a man is ten times as likely to commit suicide. And, when a woman dies, a husband is ten times as likely to commit suicide as she is when her husband dies."
warrenfarrell.com/.../
One final note: I realized this after I made the comment pointing out the change in definition of rape (at this point you haven't responded with anything so if you did sorry about that) but I made a mistake with the change to the rape definition I looked at the previous definition before the change.
I don't care. It should be considered illegal to rape your spouse. It's not okay to protect rapists by making their rape legal.
There is another problem with your "Rape is illegal so stop whinging" argument is that for a few weeks, and I don't care how you feel about abortion, in Missouri earlier this year, lawmakers implemented a law requiring women to submit to a pelvic exams during their consultation. Now here is what is wrong with that. Women are already forced by law to wait at least 72 hours after their consultation even though it is not medically necessary to wait and often, because they have jobs and it's a far way to travel (as there is only 1 abortion clinic in the state), they have to wait a whole week before they can make the time to come back. And the doctors who work at this clinic spoke out and said that the law was requiring them to act against their ethics, which is performing a medical procedure on a patient when it is not medically necessary. It is only medically necessary to perform a pelvic exam during the appointment where the abortion will be performed. The doctors explained that a pelvic exam performed 72 hours prior to the abortion doesn't provide them any information they can use for the abortion that the women are seeking, making it medically unnecessary and against their ethics to perform. Abortion clinics have already been targeted by anti-abortion lawmakers by implementing unnecessary standards which force them to close down but this goes too far.
Women cannot object to this unnecessary invasive pelvic exam (sticking equipment and fingers inside their vaginas) if they want to access the abortion that they want. They can say no, but then they won't be allowed to have their abortion. You cannot withhold something from someone, putting them in a difficult circumstance in order to get them to "consent" to you touching their bodies. It's like a man going in for a consultation at the only clinic in the state for neck surgery and then the doctor tells him he can't have the neck surgery unless he submits to a prostate exam, which is unrelated to the neck surgery. You should not be penalized for objecting to an invasive medically unnecessary procedure, with the penalty being having your access to a wanted medical procedure withheld. In the doctor's words, not mine, it is state sanctioned sexual assault. www.msnbc.com/.../new-missouri-rules-amount-to-state-sanctioned-sexual-assault-of-women-61522501794
I did not say feminists fought to criminalized rape against a man. I said they "fought successfully by starting the Rape is Rape campaign to change the definition of rape in the FBI Uniform Crime Report" to include rape against men. I'd appreciate it if you don't misunderstand what I say and then accuse me of being wrong when I am not. It's infuriating.
"No one knew that the girl was forced to lie until after Carter was sent to prison." What does have to do with anything? She was physically assaulted into lying about the rape by Carter by her mother's boyfriend. My point was a man conducted a scheme to accuse another man of raping a child to ruin his life because I am sick of the gender warfare aspect of discourse of false rape accusations. Stories of women falsely alleging rape is just hate-porn for misogynists. They don't respond with the same disgust when it's a man who falsely accuses another man of rape. Aurelias Marshall is an evil piece of shit and footage of him in court is on youtube. It has next to no views unlike the youtube videos about stories of women who lied about rape. And there is plenty of youtube comments that express hate and disgust at women as a whole.
Here are working links. commas got attached to the hyperlink and screwed it up but they are still there and legitimate cases of men alleging rape.
www.law.umich.edu/.../casedetail.aspx?caseid=3970
www.law.umich.edu/.../casedetail.aspx?caseid=5067
I don't want to delve into but Dr Christine Blasey Ford and Debra Ramirez are credible and 2 journalists have recently published a book about Brett Kavanaugh who essentially did a proper FBI investigation to corroborate their accusations. I'm not going to argue about it. If you want to look more into you do that but I am not getting into it with you. That's all I wanted to say.
I don't think that's what the believewomen campaign wanted to do. It wanted to change the culture from just not believing women by default to taking their accusations seriously. Presumption of innocence is granted when the accused go through a criminal trial. Good thing about false rape accusations is that they don't get very far.
webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/.../hors293.pdf
in the most detailed study ever conducted of sexual assault reports to police, undertaken for the British Home Office in the early 2000s, out of 216 complaints that were classified as false, only 126 had even gotten to the stage where the accuser lodged a formal complaint. Only 39 complainants named a suspect. Only six cases led to an arrest, and only two led to charges being brought before they were ultimately deemed false. (Here, as elsewhere, it has to be assumed that some unknown percentage of the cases classified as false actually involved real rapes; what they don’t involve is countless innocent men’s lives being ruined.)
Yes, there is a stigma to being accused of rape, even if you are acquitted, but there is also a stigma to being perceived as woman who falsely accused a man of rape. And I don't mean just in the court of public opinion. There are women who were convicted on charges relating to a rape accusation the court deemed false, only to later be exonerated when evidence emerged that proved they had in fact been raped. Here is one case I found in the national registry of exonerations database: www.law.umich.edu/.../casedetail.aspx?caseid=4474
And here is how it had affected her.
"Figueroa went public with her story in the hope that it would help other rape victims. She said she forgave the detectives who pressured her to recant the rape claim, although she added, “There was a point where I was just so upset with them. I felt they hurt me more than the rapist hurt me. He just came and left, but for six years, nobody believed me. I lost my family. I lost my freedom. I lost a little of my sanity.”
www.nytimes.com/.../...-assault-victims-lying.html
An 18 year old woman was raped by a man who broke into her apartment. Reported it to the police who didn't believe her. They pressured her to recant her rape claim and she faced consequences like fines, mandatory counselling for her lying and probation. Her "false" rape claim made it to the news and she lost friends. 2 years later the police arrested a serial rapist and found pictures he had taken of his victims, which included that 18 year old woman who could finally now be believed.
The article contains other cases of rape victims who suffered similar experiences.
You can't just feel sorry for men who face the stigma of being accused of rape and not give a shit about the stigma attached to be a "false" rape accuser.
And I'm going to be crude. I don't fucken care what fucken Warren Farrell thinks. He uses the fact that there is an Office of Research on Women's Health but not an Office of Research on Men's Health to support his claim that "men are more disposable than women #Menarejustasoppressedifnotmore".
That is not at all why there is an Office of Research on Women's Health. It's says so on their "about us" page that the reason they exist is because historically women were excluded from medical research trials because it was falsely assumed that women were fundamentally men with hormones and menstrual cycles that would complicate the results. They used men as participants and then falsely assumed the results could be generalized to women. The Office of Research on Women's Health was established the same year the Journal of the National Institute of Cancer published a study looking at the impact of diet on estrogen metabolism and it's effects on the cancer of the breasts and uterus. All of the subjects in that study were male. All. were. fucken. male. Oh yeah, menstrual cycles would complicate the results but not having a fucken uterus is not compromising at all.
So the Office of Research on Women's Health was established to restore the damage done by a gender inequality, a gender inequality that men benefited from at the expense of women. Warren Farrell would understand that if he actually researched and simply read the "about us" page. Either he is an idiot or he is purposely making up bullshit to appease the members of the men's rights movement. FUCK Warren Farrell for either being so fucken clueless or purposely deceitful.
This is why I hate modern feminism. The feminist movement was intended for equality but this is not equality. What it is is subjective men to the same oppressive mentality we went against years ago. That’s bullshit.
*subjecting
the point of this was to show the contrast and how wrong it is. Noone says we actually need to do ads like this with men in them. But showing what it would look like sure does feel uncomfortable in a good way, so that if we don't like to see men like this, women should not be put that way too.
On the other hand, men want to get the right to punch women whenever they want and some of them even stopped protecting women when they are in dangerous situations, because "if they want equality, they have it!!!"
This is exactly the same case, but the roles are reversed. Women want equality so they treat men like the men in the commercials treat women.
And now, I am not saying men cannot punch women and women can punch men. I am just saying what you say, that we can reach equality in other ways (without legalizing ANY violence), except you said that only feminists want to reach it by oppressing men like they oppressed women before. It is not true, men want to reach equality too, by getting the right to treat women badly in the ways that are so far acceptable for women but not men.
@Iwillfindyou21 I don't think anyone "wants" to reach equality by treating others badly because then it wouldn't be equality at all. I don't even think those are your own thoughts, right now you're just saying what the mainstream media keeps repeating over and over.
@Radi8rspringsdoc I am seeing this a lot in comments under articles about a woman being raped or punched by a man. Most of the replies are by men saying "if women want equality then they should let us punch them whenever we feel like it!" or "gender equality! If you are so independent, then why would you need somebody to protect you?" or "next time when I am going to see a woman who can't lift something heavy, I am going to watch and laugh. They wanted equality, after all"
I don't see how such comments are any less harmful than the things feminists say and think
The only time I have ever heard any man say that equality should involve permission to hit women is when women hit first unprovoked. If the guy’s just talking about hitting some random woman for no reason then you would have a point but if the girl starts shit and hits first he has every right to hit her back. We can’t act like raging bitches and still expect to be treated like delicate flowers. Just saying
If it’s just guys talking about punching or raping women, those are not sexists. They’re most likely incels, which are even worse.
I agree with @silvermoon84. If women initiate the fight (verbal, mental or physical), they should also prepare to face the consequences. Same goes for anyone alive, genders don't matter. If you don't harm anybody, you won't be harmed either. That would be equality which is clearly not what's happening.
The things you mention @Iwillfindyou21 what "most" men here are saying, they don't want equality either. They're the same as feminists, and both the groups are harmful for a peaceful equilibrium
@Radi8rspringsdoc I am not saying that it happens just here. And I am not saying that a woman should not be prepared for consequenses when she hits a man. I am just saying that we both should stop punching each other and punching everyone just to reach "equality" is stupid. Besides, just as men can get mad when women punch them with no reason, women have the right to get mad when men make misogynic jokes. It's not just women who act bad and later expect everyone to treat them like "delicate flowers"
@Iwillfindyou21 that's what I... meant when I typed my last comment. Did you not read it?
@Iwillfindyou21, Exactly! Both genders are equally guilty of disrespecting each other, that’s the point that I was trying to make. But we can’t address misogyny without also addressing misandry. Both are unnecessary evils.
@Purple_Summer I don't think men need to be shown how wrong a lot of this was nowadays. Some of that though is right, men were giving the right to tule the household by God, but the husband is supposed to respect his wife.
They're good to show how gender roles are ridiculous, but it doesn't promote equality.
Though they are funny they are still offensive same as if the originals ran today. We have learned from the past and no longer run such ads because we realize they were sexist and hurtful. Yet feminist and some feMENist dont seem to want to let wounds heal. They dont seem to want peaceful co existance. They dont want equality. They want vindication. They want men to feel as subjugated as women were once forced to feel. (in your grandma's day and beyond) It feels a lot like " you hit me so I hit you back" vs both parties saying violence isn't the answer. SMH
The originals were funnier, more clever and less sexist than the remakes.
The artist didn't do anything apart from switching the genders and removing the parts he has clearly deemed non-sexist just so they would fit his agenda better.
The original message was lost, and the new message is either just plain nonsensical or sexist.
All in all, I would give this artist a 1/10 for cleverness and creativity.
Wow. Never seen any of these. I know women were suppressed but did not realize it was to the point that it was mocked in the media too.
I personally preferred if they really change it, not just try to make a copy of it that some look cheaper (its fair as one is a painting yet I think could have looked less like a set
I think this is cute but could have been done better
Dont worry darling you didn't burn the beer
That ad is cute! <3 haha How is that ad sexist in any way?
Some of the others I find funny.
Some are obviously sexist, but that was 1950, things were different. I find it funny when young women get offended for something they werent even alive for.
Ohhhh God! the horror! washing dishes and cooking for your provider! the dread! the despair! lmao
Why would any Man want a woman to provide for them?
Most women want a provider
Not saying they can't, they shouldn't
"the future is female" wait but I thought feminism was FOR equality. are you saying it isn't. hmmmm something to think about sweetie.
I actually like some of the original ones.
Also not all of the original ones are really offensive or even sexist, but rather are just having their jokes misread or are just clear examples of targeted marketing which is no different back then then it is today.
You can also add your opinion below!
Holidays 
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Most Helpful Opinions