Super Bowl 2015

[Content note: cissexism, death]

I'm a slacker. While in years past, I have dedicated a LOT of time and attention to Super Bowl ads, I barely even watched this year. In fact, for the first quarter I was actually out on a walk and the second quarter I was straightening up around my house. I did catch the Katy Perry halftime show (shrug) and a few ads, however.

I love the Always "Like A Girl" ad (although I had seen it before.)



I'M NOT CRYING, YOU'RE CRYING.

It's pretty damn cool this would air during the Super Bowl, which historically has skewed to being out right hostile to women.

While I do love the overall message of this ad, I know it's an AD and it has to be remembered within that context. As Jilliam Berman wrote at the HuffPo, "The ad may be the first time a [menstrual] care product was advertised during the Super Bowl and is a prominent example of how companies trying to woo women customers are shifting advertising tactics...The idea for the touchy-feely ad campaign came from a common business exercise: analyzing consumer research."

So at the end of the day, it's trying to sell us something. I do support advertisements moving toward this empowering perspective, but we can't ever forget their main motive.

I also caught the pretty horrific "your kid could be DEAD, DEAD I SAY!!!!" spot from Nationwide.




I have a feeling someone was fired over this.

I mean, if their goal was to stir controversy and discussion, they did, but I'm not sure the overwhelming negative response was worth it. It's a pretty classic case study in how treading the line of "in poor taste" can  back fire on you.

Otherwise, I didn't really catch any ads that stuck with me. Was there something horribly offensive that I missed?

Please see the commenting policy before replying to this post.

Super Bowl 2014 Commercial Watch. With Tweets! And Gifs!

Let the annual tradition continue!

I'm going to do things a little different this year. Instead of waiting until the night is long over, I'm going to semi-live blog this thing. (Only semi, because I'm not going to post it as I go, I'll wait until the end.) But it will be much more stream of conscious style than usual. Plus, I'm much more likely to remember who the companies involved if I just write it all up now instead of trying to remember tomorrow.

Let me make sure I put this out there: I hate football. I really, truly do. It's just not my thing. But the Super Bowl is such a spectacle and its ads are a huge artifact of pop culture and are pretty influential and iconic, so I have to do this, ya know? Companies spend so much on their ads tonight and try to have the best one, so let's see what they have.

If the stream of consciousness thing ain't for you, I'm going to put my TL;DR comments above the cut. If you would actually like to see where my brain went during the game, then the stuff under the cut is made for you!

TL;DR: Overall, things weren't the worst this year. If anything I was absolutely underwhelmed. BUT there were still some distinct disappointments. VW's "Wings" ad included both a penis size and sexual harassment joke while totally ignoring women as engineers. How did at least one person in the production of that not say, "Dude, you gotta have a woman engineer get her wings." Axe brought in some racism and sexism with their "Peace: Make Love Not War" spot, which is nothing surprising for their brand. On the other hand, Goldiblox is awesome but I knew that. Coke actually did something interesting. And my old nemesis GoDaddy had something very different to offer, but no one believes they aren't the same old jerks.

Superbowl Sexism Watch 2013!

Ah yes, it is time for my 5th annual Superbowl advertisement sexism watch!

I am happy to say that I declare this year's situation to be...drum roll...STATUS QUO! By that, I mean that gender stereotypes were out in full force BUT there wasn't a single commercial which set us back 50 years. And there were actually a few which were kinda good. Kinda.

Same old stereotypes and problematic content:
-Go Daddy's smart + sexy ad. A hot girl is sexy. A nerdy dude is smart. Together, they equal Go Daddy with a lot of disgusting kissing noises. YAWN. BLAH. OVER IT. I mean...for Go Daddy, it was actually pretty mild. For life, it was annoying as hell. Plus, when would it EVER be a nerdy girl with a hot guy? (Hint: never.)

-Audi had a commercial where a teen is going to prom stag, but he takes his dad's car and he feels like such a bad ass that he storms in and kisses the prom queen. I know that people want to pass this kind of thing as romantic or whatever  but I will ALWAYS be uncomfortable with the "sweeping her off her feet" mentality because HOW DO YOU KNOW SHE WANTED SWEPT? Consent is a simple concept and there was none in that commercial. In a perfect world, there's a whole back story that we can't see, but let's be honest, if we don't see it, it doesn't exist. All we (and millions of teens everywhere) see is the story portrayed. At best, it's really problematic. At worst: a contributor to our rape culture.

-The Calvin Klein shiny, ripped dude in underwear caught my, ahem, attention. Ok, I can admit it's a little interesting to see a guy so heavily objectified during the Superbowl, but 1) I don't think we win by having men be objectified too and 2) when a dude is objectified, he's still portrayed as strong, active, athletic, and a human. Women are so often reduced to being passive, idle, dismembered bodies.

-Amy Poehler for Best Buy. It kills my soul to put her on the "same old" side of things because I love her more than I have words for. BUT while the commercial was hilarious, she was kiiiiiiiiiinda being a dumb blonde and that's not my favorite thing ever.

-The Coke race series of ads. The group of women are showgirls while the men are adventurers. Dumb. I mean, yes, the women won, but still. Come on. Plus, it's being criticized for being racist.

-Speaking of racism, what about the VW ad where the white guy is "happy" epitomized by his appropriation of a Rasta/Jamaican accent? WHAT THE HELL? VW, you're better than that.

Interesting takes:
-The Hyundai ad with The Flaming Lips...it was a dad parenting and having a great time with his kids (and The Flaming Lips.) Not bad. Not bad at all. (Hipsters, be damned! I don't care if you're upset that TFL are now "mainstream.")

-Toyota had an ad with Kaley Cuoco where she can apparently grant wishes and they work through what the family wants. It did have a bit of a fatphobic undercurrent to it, but when the little girl wished to be a princess, she became a bad ass warrior one, in a scene that could have been out of Braveheart.

-Jeep had a long RAH 'MERICA ad voiced over by Oprah. (What did that cost!?) I'm not really into the ad in general, but when they show an American soldier at the end, it's a woman of color. So they get points for that, at least.

Like I said, overall there wasn't as much blatant awfulness as usual, but there's certainly so much more progress to be made. At least I can chalk up Superbowl 2013 to being the year where I didn't audibly groan at my TV...at least, not too loud. Ok, I did. Whatever.

Super Bowl 46: A Shitty Gender Situation as Ever

So the culmination of the football season just happened...and, you know, there's a reason that the Super Bowl has its own tag here...while all other tags are much more general (like "education" or "sports.") It's because the Super Bowl is a yearly reminder that women just aren't that important.

This year was no exception. The whole thing went down in my hometown of Indianapolis. While I was really happy to have the eyes of the world on my old digs, I was epically disappointed that the advertisements are a case of same shit, different year. If an alien civilization had only access to Super Bowl commercials as artifacts of our way of life, they would find a pretty bleak picture of both men (sex driven meat-heads) and women (sexed up, throw away objects.)

Superbowl...

So last night I watched the Superbowl with three like minded individuals. Typically, there are ads in the Superbowl that I want to scream at. However, this year it was all around boring and stupid.

There was, of course, the Darth Vader Volkswagen ad that Ronald has been in love with. It was, by far, the best ad of the night. However, having seen the full version before the actual Superbowl, it took all the glory out of it. And...I still insist that Vader's a little girl.

That's not an insult. I think he's played by a little girl. Not a boy. FYI.

Anyway, everything else was pretty snooze worthy, which by all accounts, should be good news given the hatred that sports advertisements have typically produced in us around these parts.

All in all, the misogyny was most present through both a Pepsi Max and a Doritos ad that depicted violence against women. Random crap being thrown at them. Oh, and don't forget: Men are single minded morons. Ya know, standard tripe.

I was also really, really disappointed in the Groupon ads which both exploited the Tibetan culture and deforestation in the name of cheap Tibetan food and Brazilian waxes.

Ew.

Eh well, the whole experience was all around blah, save for the fabulous company I enjoyed. And to prevent talking more about Ben Roethlisberger, I'll simply refer to you to my previous thoughts on him. (Short version: ick.)

Yay Superbowl Time!

So last night was the Superbowl, one of the most fruitful times for feminist fodder. And the feminist world is abuzz about the ads this year.

I don't have to add much. The best points have already been made. And interestingly, the Focus on the Family ad was super blah. (I still insist that the problem is how CBS went about this whole thing and not the content itself.)

But what I will add is that it seems advertising companies responded to the outcry from last year which was one of the raunchiest and most offensive Superbowls I've seen ad wise. (Some may argue that Janet's boob was the raunchiest thing to happen in a Superbowl, but I didn't mind that as much...so whatev.) Point is that the message seems to be, "Ok, you don't like it when we strip women and have them shake their asses and shower for men's pleasure. Prefer not to have *that* form of misogyny? COOL. We'll give you another form: The type that shows what wimps the men are who care about the feelings and societal position of women. You don't wanna be THAT guy do you? GOOD. Now buy our shit and keep your balls."

SIGH.

At least some of us know men who really do care about what women think and feel and experience in life. And they are not beaten down or emasculated. They are actually intelligent, respectable individuals, capable of looking beyond their own experience.

CBS and the Anti Choice Ad

So, the feminist blogosphere is all a-buzz about the Superbowl advertisement which will be telling the story of how Tim Tebow's mother chose* life and now her son is an amazing football star and blah, blah, blah. The real problem, feminist bloggers have asserted over and over again, is that CBS previously held the position of disallowing "advocacy ads" but suddenly changed their position and allowed this spot. In fact, they are a lot more intimately involved with this adverstisement than it first appeared. (Keep in mind that they've denied PETA, MoveOn.org, and The United Church of Christ in the past, and a gay dating website this year.)

Naturally, I found this annoying, so when I saw friends posting a link on Facebook for people to write to CBS standing up against this choice, I sent the email and also posted the link. Then the opposition on Facebook started to speak up...even though the article I posted said:

"CBS has decided to air an anti-abortion ad during the Super Bowl, despite years of refusing to run "advocacy ads" by progressive groups. Whatever your opinions, the Super Bowl is not the time or place for an abortion debate. Please take a stand with me and go here: www.amplifyyourvoice.org/SuperBowl"

Here's what the central thesis of the outcry against this posting was...followed by my ideas on why these theses are foolish.

1) CBS can air the commercials of anyone who is willing to pay. It's their decision.

What's wrong with this idea is that it supposes that CBS is simply catering to the money provided to pay for the ad (which is a reported $3 million spent by Focus on the Family. Think what $3 million could have done if it was actually spent helping women...) However, the fact of the matter is that in the past CBS has denied the groups I mentioned above the opportunity to air their advertisements. Was their money not as good? Was CBS some different kind of business then that didn't care about profits? CBS is clearly picking and choosing when and when not to air ads and promoting a particular agenda over others. That's what the problem is.

2) CBS is a business and will act in their best interests...

I quote, "the Superbowl has a bigger demographic of Christian families [than] leftist feminists." This argument rests on the premise that CBS is just being smart and catering to the interests and beliefs of the people who watch the Superbowl. (Now I might actually believe this when it comes to vetoing material they might see as damaging to their image, like...oh...say tons of advertisements with scantily clad women in them. But that's not what CBS is doing, is it? They're actually specifically promoting certain material, but I digress.)

I can hardly wait to address everything that is wrong with this perspective:
A) First of all, are you really suggesting that someone cannot be both a leftist feminist and a Christian? Or be pro-choice and a Christian?
B) If we are going to agree that the majority of people who watch the Superbowl are "Christian families," (and let's go with the assumption that a majority of them are already anti choice) then do they REALLY need an advertisement extolling the virtues of not getting abortions? I thought advertisements were to persuade someone to buy a certain product, believe something, or do something specific, that they might not otherwise do. Then isn't the Superbowl an incredibly silly, and perhaps even inappropriate place to air this? I mean, there aren't public service announcements telling people to breathe air, for a reason. Hmm...something just isn't adding up.
C) Furthermore, if we're going to start talking about the demographic that actually watches the Superbowl, (and let's continue with the theme of extremely sweeping generalizations) then couldn't we say that the majority of people watching the Superbowl are actually most likely MALE and therefore have no legal say in the actual decision to carry a baby to term or not (according to legal precedent.) Doesn't this make this an even more foolish choice as far as catering to your demographics go? Unless, maybe, you have a certain agenda and you want to promote a very specific viewpoint. Hmm again...

3)...It's not like they're the government, after all!

This follow up to #2 is under the argument that CBS can cater to their audience while the government would have to be more diplomatic to all viewpoints and people. This is laughable, because it rests on the premise that the government does treat all people fairly. (Because, you know, access to education and legal marriage, to name a few, are the same for ALL people, right?) But beyond that, I don't think that CBS is like the government, or should be held to a government like standard...but I do think that the media holds a special place in American society, CBS included. They are part of the long standing tradition of at least attempting to be partial and unbiased. (Even though we usually know which way each media source slants.) It's just sad to me when the media is so incredibly transparent about its political agenda and isolates already marginalized groups.

So while I'm on the topic...I thought I'd mention the Sarah and Bristol Palin In Touch magazine cover, that proudly declares they chose* life. Of course, I would wager that most women who do choose* to have their babies don't regret their decisions and love their babies and would never come out and say "I wish I had an abortion." On the other hand, however, I know there are women who also do not regret their abortions, despite the fact that we are told that all women who have them do. Just some food for thought.

Point is they had a choice...

*Special emphasis on this particular word :)

What Superbowl Ads Taught Me...

1) As a woman, it's just best for me to shut the hell up. Thanks, Mr. Potato Head and Bridgestone tires!
2) As a man, your first priority is ripping a sexy woman's clothes off, followed closely by getting tons of money, and destroying authority. Thanks, Doritos!
3) Another important thing for men includes watching Danica Patrick shower 6 times, and hey, for fun, throw in another woman. Thanks, GoDaddy.com!
4) There could be a court hearing prosecuting women for having ridiculously large implants. In this hearing, Danica Patrick will admit to the accusation of enhancements, but only on her website! And a random bimbo will partially take off her top. Thanks again, GoDaddy.com!
5) Danica Patrick is the biggest tool.
6) Misogyny is funny and cool and must be REALLY effective in selling tires, chips, and domain space, right?