| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 236.1 | | QUARK::LIONEL | We all live in a yellow subroutine | Wed Jun 08 1988 23:43 | 12 |
| Male-bashing is "in" now on TV, haven't you noticed? All those
commercials that, in days gone by would show a helpless woman being
"rescued" by a man, are now showing the reverse - the klutz man being
upstaged by the clever woman.
As for the soaps, they are only showing what their audience wants to
see.
Unfortunately, on TV as in other places, folks don't seem to recognize
that male-bashing is just as wrong as female-bashing.
Steve
|
| 236.2 | Well, I don't think they're so bad | FSLENG::HEFFERN | we make it harder than it has to be | Thu Jun 09 1988 01:25 | 22 |
| Well, I guess I have to agree a bit on the commercials...but I do
think that on daytime tv (ok, the soaps) it's split pretty evenly.
There's always some poor Joe that has fallen hopelessly over the
town's number one bitch. He's forever trying to marry her and she'll
always take him for what she can. Or how about all the poor nice
men that wind up duped into marrying someone who's carrying his
best friend's, or brother's baby? etc....
You know, it's kind of curious. This and the "other" conference
are there to discuss different issues and points of view pertaining
to our sex. Instead, they seem to be filled with topics regarding
the other sex. We take a subject and bash at what the other sex
thinks and feels about it. Or opinions will inevitably be what
we perceive the other sex thinks and feels. (Am I being clear
enough, having tough time with wording, being no literary giant).
The topics are almost always Male vs Female. They don't start
out that way if you scan the directory, but they all end up that
way. Always the battle lines drawn. (sigh).
cj *->
|
| 236.5 | | QUARK::LIONEL | We all live in a yellow subroutine | Thu Jun 09 1988 10:00 | 27 |
| Re: .2
I agree that "battle-lines" seem to be drawn everywhere - sometimes
deliberately, often accidentally. I don't understand why this should
be.
But it seems natural to me that, for many of us anyway, the opposite
sex is a very important factor in our lives, so we talk about them
and their influence on us. (The previous sentence is intended to
apply to either men or women.)
So it should not be surprising that most of the topics here relate
to how women affect men. I don't see anything wrong with this and
encourage full discussion and participation from everyone, men and
women.
Back to the original topic - I can't really comment on the soaps
because it's been so long since I've seen them. But from what I do
pick up, it seems that the "evil" characters in soaps tend to be
female more often than male - the men who are "naughty" are often
portrayed as sexually desireable. This fits with the majority
audience, women, who are more likely to not want to see a lot of
competition on the screen. Soaps are escapist fantasies. (Men
have their escapist fantasies too - they just are on later in the
day!)
Steve
|
| 236.6 | If TV's a reflection of society, we're in trouble. | TSECAD::HEALY | Life is perfectly fair. | Thu Jun 09 1988 18:45 | 19 |
|
Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes! Thank you for bringing this up. I
have been noticing this for quite a while. It seems to be a
trend which is still on the increase. This prevails in shows
and in commercials. Men are the dumb-*ss incompetent fools
and the rational, self-assured, level-headed women out there
are always having to set us straight. Women using violence
against men is also much more common nowadays and is a lot
more excepted.
The only thing that useless box is good for is the 7 pm news.
People are so used to TV and so conditioned by it they have
consciously forgotten just how bad it really is! Look at the
percentage of commercial time versus program time. Just one
example.
Fred Friendly, a long time TV executive, put it aptly:
"TV makes so much money being bad, it can't afford to be good."
MATT
|
| 236.7 | | QUARK::LIONEL | We all live in a yellow subroutine | Fri Jun 10 1988 12:20 | 5 |
| I'll just remind folks that the "dumb men, smart women" image is
the reverse of what was portrayed on TV in the 50's and 60's.
But what about "two wrongs don't make a right"?
Steve
|
| 236.8 | assertiveness on television | XCELR8::POLLITZ | | Sat Jun 11 1988 20:17 | 21 |
| re .0 "Has anyone given notice to the fact that 99.9 percent
of daytime television is giving men a bad image?"
It is highly improbable that male bashing on TV can
possibly be as high as you state.
In my viewing experience I believe that there exists a
balanced amount of M/F bashing. I think that we just
are more alert to the extent of bashing that is going
on, and are taking notice of a trend toward (well, against)
men.
It is quite possible that what we are seeing is Women
that are simply being assertive. Assertiveness is a
most healthy human quality and "speaking up" improves
communication between us all.
So is it bashing or assertiveness? I contend that it's
much more of the latter.
Russ P.
|
| 236.10 | | TSECAD::HEALY | Life is perfectly fair. | Mon Jun 13 1988 16:25 | 10 |
|
Russ, if you can afford a sex change operation - go for it!
MATT
|
| 236.11 | Dr Russ at your service | MCIS2::POLLITZ | | Mon Jun 13 1988 17:09 | 4 |
| Matt, if you can afford a lobotomy, I have a scalpel. And
even if you can't afford one ...
:-) Russ
|
| 236.12 | Woman's issues are talking | MPGS::POLLAN | | Mon Jun 13 1988 20:06 | 19 |
|
Look this perfectly well considered subject has gone to each other
being at eachother's throats. Now cut it out. Let's face it one
can deny that sexism cuts both ways but they could all so believe
the moon is green cheese. To not see the man in the moon when
he is straight in your face is your problem. It is as if to say
that there is no rascism from non-whites to whites. come on.
Of course there is but it is not as obvious. There is no doubt
that some woman and woman in general have male negative image
and that it is a trend in advertising to cator to the woman.
It used to cator to the men. But just stay home and watch any
daytime talk show and men are shoved around like a sack of potatoes.
The name of this note .0 was based on a Sat. nite livve skit that
hit the nail on the head. If you write a mans self help book,or
how to get your man a better orgasm,or how to get your woman to
do more in the bed room or HOW TO PICK UP THE LADIES you are not
going to sell it because you won't make it on People Are Talking.
Is it taboo to learn how to get more dates?
|
| 236.13 | | AXEL::FOLEY | Rebel without a Clue | Tue Jun 14 1988 12:05 | 9 |
|
Geez, and to think I got beat up, deleted, and flamed at for saying
less... Oh well, back to the topic at hand...
My opinion is that we all bash each other.. Just not at the
same time.. And some do it more than others.. :-)
mike
|
| 236.14 | | HANDY::MALLETT | Situation hopeless but not serious | Wed Jun 15 1988 17:54 | 73 |
| re: the last few
I don't think anyone is saying that there's no reverse sexism
(in TV or elsewhere). I think Russ is questioning the notion
of "99.9%" bad males in daytime TV. I agree. Are more males
cast in a negative light today than 20 years ago? Probably, but
I'd bet big bucks that it's much closer to 50/50 than 99.9/0.1
Why such an assertion should prompt a reply about a sex change is
beyond me.
re: .12
� Now cut it out
Hear! Hear!
� There is no doubt that some woman and woman in general have male
� negative image
Au contraire. I have a great deal of doubt that women *in general*
have such a negative image. Yes, some do; probably more do than
in times past. However, I'd hazard a guess that even in these
"enlightened" times, far more men have a negative image of women
(e.g. "weak", "illogical", etc.) than vice versa. Hopefully we're
all beginning to learn that these stereotypical images are serving
us none too well.
Also I think the point (Russ's?) was well-taken that, at least to
some degree, it's a matter of perception. Who even thought about
*reverse* discrimination of any kind until the initial discrimination
became an issue?
� and that it is a trend in advertising to cator to the woman.
� It used to cator to the men.
I think there is a *greater* trend to target women in advertising
than in the past but, to be sure, the advertising world still
works on men as well. In terms of targeting women, I'd say that's
a pretty smart move on the part of advertising execs (who are, BTW,
still by and large men); given that more women are in the work force
and have money to spend. . .
� But just stay home and watch any daytime talk show and men are shoved
� around like a sack of potatoes.
The most recent daytime talk show I saw was about physical abuse
in marriage - women beating up on men. I've also seen shows (well,
parts of shows - daytime talk shows just aren't my cup of tea) on
men in alternative marriages (she works, he stays home) which cast
men in a very favorable light. Among other things, the proliferation
of daytime talk shows is a fairly recent development and one that
is more or less concurrent with the Women's movement. Since
controversy and/or the unusual is the bread and butter of these
shows, it's not too surprising that sexism is a favorite topic;
it's controversial and that draws viewers. It's not so much
the topic per se that gets one on the talk shows - it's how
hot that topic is. F'rinstance AIDS, Satanism, neo-Naziism,
and child abuse are all hot topics these days; Phyllis Schlafly's
man-at-work-woman-in-the-home ideas just aren't selling well
so she's not on as much.
� If you write a mans self help book. . .you are not going to
� sell it because you won't make it on People Are Talking.
I think it's more a matter of not getting on PAT because the book
isn't selling. Again, these shows are looking to sell (advertising
time); advertisers want to know that the show (or their ad) will
be viewed and if my book isn't selling, how will I draw viewers?
Steve
|