Still think intent doesn't matter ?

If you recall about a month ago I did a post on an ad featuring images of a fat guy being used to sell ad space. Well my problem with the ad was that the images were used in a "hey hurry up and buy this ad space before this fat guy takes all his clothes off" context. (Also check out Renee's chime in on it.) Pretty messed up right? It would seem that others don't think so.

A week or so after I posted on this ad campaign the folks over at Sociological Images weighed in on it. The person that wrote that post seems to recognize the fat hatred (although I think they went through a bit of length to keep it gender neutral, lengths I doubt would have been taken if the featured a fat woman but that's another story) but were a few that thought otherwise:

Traditional attitudes to male and female fatness are not the same (obviously). The male beer belly is a symbol of strength, appetite and self-reliance (because, of course, only unmanly men care about their appearance), and the idea that it is unhealthy and unattractive reinforces that self-reliance message. This model is clearly not supposed to be ashamed of his body.(Emphasis mine.)

If only it were that simple.

Okay while I think its great that that model is not ashamed of his body I think the problem here isn't what he thinks about his body but the manner in which the ad agency chose to use it.

Take Chris Farley. If he were alive today and you asked him if he was ashamed of his size I bet you would get a resounding no. However I dare you to prove that "its funny because he's fat" had nothing to do with the appeal he had with fans during his relatively short career. Let's take someone that current. Kevin James. You really think that his material would be great if he were the same size as say Adam Sandler? Oh he could be but I bet you his material would very different.

And the reason those things work the way they do is because society at large thinks that fat is disgusting and unattractive but can be quite funny when used "properly". If that ad he used an image of a guy that's more conventionally attractive the ad space may have still sold (and possibly still won an award) but I think the reasoning would have been very different. My money says if he were conventionally attractive the tipping point would have been homophobia rather than fat hatred (which may have been counted by an effort to keep the image up by those who are attracted to men). I mean think about it like it were Hooters. More than likely most of the women that work at Hooters restaurants probably don't think they are being objectified but when you really get down to it why do the owners/managers hire those women? To show off their bodies.

Its times like this I believe intent matters and in this case I believe it was the intent of the folks who ran that ad campaign to use that man's image in the sense of, "Come on buy this ad space. You don't want that guy to take all of his clothes off do you?"

"Doofy Husbands"

Sarah Haskins of Target Women fame has a video up about Doofy Husbands. As usual, it is absolutely hilarious. And, it touches on an interesting figure in pop culture: The incompetent, unintelligent, overweight man, who can hardly manage his own life without the help of his overly-responsible and under-appreciated wife. Danny wrote a recent post about fatphobia directed at fat men in particular that touches on this current trend (a long-lasting one too, I might add) in pop culture and every day life.

Some might find it questionable how this particular trend-- the one that plays on stereotypes and not only perpetuates, but encourages the idea that men are stupid and worthless-- has anything to do with advertisements that market to women in a way that perpetuates and encourages poor body image and low self esteem (which is the basis for Target Women).

Well, that's because it kind of doesn't have anything to do with women-- other than the fact that without women, these men would probably be dead or living in a box somewhere. Or so we're led to believe.

There's the standard argument that this portrayal is rooted in misogyny. How could it be, for this particular trend? Well, women are supposed to work extra hard and accept their husbands for just what they are... or, they don't mind being under-appreciated... or... no, I can't find an actual argument that makes any kind of sense. I actually thought I was going to be able to.

Anyway, needless to say, I disagree. But the reason why I disagree is not only because the trend is actually something negative about men, and not having much of anything to do with women, it is overshadowed by what I think is more relevant:

It seems as though the writers of these commercials and television shows like King of Queens or Home Improvement (among so many countless others) are writing these female characters as Smart & Capable Woman vs. Slow & Incompetent Man in order to make up for all of the past roles women were given where they were constantly portrayed as weak, helpless, and usually unintelligent. Their version of responding to the feminist movement. Instead of writing leading male and female characters who both have strengths and weaknesses that are equally celebrated and also made fun of in the name of humor, they do the opposite and create an illusion that women are actually the rulers of the world, only in our own little under-appreciated and uncompensated mini-world where the men actually end up getting all the credit, and we stand back, proud of ourselves, shaking our heads and chuckling about the way it all turned out.

It's not helping either gender with breaking out of harmful stereotypes and unrealistic expectations based on our gender. It's only creating new ones where women rule the world, and men are just humble, dumb servants. It obfuscates the point, which is that we should all be treated equally and not judged on our gender alone. Women don't need overcompensation for past oppressive media representations. We don't need to switch roles and have power instead. And when it comes to media, we just need to be accurately and respectfully portrayed.

Really, that's all.

Painting men to be lazy, fat idiots, homely, and otherwise undesirable doesn't do any justice to anyone. It takes the negative representation off of women and places it, instead, on men. The goal of feminism is not for women to someday take over the world; it's to fight for the equality of men and women, in a society where women are currently, in general, at a disadvantage to men.

Furthermore, as a writer for any of these shows, do you ever notice how in the attempt to make women look powerful and intelligent, you're still perpetuating unrealistic expectations of women? While the woman is supposedly all-knowing, capable, and "really" the head of the household, they are still stick-thin, conventionally attractive, and doting mothers? Are we still not able to show an average-looking female that we can take seriously on television? While non-"conventionally attractive" men are still frequently portrayed as stupid, unattractive, and unmasculine, there are still roles available for overweight, homely, male actors where their characters are meant to be taken seriously and respected.

It's just... ridiculous. All across the board. And it's still popular! I don't understand. There isn't a person alive who shouldn't have a problem with this. I guess it's easier to just turn off criticism and laugh.