Video: Trojan Bashing Men?
Marc Rudov Debates Lis Wiehl
on
FNC’s Your World with Neil Cavuto: 06.22.07
“Does Trojan’s ‘Evolve’ Commercial Bash Men?”
(disable your browser’s smooth scrolling and auto-scrolling,
if you are experiencing difficulty voting at FoxFan.com)
=======================
Watch Neil Read the Viewer Mail
Windows Media Player | Everything Else
| More from Marc H. Rudov
Stumble It!
June 22nd, 2007 at 6:07 pm
i bow to the marcmeister. last week i said i thought you were trimmed. this week, you smoked her. it wasn’t even close. i do believe you may be getting under her skin. does this contract lock her in as well as you?
also, i notice that liberals, as a rule, want to smile alot and lighten things up……..when they are getting their socks rocked. wiehl is no exception. when i see that, i KNOW you are winning the debate.
June 22nd, 2007 at 7:01 pm
To All:
If you feel that I won the debate with Lis Wiehl, please vote at http://www.FoxFan.com (scroll halfway down the page, right-hand column).
It is critical to show FNC — by watching and voting — how you feel about these issues. The more participation you exhibit, the more FNC will want to continue these debates, the more the world will see that men are not taking feminarcissism anymore
Thank you,
Marc Rudov
June 22nd, 2007 at 11:22 pm
DadWith2Girls,
My ex-wife is easier to predict than you are. Based on the letters I am receiving from around the world, I hit a homerun in this debate. Frankly, I don’t think you watched it.
June 23rd, 2007 at 7:11 am
Marc you did great. I tried to vote and can’t using either fire fox or Explorer browsers anyone else having a problem voting?
June 23rd, 2007 at 7:16 am
Joi, yes, same problem here when I tried to vote. Maybe wait a while and try again.
June 23rd, 2007 at 7:30 am
I would love to see a comporeable women as pigs commercial…
Then just laugh it off and say ” come on liz…lighten up..its just an ad…aint it funny????”
June 23rd, 2007 at 7:42 am
marc.. you keep winning like this, and you are going to rouse the feminist mobs..
I can’t wait!!!!
June 23rd, 2007 at 8:25 am
In the debate, I made the point about reshooting the commercial with the women as pigs and their lawyers as vultures. Lis thinks my perspective is much ado about nothing — because she’s never seen an anti-female commercial in her adult life.
Like you, I had trouble accessing all FoxNews.com polls and videos today (06.23.07). I had to turn off smooth scrolling and auto-scrolling in both browsers to succeed.
I recommend sending your complaints to foxnewsonline@foxnews.com
June 23rd, 2007 at 9:40 am
Thanks Marc it worked when I turn off smooth scrolling and auto-scrolling with fire fox.
Although you are winning at 55% it is sad that 45% thought it was okay.
June 23rd, 2007 at 1:29 pm
My Letter to Cavuto:
Marc is correct.
This advertisement is blatantly sexist and paints men as pigs and predators.
I am not a pig, nor a predator.
In reality – it is WOMEN who are users, predators, and pigs – basically looking for Mr. Right (carefully checking his bank account, wallent, and credit history) to ensure themselves the easiest possible life….and jetising “Mr. Right” when things go wrong, he loses his job (due to outsourcing or downsizing), or she feels “unfullfilled”.
This ad could not survive if they painted women as users, skanks, disease ridden gold diggers – which many, many are. But let’s see them air something like that and see how it goes!!
…..
I also am sending a letter to Trojan.
June 23rd, 2007 at 3:44 pm
Neil Cavuto wants to hear from you, after you vote at http://www.FoxFan.com. He wants to know why you voted as you did.
Please send Neil an e-mail to cavuto@foxnews.com
June 23rd, 2007 at 5:51 pm
I thought Marc won, but could have invited Lis to speak a bit more, as he did so skillfully on previous encounters.
June 23rd, 2007 at 6:59 pm
Here is my letter…
Hello Mr. Neil Cavuto,
I voted for Marc H. Rudov because on the issue regarding “Does Trojan’s ‘Evolve’ Commercial Bash Men?,” he is correct. Everything Marc said is true and correct.
This is far more than an issue of simply portraying men as pigs to sell condoms. This is an issue regarding the way men are treated and portrayed in today’s popular culture.
Two books I recommend which are able to explain the extent of mens situation far better than I ever could are Spreading Misandry, and Legalizing Misandry, by McGill-Queen’s University Press.
http://mqup.mcgill.ca/book.php?bookid=1323
http://mqup.mcgill.ca/book.php?bookid=1966
Thank you for your time and consideration in reading my email.
God Bless
June 24th, 2007 at 4:56 am
Did you have to bring God into it, Joi? The co-author of Spreading Misandry is a religious person, but she keeps it to herself, arguing the issues!
‘Have a nice day’ would have sufficed.
Who are you to bestow God’s blessings upon someone? … Jesus?
References to God on men’s news websites (MND) sound so pagan, they detract from any legitimate points being made.
Freaks!
June 24th, 2007 at 6:30 am
Everyone say a prayer for ‘tom of covent garden’. Maybe he’ll learn to stop hating.
June 24th, 2007 at 9:36 am
As usual, something I publish on MND spawns microeditorials, from people who don’t write their own articles, and devolves into a string of personal attacks.
What does any of this garbage have to do with Trojan bashing men?
If you have nothing of substance to add, please read a book.
June 24th, 2007 at 9:49 am
I’m sorry Marc. It wasn’t my intention to write a micro-editorial.
June 24th, 2007 at 10:29 am
Joi,
In my opinion, you did not write a microeditorial — you reprinted your excellent letter to Cavuto. But, I have now written 60 articles and published most of them on MND. Typically, people feel the need to rewrite my articles and give ultralengthy editorials on them, and bash each other and often me, in the comments section — not the purpose of a comments section.
In the future, I hope that you will recommend my books to Cavuto, on whose show I appear every week, as freely as you recommended the books of others. Thanx.
June 24th, 2007 at 1:58 pm
Squiggy, while you all are at bible-bashing practice, I’ll be conducting scientific gender research, to get a few straight answers. Religions spew symbolic patriarchal fairytales and are therefor, bad for men – therefor I HATE religion. HATE, HATE, HATE, HATE!
Have a nice day.
June 24th, 2007 at 2:24 pm
tom of covent garden….If you were to study gender in earnest, than you would realise there are certain subtle differences in the way men and women express themselves…
youre style of communication, and choice of words is very feminine…
As freud would ask…
Do you represent youreself as a man because of a deep seated penis envy???
June 24th, 2007 at 4:31 pm
Scottkirk, again, you attempt to feminize the enemies of anti-feminism. This is a tactic used in times of war, by anti-feminist propoganda machines, like the Allies, Nazis and Fascists.
If you feminize the enemy (other men), it makes killing seem a more natural thing for ‘real’ men to do, and have done to them. Not very pro-male.
On the question of the subtly different ways males and females express themselves, I recommend Men and Women in Interaction: Reconsidering the Differences (Aries, E. 1996, Oxford University Press). It would suggest your tangential interjections are an attempt to assert dominance – a masculine trait indeed, but no more tangential (and masculine) than my attempt to come on to an anti-feminist website and take on the anti-feminists, with logic.
You quote Freud, who though popular, does not feature highly on Science-based reading lists, as he was speculating most of the time, and addicted to cocaine.
I’ve been carrying out experiments on the streets of London , speaking to hundreds of people for the last ten days, finding broad acceptance and approval for feminism. There are very few victim-masculinists or anti-feminists out there, apart from the occasional Bible/Quran-reading flagellators. We have moved on.
June 24th, 2007 at 4:34 pm
Roger said:
“In reality – it is WOMEN who are users, predators, and pigs – basically looking for Mr. Right (carefully checking his bank account, wallent, and credit history) to ensure themselves the easiest possible life….and jetising “Mr. Right” when things go wrong, he loses his job (due to outsourcing or downsizing), or she feels “unfullfilled”.”
Hello Roger,
I appreciate your point but I’m going to raise it up a notch if you don’t mind:
The point of the commercial was the men were “pigs” for looking for easy sex at a bar without having a condom on hand. But… what does that say about the person who hangs around with pigs? In the old days, nice girls didn’t hang around at bars and have sex with strangers condom or no…
On the contrary Roger: What gets under upper-middle class blue stater women’s skin is that it’s more difficult for them to nab a decent man today using the old passive-aggressive game. If she hangs out in a bar putting her wares out, it’s more likely that “pigs” will come for them than princes ready to put their W-2 on display.
After generations of feminism, such women can’t stop having children for “deadbeats” and for losers and sometimes, yes, even psychopaths. Much of the reason, Marc and all, is that the decent men really ARE using protection or just not sleeping around.
The system works as follows: It assumes that women who are whorish tarts will sleep around with men who are sloppy (have sex without a condom) and hang out at bars but… will quickly cough up thousands each month to make the whole feminista utopia work. Sound plausible?
Of course, we don’t want to buy into the image that all these men are “deadbeats” but in the cases where they are, most women carefully chose to make each of these individual decisions:
1) Wait around for these losers.
2) Slept with them (without protection)
3) Gestated the child to term (9 months to think about it.)
4) Kept the child in an awful situation rather than put it up for adoption.
5) Pursue the loser for “child support” rather than learn from the experience, buckle down, and find a decent man to have future children with.
Of course, this is assuming she doesn’t legally “relinquish” the child (abandon it) because so many are winding up dead in a dumpster (thousands now total EACH YEAR.)
Pigs are beautiful by comparison. Oink oink!
I can hardly wait to watch Marc’s segment and will comment (probably positively) but the wife is nagging me to relinquish the computer. Later…
June 24th, 2007 at 4:42 pm
DadWith2Girls wrote: “You had an opportunity to debate the lack of reliable male birth control options, and the conspiracy in Big Pharma against making it happen.”
Is this presumptive comment based on your vast TV experience?
Why don’t you explain to all of us without TV experience what happens when you veer off-topic in a TV debate, when you have a finite amount of time to make a specific point and the producers and host expect you to stay on-topic.
Of course, you don’t know. So, let me disabuse you: you’d get bounced off the air and never invited back. Last week, O’Reilly asked a female guest why the far-left is distancing itself from Hillary Clinton. She had her own agenda and began talking about George Bush. He asked her again. Same answer. O’Reilly cut her mic and threw her off the air. She’ll never get invited back.
I have a weekly gig because I know how things work and am smart enough to understand that I am a GUEST, not the host. You will learn more by listening and observing than by pontificating without experience or knowledge.
I am known all over the world because I go on international TV with my views, face, and name. I debate a former federal prosecutor and subject myself to a poll and the scrutiny of FNC’s top brass. More people are hearing the man’s point of view than ever before, and I am proud of that. Yet, you come onto MND to criticize me behind the cowardly comfort of anonymity. Use your head.
June 24th, 2007 at 6:27 pm
I wonder why Marc Rudov is on an anti-feminist website, like MND in the first place. Mensactivism seems far less rabidly anti-feminist, and less religious also. Marc Rudov is too credible for this website, the way its heading. I appreciate the men’s news issues MND raises, but the religious pro-patriarchy polemic is very scary, and seems to predominate of late.
If Marc is trying to change the anti-feminist course of MND, it will be interesting to see if he manages it.
June 24th, 2007 at 8:08 pm
tom..penis envy must be a hard row to hoe…..
June 24th, 2007 at 8:14 pm
Yes. there should have been a Miner 49er next to each pig.
June 24th, 2007 at 9:02 pm
just hold her steady marc…youre getting some serious exposure..
June 24th, 2007 at 10:14 pm
DadWith2Girls,
You say to Marc, “There is NO-THING personal that any commentator has in relation to who you actually are, as a man/writer/symbol.”
Wrong. This has been very personal. Read the comments again, especially your own. YOUR tone is patronizing. “NO-THING personal”???
You suggest the price Marc must pay for his success is that he accepts becoming a “brand”, and that he is now a “commodity”. As Marc’s self-proclaimed “MRA comrade”, what PRICE are you paying? What “experience” do you have? What are YOU currently doing for the cause?
June 25th, 2007 at 5:39 am
Scottkirk jingoistically persists in attempting to feminize the enemies of anti-feminism. It’s like being in a time-warp.
DadWith2Girls attempts to exact his virtual patriarchy upon Kate M. – the first openly female poster I’ve read on these pages – by telling her she is dismissed.
DadWith2Girls, along with Thurston861, cite FIGHT CLUB as a template or source of enlightenment visa vie the male discourse!
It’s all so crap.
June 25th, 2007 at 7:35 am
My email to Neil:
“Rudov won; Wiehsel had no legs to stand on. As a male, I was offended by that commercial the very first time I saw it. The message is understood and is praise-worthy, the delivery is offensive and insulting.
In my circles, we have a little test known as gender reversal. Mr. Cavuto, reverse the gender in this commercial and show the women in that bar as less than human. Watch the sparks fly! Ask Wiehsel what she would think of such a commercial.”
As for you guys that want to tell Marc what to do: Hey! This is his time in the sun. He earned it. Be thankful that he is spreading OUR message in a medium that rarely allows our voices to be heard. Gift horse ‘n all that, ya know?
As for the religious war, take it somewhere else. From what I’ve seen of religious MRAs, they only want to turn the clock back and that’s not going to work. Pandora’s box is open and there’s no turning back.
June 25th, 2007 at 10:19 am
90% of the battle is won just getting the issue aired, even if just for 3 minutes. Almost everyone is going to form their impressions before the clip of the ad even ended.
Having bought this brand in the past, I was disappointed that some of my money was used to produce this BS, and there was nothing I could do about it except not commit the same mistake in the future. So, my one little quibble would be that Marc could have gone a step further and asked for an unequivocal apology from the manufacturer. That’s where the pressure should be focused. I’m guessing only a tiny percentage of their sales results from bathroom vending machines and bar pick-up scenarios. Perhaps the ad is thought to work because a significant fraction of sales are to women at the grocery store who for some reason can’t/don’t use other methods. Anybody know, or is this proprietary info?
I was also somewhat surprised Liz didn’t challenge the precept that women are responsible for contraception. I suppose none of those babes populating the bar could have possibly had an STD, which used to be condoms’ other big selling point to men…
June 25th, 2007 at 12:08 pm
DadWith2Girls,
WARNING
You have no power or right to dismiss anyone here. KateM is free to express her views. She doesn’t offend anyone, intentionally or unintentionally. I like to hear from reasonable, male-loving women.
If you continue your diatribes against people in the comments section of my articles, YOU will be history.
June 25th, 2007 at 12:20 pm
DadWith2Girls,
You are temporarily enjoined from contributing to this thread.
Please cool off with a nice lemonade.
June 25th, 2007 at 4:17 pm
I will discuss the Trojan commercial tonight (06.25.07) at 11:30PM PT on KABC 790AM, Sirius 143, and XM 124 — as the guest of Peter Tilden, host of America’s Earliest Morning Show.
June 25th, 2007 at 7:39 pm
Marc H. Rudov,
Keep up the wonderful work !!
You have become an International voice for men’s issues and your fan base is growing alll over the world.
Ian Wilson
Australia
June 25th, 2007 at 9:19 pm
Ninderthana,
I’m honored that you boys in Oz find my work helpful. Please stay in touch and join my mailing list.
June 26th, 2007 at 12:35 am
Oh poooo!
I have been busy the last couple of days and now I don’t get to read what DadWith2Girls said that was so offensive!
As for Marc hitting a home run, congratulations.
Though we have to admit that this commercial was so stupid, almost as stupid as the stupid boys t-shirt, that Marc had himself a nice soft fast ball right through the middle of the strike zone!
If Trojan really wants to improve the sales of their product, they need only to call it the Child Support and Commitment Prevention Device!
June 26th, 2007 at 4:44 am
Good work Marc.
TMOTS
June 30th, 2007 at 5:24 am
Jeez, you guys.
Marc, yes, you’re right regarding that stupid silly commerical. And we all know it. It’s not even mildly argumentative.
She’s an idiot. Ask her to do the next debate topless. Maybe I’d watch it to see how big her hooters are. No other reason to listen watch her her. She’s an idiot.
Trojan, Inc. are fools. I mean why do that? Why make half the human race look like pigs? Doesn’t even make sense. Because sex is something that men like? I guess women by inference don’t like sex. And like one writer added; apparently men want to knock up women only to support children they don’t have any say in the upbringing of. The so called higher order (hint: women) really don’t want unprotected sex? Good God guys. Wake up.
Hey, at least I know people are reading Marc’s articles.
Stop dating the amerikan female, stop having sex them and stop being “screwed” by the real pigs in our society (hint: amerikan women). Trojan, Inc will go out of business and the cockroaches can have the place back to themselves.
Marc, thanx for the great work you do on a consistent basis.
June 30th, 2007 at 6:42 am
Marc, excellent job. It is far easier to sit on this side of the TV screen and make the arguement than it is to sit in front of a camera. You are getting FOX to talk about these issues, and that is great. Do you have any control over content, or does FOX pick the issues?
You smoked her, you have over 60% of the votes at this point.
Does anyone have the e-mail to the response form? I do not have outlook express, and so cannot access the e-mail from FOX. Thanks.
June 30th, 2007 at 11:04 pm
Marc, great job.
Here’s what I suspect Trojan was doing: they were trying to appeal to women’s sense of how men should behave and trying to appeal to those men who look to women to tell them how to behave.
The more our movement spreads, the more our ideas catch on, the more that type of advertising backfires.
You vote with your wallet. The more men see a commercial like that and think “forget it!”, the more Trojan, Inc. will feel it where it hurts.
Sure, we can write letters, etc. But in my opinion, the most effective way to change a company is to simply not buy their product. And we can continue to increase the effectiveness of that by educating other men.
Pass the word, brothers and sisters!
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:21 am
Marc,
I’ll agree that you won this debate, but I don’t think it’s because you did such a great job, but because Lis did such a lousy one. She only really made one point: “It’s just a commercial.” Which, I kind of agree with, by the way. Granted, I would stop buying Trojan condoms because of this commercial, if I bought condoms at all, but, it’s still just a commercial, and really, there are much worse ones out there (for example, pick any from a long line of commercials that portray fathers as childish buffoons). Here, they are portraying guys who hang out in bars to pick up women as pigs (And guess what? Many of them are. I know some of them.)
Yes, the commercial is blatantly sexist, but it’s also extremely ridiculous (as if the men who are the least pig-like are those that are already presuming that they will have sex, and as such are already carrying around condoms). Plus, it doesn’t make women look so good that they’d sleep with any one of several complete horny strangers as long as one (or perhaps more) of them has a condom.
Plus, I’m not sure I quite buy your argument that “Women are in charge of their own contraception” as a reason to be offended by the commercial. Sure, they should, but that’s not why the commercial is offensive. Yes, women could carry around condoms themselves, but if I’m the type to go to bars to have sex with anonymous women, I don’t think I’d count on that. No, the commercial is offensive simply because it portrays men as a bunch of pigs who are more than willing to have sex with anonymous women without protection. That’s it. Nothing more.
But, overall, the commercial doesn’t even really make any sense.
Anyway, if it’s possible for both of you to lose the debate, well, then you did.
July 2nd, 2007 at 8:51 pm
Another thing which I don’t see get mentioned very often:
Who gets to decide whether someone is offended or not? Does the offendee get to decide, or someone else?
In this case, Marc (and others) are offended by the commercial. And women are trying to tell us not to be offended, we shouldn’t be offended, “get over yourselves”.
You know, there are so many things which supposedly offend women. And women get really indignant when you tell them not to be offended, they shouldn’t be offended (and lots of times we are really tempted to tell them to get over themselves).
But, if we want the right to be offended and have others take our word for it that yes, we are offended, without others questioning it (which is a right I think we ought to have), then we pretty much have to grant that same right to women.
Here’s the thing: women already demand that right, and, more often than not, they get it.
We need to use the same tactic and say: “How dare you tell me not to be offended! Who is the best judge as to whether something is offensive to ME: you or ME?”
That should shut them up pronto.