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.

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.

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!

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.

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.

TMOTS

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!

I’m honored that you boys in Oz find my work helpful. Please stay in touch and join my mailing list.

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

You are temporarily enjoined from contributing to this thread.

Please cool off with a nice lemonade.

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.

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…

“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.

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.

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?

If Marc is trying to change the anti-feminist course of MND, it will be interesting to see if he manages it.