Marc Angelucci has complained several times about my recent series analyzing ads which the National Organization for Women complains are unfair to men–to read some of Marc’s comments, click here, here, and here. To see my NOW series, click here.
I thought the reason why I did a series on NOW’s complaints was apparent, but given Marc’s comments, perhaps it isn’t. I will try to explain it fuller:
1) Ads which mock or denigrate men and fathers are ubiquitous. I consider this a problem.
2) We’ve done campaigns or actions against these ads several times–for some examples, click here and here.
3) Every time we’ve done something to protest ads which denigrate men and fathers, the National Organization for Women and feminist groups counter that most advertising really is anti-woman, not anti-male. For example, when we did the protest against Verizon’s anti-father ad “Homework,” the Associated Press article on our protest–which ran in over 300 newspapers–quoted NOW president Kim Gandy as saying that anti-male advertising isn’t a problem, because it’s usually women who are portrayed negatively. Whenever I’ve done radio or TV over the issue, I’m invariably asked, “Haven’t most ads usually been unfair to women? Isn’t it guys’ turn? What are you whining about?”
3) Given that the feminists have had considerable success in pushing their view that ads are usually insulting to women, not to men, I think it’s useful to examine the ads that NOW says really are insulting to women, and to see if NOW is correct or not.
From what I’ve seen so far, NOW’s complaints about ads have some legitimacy, but not a lot. My series on their ads still has two more parts. In general, I will continue to draw attention to the problem of anti-male advertising, and that includes dealing with the feminists’ arguments and claims on the issue.
Marc has also repeatedly complained that I have not yet written about a recently-released Harvard domestic violence study which found, among other things, that “When the violence was one-sided, both women and men said that women were the perpetrators about 70% of the time.” I agree with Marc that this is a worthy topic for me to write about. However, the 70% figure seems high to me, and I don’t want to write about the study until I’ve had time to look into it further and ask a couple of domestic violence experts about it. I have many, many demands on my time, and I haven’t had a chance to take a close look at the study yet. Until I have the time, it will have to wait.
|


