So, with the Superbowl on it’s way this Sunday, there has been a lot of controversy surrounding some of the ads that are going to be displayed or not displayed. In my previous post, I mentioned CBS’ involvement in showing anti-abortion ads for the group Focus on Families. A little update of that effort : CREDO (the organization involved in the petition to pull those ads) have gathered over 120,000 signatures, which CBS is very aware of, but choose to ignore. Regardless of your stance on the issue, it is hard to feel sympathy for CBS’ hypocrisy with their “No-Advocacy” policy, when they start banning other advertisements that may promote certain lifestyles they do not wish to align themselves with.

Now, I have come across two specifically that really benchmark what kind of game is being played at the superbowl this year (pun intended). Even with the number of people that watch the Superbowl, football is largely a masculine sport with male followers. With that being said, I think it sets the stage for the two banned ads (I am sure there are more) that came my way.

ManCrunch

ManCrunch, which is an online gay dating site has had their ad refused by the powers that be. Now, there is already a little controversy with this ad in general. The signs in the back, the displeased friend, etc. Although there are multiple interpretations, I would say that having a football related , gay ad would be a good ad to run, regardless of some of the negatives. I think the ad breaks the gender barrier of saying that masculine, football-loving men are, indeed, gay as well. Take from the ad what you will, but the ban is very obviously one of gay nature (and im sure the image of very tough, football-loving, men shunning their heterosexual nature isn’t part of that AT ALL). The thing to consider here is the mash-up of gender and sexuality. Even though these men are retaining their masculine qualities (being strong, etc.), their masculinity is instantly stripped once they are gay. It’s an interesting and ironic measurement of gender studies to see how those two can be separate, then closely tied in specific circumstances.

GoDaddy

This one has surprised me. GoDaddy is notorious for very sexist, over the top, sexualized advertisements (FOR WEB HOSTING!). Just last year I switched my hosting to DreamHost because I did not agree with Bob Parsons’ take on women, the industry, and advertising. I didn’t want to support such blatant objectification of women. That is why their latest ad can only dictate the humiliation of effeminate acting men. In the ad, Lola (an ex-football player), built a business as a clothing designer. Of course, Lola is very “gay acting” (effeminate), and even though effeminiate does not equate homosexuality, I think it is implied in this ad. I am not sure the intent GoDaddy had with this one. Danica Patrick has been their mascot for quite some time, and she is in her full suit (sometimes she’s barely wearing anything), and narrating the story of Lola. I’m not sure if they were TRYING to sell limited images of gender (how a masculine man can become feminine with the snap of selling clothing — hint : selling clothes does not make you snap your fingers and lisp) or if they were trying to get the gay vote (if they were, they need better marketing consultants). Either way, it’s fail, so it is good this is pulled off the air, but in the same time, the reasons for it being pulls are also for the wrong reasons.

Now, between the ManCrunch and this ad, both gender and sexuality for men take a beating, as well as women’s right to choose abortion as an option. I am not sure how in 2010, we are regressing so much, but apparently the marketers are pulling out all the stops on this event.

I don’t watch the superbowl (as a male!), but I wish I did , so I could boycott the event. I really am excited to see what ads actually air, and then the final release of the rejected ads. If you have any other gender/sex related banned superbowl 2010 ads, let me know! Also, let me know your thoughts on the ads!

There’s nothing more infuriating and creepy than early media propaganda that dictates gender roles. There are a bunch of these over youtube, so I wanted to feature a few of them and talk about them.

• Girls Beware

The reason I wanted to feature this video is because since the 50s, the fear mongering about woman’s safety has not released. Now, this video is rather extreme because it ends in the deaths of young girls for “wrongly trusting”. I went to a domestic abuse performance a few months ago, and they handed out information about sexual assault and domestic abuse. There were “tips” for staying safe in the pamphlet. For example – stay in brightly list areas, check the back of the car seat, don’t talk to strangers, etc. Now, this is from a center that helps victimized women, but should the approach always be one of fear? The point is that in this video (and even today) – women should be fearful around every corner and men are killers. If we lock ourselves into these roles, then there will always be a culture of fear surrounding the safety of women. I am not suggesting we lose our cautious minds because these are very real occurances, but I think the approach is seldom one that women aren’t responsible for.

• Boys Beware

The happy part about this film is that I feel we have come somewhere since this anti-gay propaganda was created. I think hitchhiking in general is a horrible idea regardless of who you are. In many ways there have and have not been changes. The pieces I think have changed (thankfully) are the comments about homosexuality as a sickness. Now, I think a lot of people will agree that homosexuality is not a “sickness” – minus radicals of religious faith. A fear around homosexuals and teenagers still persists in our culture. We see this all of the time, but I think over the last decade, a lot of that fear has subsided. Hopefully, we can get to the day where everyone would see how ridiculous this video is. Some of the “best” parts are : “when never knows when the homosexual is about” , “sickness that was not visible like small pox but no less dangerous and contagious. sickness of the mind. Rob was a homosexual – a person who DEMANDS a relationship with the same sex…”. I just love how homosexuals DEMAND relationships.

I found this parody of the 50s style propaganda and sums up how ridiculous these videos were

• Catching The Gay

It’s interesting to see how the media has and has not changed over the last 4 or 5 decades. I will agree 100% that there have been a lot of changes, but there is still a lot of fear mongering as well, and until we can get past that, I think there is still a lot to be done.