Comments on: Wear The Pants

By: David

David — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 14:54:36 +0000

I’m not sure what to make of your [...] response but I do know that advertising, at these levels, can be very, very expensive. It is not something that isn’t thought out. So, unless there is a huge population of men who feel this emasculation you speak of, it’s a waste of ad money.
Levi’s ads are generally about independence and individualism for both men and women. This ad represents a shift in style for sure, but I’m not sure if their overall messages are so different, but why aim at just men if the numbers aren’t there.
They may have wanted and accepted a backlash from feminist because this would promote outward through blogs like yours.
You wouldn’t fall for that would you?

By: The Super Bowl and the “Mancession” « from the rib?

The Super Bowl and the “Mancession” « from the rib? — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 20:01:25 +0000

[...] is the fact that they are trying to appeal to men who feel emasculated. (Similar to Dockers’ “Wear the Pants” campaign) . They’re saying: men, you’ve been forced into situations that have taken away your [...]

By: David

David — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 06:27:17 +0000

Maren
After viewing the Super Bowl Ads, I now agree that the advertisment is aimed at men.
It’s such a shift in the industry that I’m not sure what to make of it.

By: David

David — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 06:40:33 +0000

Maren
OK, no more shaky statistics, no more looking beyond the obvious.
You seem to know a lot about men and I assume that you naturally know a lot about women. Even if I am a little bit right, I could also be mostly wrong. You’re smart, you’re educated and you know what you are talking about.

By: Maren

Maren — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 20:58:51 +0000

@David

I’m sorry but this patriarchal heteronomative comment is totally crap. I know plenty of men who are capable of buying their own clothes, and those who believe clothes are an expression of their own personality.
I’m sure there are men out there who’s wives and girlfriends buy clothes for them, but that is not the case for all men. And all Women have interests other than shopping.
Also, how does this sexist ad appeal to women? Please explain this to me.
I have a hard time trusting the credibility of your statistics when they change from post to post, and aren’t cited.

By: David

David — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 14:53:12 +0000

PatriarchySlayer
Yes, women buy most clothes for men. First it’s the mothers, then girl friends and family, (Birthday- Christmas), and finally by wives, daughters, and grand daughters. Certainly men buy a percentage of their own clothes and there is a short time, when a man is single, that he buys most of his on clothes. A short time, after which most men are married. I hope you don’t see this as a bad thing; its life, and love, and family.
Women make about 85% of all purchases in the US. Ads aimed at men just don’t work for most items.
So, if you want your boyfriend or husband to be the kind of man that you claim to struggle against, while he foolishly wears the proof of your belief, -then buy him some Dockers. Because we all know that gender equality is tied up in a pair of pants.

By: PatriarchySlayer

PatriarchySlayer — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 02:29:12 +0000

@David, I agree that the ad is awful. But I’m curious if you can tell me if men aren’t spending money on men’s clothes, who is? Are we saying that men don’t have as much clothes as women do, or that women are buying men’s clothes for them?

Does that mean that if the man is single that his mother is still buying him clothes?
I guess I’m a little confused by this because most of the men in my life are really well clothed. So if it’s not their girlfriends or mothers, they must be buying their own clothes.
Shopping isn’t just for women anymore. Help me out guys? Who’s buying your clothes?

By: Samuel W.

Samuel W. — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 19:57:50 +0000

Note the line “disco by disco”. Looks like more proof as to just how nonmusical the whole “disco sucks” jihad was, and how it had about 100% more to do about white male suburban rockers against gay, Puerto Rican and black men than about musicians against drum machines. Another thing of note is how the ad’s bizarre text reminds me of nonsense spam emails I used to get, often headed by words like “There was a half-starve nurse maid” or something like that. What a wonderful advert, Levi’s! You made an AHEM…genius advert that reminds me of nonsense spam email.

By: David

David — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 14:57:38 +0000

The ad is an insult to men and holds the old idea of manhood up as a joke. The ad is aimed at women; as most ads are. Women make over 75% of all purchases and are even the largest purchasers of Dockers. Levi doesn’t waste it’s ad money on men!

By: sangetencre

sangetencre — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 16:36:44 +0000

Mary Jane it’s fine to want specific qualities in a romantic partner.

But the point is: those qualities do not inherently belong to men or women.

They’re described as being “masculine” or “feminine” because of the way our society has evolved and the way people continue to push the idea that men act one way and women act another and that’s just how it is–when the truth is that we act the way we do, in part, because of socialization.

For instance, boys are told from a young age that they shouldn’t cry or that crying is what sissies or girls do. So it becomes unacceptable for boys and men to cry.

Because crying is designated as being weak or feminine. And masculinity is defined by being…not feminine, essentially.

Men acting like men and women acting/being treated like women are socially circumscribed.

They’re limiting.

They’re damaging on an individual and societal level because they they put both men and women into boxes or up on pedestals.

And that’s why we take umbrage with this ad.