| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
kabrams
Joined: 15 Mar 2008
Location: your Dad's house
|
 Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 4:52 pm Post subject: New Dockers Ad: Sexist? |
 |
|
The full article is here:
http://assets.nydailynews.com/lifestyle/2009/12/09/2009-12-09_new_dockers_ad_campaign_for_soft_khakis_brings_charges_of_sexism_over_.html
| Quote: |
New Dockers 'wear the pants' ad campaign for soft khakis brings charges of sexism
BY Rosemary Black
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Real men are set to wear the pants again - at least if you believe the new Dockers ads for khakis. But some are seeing subtle sexist overtones in the costly new ad campaign.
One of the new ads says, "It's time to answer the call of manhood," and the company's Web site exhorts men to "wear the pants."
A "Man-ifesto" posted on Dockers.com begins, "Once upon a time, men wore the pants, and wore them well. Women rarely had to open doors ... Men took charge because that's what they did."
"Disco by disco, latte by foamy non-fat latte, men were stripped of their khakis and left stranded on the road between boyhood and androgyny," the ad continues.
"Just because the Dockers ads are tongue in cheek does not mean that they're not sexist," wrote WalletPop.com blogger Jami Bernard in a recent post. "It's one thing to encourage men to man up, another to tell them to ‘wear the pants' - an expression that taps directly into the old question, ‘Who wears the pants in the family?'"
Dockers is reintroducing the brand - which, according to The New York Times, many young men associate with the 1990s and "casual" Fridays - with a big-budget blast including radio, print, poster and online advertising. Social media like Facebook and Twitter will be used in the ambitious ad campaign, which debuted earlier in December, and TV commercials will begin in February, with Dockers ads returning to the Super Bowl after an eight-year hiatus, according to The Times.
But just whom are they hoping to attract with the ads? Jennifer Sey, Dockers' vice president of global marketing, said in an interview in Brandweek that "sensitivity, chivalry, ambition and decisiveness" are on her wish list for the traits of "the modern idea of a man." The new promos hopefully will "inspire today's men to be men," she said in the interview.
Walletpop.com's Bernard feels the Dockers' ads "take an unnecessary snipe at gay men through the use of common wink-wink stereotypes. According to Dockers, a real man doesn't eat at salad bars or order nonfat lattes."
The new ad campaign may succeed at making 25- to 35-year-olds khaki-conscious. Jim Calhoun, president for the Dockers brand at Levi Strauss, told The Times, "I don't think that we, as leaders of the category, have done much to keep the khaki category fresh and exciting, to give the consumers a reason to buy."
Whether or not younger men will fall for soft slacks in muted shades remains to be seen. But one thing Dockers has going in its favor: an attractive price. The khakis generally sell for $25 to $55.
|
What do you think? I'm pretty sure most of you already know my stance on it. (It's sexist towards men and women). |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
BigLarry
Joined: 09 Sep 2009
Location: Anywhere there is wine.
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 5:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It�s another piece of vacuous twaddle that is deliberately designed to court media controversy: No one creates an ad with that much text and in such an unreadable format in order to directly sell a product.
The papers and bloggers get something to whinge about for an afternoon while a clothing company gets free advertising worth millions.
Nothing to see here, move along. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kabrams
Joined: 15 Mar 2008
Location: your Dad's house
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 7:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BigLarry wrote: |
It�s another piece of vacuous twaddle that is deliberately designed to court media controversy: No one creates an ad with that much text and in such an unreadable format in order to directly sell a product.
The papers and bloggers get something to whinge about for an afternoon while a clothing company gets free advertising worth millions.
Nothing to see here, move along. |
I don't understand the concept of free advertising if the advertising is negative. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
IMF crisis
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 7:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| This ad campaign is so upsetting I'll probably need to drink 2 or 3 wine spritzers tonight just to get to sleep. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty Shackleford
Joined: 08 May 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 8:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I was cheering and pumping my fist by the end of that ad. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Quack Addict
Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 8:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| boyhood and androgyny |
Are they talking about Thailand? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aboxofchocolates
Joined: 21 Mar 2008
Location: on your mind
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 9:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kabrams wrote: |
| BigLarry wrote: |
It’s another piece of vacuous twaddle that is deliberately designed to court media controversy: No one creates an ad with that much text and in such an unreadable format in order to directly sell a product.
The papers and bloggers get something to whinge about for an afternoon while a clothing company gets free advertising worth millions.
Nothing to see here, move along. |
I don't understand the concept of free advertising if the advertising is negative. |
You're talking about it, aren't you?
'Hey, I want to be manly because I am a man. Gimme some dockers!'
Hey, I want to appear manly because I am insecure and equate manliness with power. Are dockers manly? I'm buying me some of these.
Hey, those dockers peope are mean and nasty. Don't buy their stuff. Who are they? Well, just follow this link to their outrageous flashy advertiszing with such a mean and edgy slogan. Everyone, quickly, pay as much attention to the sexist slogans as you can.
Not bad on you for pointing it out, just it is a ploy. Crap, I hope my docks are as flamable as my bra. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aboxofchocolates
Joined: 21 Mar 2008
Location: on your mind
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 9:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rusty Shackleford wrote: |
| I was cheering and pumping my fist by the end of that ad. |
Hey, whatever gets you off, but a little more information than necessary. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty Shackleford
Joined: 08 May 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 10:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| aboxofchocolates wrote: |
| Rusty Shackleford wrote: |
| I was cheering and pumping my fist by the end of that ad. |
Hey, whatever gets you off, but a little more information than necessary. |
Sicko. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 10:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I enjoy the whole "be a man and buck up" thing and I think sometimes its called for.
At the same time "guy" culture and jockness can be so one-dimensional and boring and is such an idiotic mindset sometimes.
The real blunder here is that it is totally the wrong marketing pitch for Dockers. It does not work with their brand image and men are not going to try to be more manly by buying a pair of dockers. That's what Carhartt/Wrangler/Caterpillar are for.
Dockers should stick to marketing themselves as reasonably affordable weekend wear that you can wear to a variety of events and do many a thing in. If you're out shopping at the mall, then go out for a casual restaurant dinner with friends and end up at someone's house tinkering on a car or playing some backyard football, your fine in your Dockers.
Part of why the Dockers brand is slipping is not because of its performance in the male market, but because the brand has minimal appeal to women. There are plenty of women who want to do the exact same things as I wrote above (Shopping, Casual Dining, Manual "Gearhead" Work and Impromptu Sports) and Dockers would work for them as well. Unfortunately they just went and turned off every siingle woman to their brand with this new ad campaign. This ad campaign will flop for them. But if they went for the women's market with a similar theme they'd stand a chance of success. I'm going to stereotype here: Many mom's have to do a little bit of everything throughout the day. Dockers would be a great pant for that kind of lifestyle.
And since when did pants(besides skintight) become unattractive on a woman? Whether its thr professional look in a pantsuit or the "mom" look in casuals, pants give many a woman a nice look of sensibility and good-headedness, as well as suggestion of her figure without putting it full on display. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 10:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with Kabrams, it's sexist against both women and men. I also think it's strange to try to equate khakis with manhood. "... men were stripped of their khakis and left stranded on the road between boyhood and androgyny." When wearing khakis becomes some important rite of passage into manhood, maybe this will make sense.
| Steelrails wrote: |
| And since when did pants(besides skintight) become unattractive on a woman? Whether its thr professional look in a pantsuit or the "mom" look in casuals, pants give many a woman a nice look of sensibility and good-headedness, as well as suggestion of her figure without putting it full on display. |
I actually think pantsuits look really silly on women. I like ankle-length skirts personally. To be honest, if it were socially acceptable I'd probably wear a kilt or toga, though; I don't like pants in general. Even men only look "good" in suits because it's such a universal image that you just get inured to it.
Though I do like baggy 한복 pants, I guess. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aboxofchocolates
Joined: 21 Mar 2008
Location: on your mind
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 10:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rusty Shackleford wrote: |
| aboxofchocolates wrote: |
| Rusty Shackleford wrote: |
| I was cheering and pumping my fist by the end of that ad. |
Hey, whatever gets you off, but a little more information than necessary. |
Sicko. |
And I'm not the one pumping to the male power slogan. Imagine how sick that would be. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flakfizer
Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 10:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| What do I think of this ad campaign? Let me go ask my wife and find out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty Shackleford
Joined: 08 May 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 10:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| aboxofchocolates wrote: |
| Rusty Shackleford wrote: |
| aboxofchocolates wrote: |
| Rusty Shackleford wrote: |
| I was cheering and pumping my fist by the end of that ad. |
Hey, whatever gets you off, but a little more information than necessary. |
Sicko. |
And I'm not the one pumping to the male power slogan. Imagine how sick that would be. |
Wow you really must have a sick mind to be able to construe pumping ones fist with whatever you take it to mean.
And now you are casting homosexuality as some how sick. For shame. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aboxofchocolates
Joined: 21 Mar 2008
Location: on your mind
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 10:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rusty Shackleford wrote: |
| aboxofchocolates wrote: |
| Rusty Shackleford wrote: |
| aboxofchocolates wrote: |
| Rusty Shackleford wrote: |
| I was cheering and pumping my fist by the end of that ad. |
Hey, whatever gets you off, but a little more information than necessary. |
Sicko. |
And I'm not the one pumping to the male power slogan. Imagine how sick that would be. |
Wow you really must have a sick mind to be able to construe pumping ones fist with whatever you take it to mean.
And now you are casting homosexuality as some how sick. For shame. |
Nope, all for the homosexuality. Less for the 'pants are for men grrr, I drink my coffee with testosterone' crap.
And implying I meant masturbation, *I am appalled. I meant that godless dancing the youth do to the rock music. You know, 'pumping to the groove'. Masturbation kills kittens, after all:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2096/2234692181_d18da8d4a4.jpg
(in case you're not in the know) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
