Monday, February 6, 2012
Feministing: Superbowl commercial sexism: #NotBuyingIt, by Chloe:
Superbowl 46 was yesterday, and the Giants won, and someone has really small hands, and that’s pretty much where my football expertise ends. But I did watch a number of the commercials, because – and this is a sign that American capitalism is alive and well and not at any risk of being overcome by President Obama’s Kenyan socialism – the ads are almost as big a deal as the game itself.
If you were on Twitter during the game, you might have noticed the hashtag #NotBuyingIt, which was started by Miss Representation and designed to critique the depiction of women in these very expensive, very widely-viewed ads. As Maya noted at MoJo, “women make up about half of the Super Bowl’s audience and they’re more likely than men to tune in for the ads, rather than the game.” Yet, Superbowl advertisers have no problem insulting women in their ads, and they “do an especially good job of missing the point by acting as though dudes are the only ones watching.” . . .
Stylelite: Adriana Lima Sports Louboutins In Sexist Super Bowl Ad, by Justin Fenner:
Here’s the basic message of Teleflora’s Super Bowl commercial, starring noted model and Victoria’s Secret Angel Adriana Lima: Dudes, if you buy your lady friend flowers for Valentine’s Day, she’ll basically have no choice but to touch your genitals.
The New York Times: Judging the Super Bowl Commercials, From Charming to Smarmy, by Stuart Elliott:
SOME say, “Enough is enough.” Others say, “Too much is never enough.” When it came to the advertising bowl that took place inside Super Bowl XLVI on Sunday, enough was too much. . . .
Yes, sad to say, once again GoDaddy served up stale cheesecake in the form of two commercials that exploited women in the guise of empowerment. A similarly smarmy tone suffused spots for Teleflora, in which the model Adriana Lima told men, “Valentine’s Day is not that complicated. Give and you shall receive” . . . .