View Poll Results: Have Feminists Been Used By Corporations To Exploit Women For Profit?

Voters
23. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    11 47.83%
  • No

    12 52.17%
Page 18 of 19 FirstFirst ... 816171819 LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 185

Thread: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?[W:29]

  1. #171
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

    Quote Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker View Post
    Apple comes to mind in the 'anti-communist regime' advertisement crowd - but you're going back to the 70's . . . So: 15 Interesting Cold War Vintage Ads (war advertising, war ads) - ODDEE
    We waged war against communism in a sense.

    Marketers target anything if it'll make a sale.
    Of course they will use anti communism itself because that fits into the capitalist scheme of promoting the idea that the consumption of corporate products is the source of happiness and symbolic of success in life. As I pointed out to someone earlier in this thread, this is the real source of capitalist power in the world. Because as long as people believe this false notion, capitalists will be able to control them. They will bow down in all humility and do any disgusting thing, even to the point of sucking someone's d***, to get money so that they can obtain such objects. People will kill one another for money. They will back stab their friends for money. They will sell their mother down the river for money. And feminists, in order to get money, have allowed corporations to take the ideals of feminism itself, such as female liberation, associate those ideals with corporate goods, and exploit other women with the lie that using those products is somehow liberating.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker View Post
    As for anti capitalistic: seen Che anywhere? I did - just yesterday I stopped in at Hot Topics to look for a T-shirt for my husband. There he was: on a shirt, faithful as always.

    To advertise against a political system you merely need to embody or embrace figures that stand as such. Che Guerva is one, and anything aimed toward Freedom Fights and Occupy Wallstreet would be advertisement example for another.

    There's nothing that's off limits: if it will make money it will be marketed somehow, by someone, to someone.
    I disagree that to putting a picture of Che Guevara on a T shirt and selling it is necessarily embracing and embodying Che. In that case, the consumer has to make the association, without further corporate assistance, between the ideals that Che promoted and the T shirt. For example, I had seen T shirts of Che, without even knowing who he was, and just thought it was a nice looking T shirt. The corporation does not embrace and embody Che in this instance because it depends on the consumer having already done that. That is very different from a corporation devising propaganda that makes the direct association between the ideals and the product. In that case, the corporation must directly embrace and embody the ideal because it has to directly make the association itself. And it cannot make the association if it does not embrace those ideals. Again this example



    In this ad the corporation is making a direct link between the ideals of feminism and the consumption of the product. They did this without any feminist protest. And that is what is interesting in the case of feminism. Corporations have directly taken feminist ideals, without protest from feminist leaders, and associated those ideals with the consumption of corporate products to exploit women. I don't think large corporations have done that with communism, because that would directly counter the source of their power. Communism is about taking control of the means of production from those very same corporations. They are not going to directly promote communism in that way. That would be suicide. In the case of feminism, they have quite correctly calculated that the feminist narrative suits the capitalist narrative well, in that it gives them more people to exploit as a source of labor. For example, the denigration of the role of women taking care of the home. It removes the dependency of the woman on her husband and replaces it with dependency on the capitalist. The capitalist welcomes that notion because now he has more people to exploit for labor, which will drive his labor costs down. Therefore we see this type of association in this ad


  2. #172
    Lurker
    iangb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Birmingham, UK
    Last Seen
    03-03-17 @ 02:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,927
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    Non-existent? I disagree. There is no need to project because it's already there. Surely you must have heard of Catherine MacKinnon. According to Stanford Law School professor Kathleen Sullivan



    MacKinnon has said that Andrea Dworkin was



    Here's what Andrea Dworkin had to say regarding men
    ....you really didn't read what I posted in my first post here. I'll repeat it - you're talking about Imaginary Feminism, not the real thing.

    Imaginary Feminism is monolithic.
    This is very important. Anything said by anyone calling themselves a feminist can be assumed to be true of anyone else calling themselves a feminist. Some random thing Andrea Dworkin said in 1973 is tattooed on all IF's chests backward so they can read it in the mirror. All IFs simultaneously subscribe to the beliefs of Valerie Solanas, Catharine McKinnon, Betty Dodson, Phyllis Schlafly, Twisty Faster, and that person who wrote those weird articles about Firefly. Or, I mean, all the beliefs you know about. Don't feel over-pressured to actually learn anything about these people.


    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    Feminists have been able to speak out against patriarchy. Why have they not spoken out against the use of feminism itself as a tool for the exploitation of women?
    Can you prove that none did? From several decades ago?

    My response is that feminism cannot proclaim to be against the objectification of women, but at the same time support such objectification. It's just inconsistent.
    The core of feminism is not against the objectification of women - indeed, as I just said, there are those feminists who would say that objectifcation is fine as long as it is by choice (of course, there are other feminists who would disagree). The core of feminism is equality.

    I'm not talking about putting a book for sale on Amazon. I'm talking about a large corporation deliberately associating the ideals of communism with the consumption of a product as in

    ....

    So, for example, show me a Nike ad, (or any other corporate commodity) that put's forward the notion that by wearing Nike's you are freeing yourself of capitalist control.
    See Aunt Spiker's post.
    The truth may be out there, but lies are in your head. ~Terry Pratchett

  3. #173
    Cheese
    Aunt Spiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sasnakra
    Last Seen
    09-10-16 @ 06:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,433

    Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    Of course they will use anti communism itself because that fits into the capitalist scheme of promoting the idea that the consumption of corporate products is the source of happiness and symbolic of success in life. As I pointed out to someone earlier in this thread, this is the real source of capitalist power in the world. Because as long as people believe this false notion, capitalists will be able to control them. They will bow down in all humility and do any disgusting thing, even to the point of sucking someone's d***, to get money so that they can obtain such objects. People will kill one another for money. They will back stab their friends for money. They will sell their mother down the river for money. And feminists, in order to get money, have allowed corporations to take the ideals of feminism itself, such as female liberation, associate those ideals with corporate goods, and exploit other women with the lie that using those products is somehow liberating.



    I disagree that to putting a picture of Che Guevara on a T shirt and selling it is necessarily embracing and embodying Che. In that case, the consumer has to make the association, without further corporate assistance, between the ideals that Che promoted and the T shirt. For example, I had seen T shirts of Che, without even knowing who he was, and just thought it was a nice looking T shirt. The corporation does not embrace and embody Che in this instance because it depends on the consumer having already done that. That is very different from a corporation devising propaganda that makes the direct association between the ideals and the product. In that case, the corporation must directly embrace and embody the ideal because it has to directly make the association itself. And it cannot make the association if it does not embrace those ideals. Again this example



    In this ad the corporation is making a direct link between the ideals of feminism and the consumption of the product. They did this without any feminist protest. And that is what is interesting in the case of feminism. Corporations have directly taken feminist ideals, without protest from feminist leaders, and associated those ideals with the consumption of corporate products to exploit women. I don't think large corporations have done that with communism, because that would directly counter the source of their power. Communism is about taking control of the means of production from those very same corporations. They are not going to directly promote communism in that way. That would be suicide. In the case of feminism, they have quite correctly calculated that the feminist narrative suits the capitalist narrative well, in that it gives them more people to exploit as a source of labor. For example, the denigration of the role of women taking care of the home. It removes the dependency of the woman on her husband and replaces it with dependency on the capitalist. The capitalist welcomes that notion because now he has more people to exploit for labor, which will drive his labor costs down. Therefore we see this type of association in this ad

    Strange, funny, and amusing that you'll try to differentiate between using women to market a product (bad, we should rally against it I suppose) - and then using Che Guerva to market a product or ideal (and it's not even bad or good or reflective of anything. He's just a cool looking dude that represents nothing?)

    Even though - I still argue - it's all the same.

    Further: go to other countries where communism and other such capitalist-alternatives are the mainstay and you will find equal advertising that reflects what we've done in the US. Marketing to a niche / marketing to an interest.

    My sister's store in Pennsylvania markets pro-Russian products. All you need are figures and symbols to express political views: that's it.

    In a way relying on notable people and symbols is a modern shift in marketing overall. Logos. Brand figures. Faces. Images - not words. Quite a bit of advertising in the past relied heavily on words along with images (the adds you've posted and the ones I linked to were text heavy). These days it's not uncommon to see image heavy product marketing with scant or no text what so ever. They tap into popular associations and placement of elements to strike interest. Contrasts the evoke emotion, colors that stir certain thoughts.

    If I wanted to tap into technologically minded individuals I might choose Tron neon: white/blue glow, black, white and gray metallic and glass. Perhaps motherboard green with neon pathways as a background. Product in front: done and done.

    Today: If they want to market toward a certain type of woman or a man they'd simply place relative items with that gender - maybe a certain hairdo. How are feminists marketed to, today, (since that's the topic here). Well: working moms on the go.

    Busy? (don't worry: a dab of flour will make them think you slaved all day to make those rice crispie treats).
    Tired? (There's 5-hour energy. Look how perfectly put together and sheek that woman is sitting at her desk with a small bottle next to her computer).
    Voting? (Oh - remember those 'use your voice' adds that had gorgeous women with tape over their mouths? Thus censoring their voice. Ah - but if you vote! You don't lose your voice, do you? Tearing away the proverbial tape!)

    Don't need words, don't need anything - just an image.
    Last edited by Aunt Spiker; 05-10-14 at 06:02 PM.
    A screaming comes across the sky.
    It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
    Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow

  4. #174
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

    Quote Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker View Post
    Strange, funny, and amusing that you'll try to differentiate between using women to market a product (bad, we should rally against it I suppose) - and then using Che Guerva to market a product or ideal (and it's not even bad or good or reflective of anything. He's just a cool looking dude that represents nothing?)

    Even though - I still argue - it's all the same.

    Further: go to other countries where communism and other such capitalist-alternatives are the mainstay and you will find equal advertising that reflects what we've done in the US. Marketing to a niche / marketing to an interest.

    My sister's store in Pennsylvania markets pro-Russian products. All you need are figures and symbols to express political views: that's it.

    In a way relying on notable people and symbols is a modern shift in marketing overall. Logos. Brand figures. Faces. Images - not words. Quite a bit of advertising in the past relied heavily on words along with images. These days it's not uncommon to see image heavy product marketing with scant or no text what so ever. They tap into popular associations and placement of elements to strike interest.

    If I wanted to tap into technologically minded individuals I might choose Tron neon: white/blue glow, black, white and gray metallic and glass. Perhaps motherboard green with neon pathways as a background. Product in front: done and done.
    I don't understand why an intelligent person like you cannot see that there is a difference in merely putting an image of Che Guevara on a T shirt and selling it, and actually embracing communist ideology, associating it with a product and thereby falsely leading people to believe that buy consuming the product, they are contributing to the rise of communism to the detriment of capitalism. For instance, what if Ralph Lauren put out an ad that said:

    "The downfall of capitalism is imminent. We at Ralph Lauren realize that you, the socialist worker, deserves to take control of the means of production. We salute you comrade. Our Che Guevara T shirts celebrate the rise of communism and the fall of capitalism."

    Do you see what I'm talking about, and how that is different from just putting an image of Che on a T shirt?

  5. #175
    Cheese
    Aunt Spiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sasnakra
    Last Seen
    09-10-16 @ 06:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,433

    Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    I don't understand why an intelligent person like you cannot see that there is a difference in merely putting an image of Che Guevara on a T shirt and selling it, and actually embracing communist ideology, associating it with a product and thereby falsely leading people to believe that buy consuming the product, they are contributing to the rise of communism to the detriment of capitalism. For instance, what if Ralph Lauren put out an ad that said:

    "The downfall of capitalism is imminent. We at Ralph Lauren realize that you, the socialist worker, deserves to take control of the means of production. We salute you comrade. Our Che Guevara T shirts celebrate the rise of communism and the fall of capitalism."

    Do you see what I'm talking about, and how that is different from just putting an image of Che on a T shirt?
    Well look at it this way: If someone gave you a Che Guerva T-shirt would you wear it?

    Why or why not?

    - Exactly

    The difference is the purpose: product Vs ideal. . . but in the end it boils down to appealing to someone's ideals in order to sell either an ideal or a product.
    Last edited by Aunt Spiker; 05-10-14 at 06:22 PM.
    A screaming comes across the sky.
    It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
    Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow

  6. #176
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

    Quote Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker View Post
    Well look at it this way: If someone gave you a Che Guerva T-shirt would you wear it?

    Why or why not?

    - Exactly

    The difference is the purpose: product Vs ideal. . . but in the end it boils down to appealing to someone's ideals in order to sell either an ideal or a product.
    The difference is that in one case the manufacturer is taking a direct active role in promoting the ideology in order to sell the product. No corporation has directly advocated the rise of communism and fall of capitalism in order to sell Che T shirts. But corporations have directly done so with feminism, and that's the difference.

  7. #177
    Cheese
    Aunt Spiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sasnakra
    Last Seen
    09-10-16 @ 06:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,433

    Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    The difference is that in one case the manufacturer is taking a direct active role in promoting the ideology in order to sell the product. No corporation has directly advocated the rise of communism and fall of capitalism in order to sell Che T shirts. But corporations have directly done so with feminism, and that's the difference.
    It's all a matter of taking advantage of an ideology to sell a product.

    Feminism existed.
    They merely used it.
    They didn't create feminism.

    Communism exists.
    They merely used it.
    They didn't create communism.

    To a marketer: it's all the same. "Who can become a consumer if we appeal to their interest?"
    A screaming comes across the sky.
    It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
    Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow

  8. #178
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

    Quote Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker View Post
    It's all a matter of taking advantage of an ideology to sell a product.

    Feminism existed.
    They merely used it.
    They didn't create feminism.

    Communism exists.
    They merely used it.
    They didn't create communism.

    To a marketer: it's all the same. "Who can become a consumer if we appeal to their interest?"
    I doubt very seriously if you will see a large corporation start advocating the rise of communism and the rise of capitalism as they have done with feminism.

  9. #179
    Cheese
    Aunt Spiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sasnakra
    Last Seen
    09-10-16 @ 06:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,433

    Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    I doubt very seriously if you will see a large corporation start advocating the rise of communism and the rise of capitalism as they have done with feminism.
    You never know. I wouldn't put it past them. Why wouldn't they?

    They exploit race and gender - why not sociological ideals? If our country becomes more split regarding our ideology then you'll likely see companies choosing sides.

    You have to consider scale: suddenly they had a market with MILLIONS of non-users at their disposal. Honestly: it was probably one of the msot wise business decisions they could have made.

    So imagine if we fractured ideologically and MILLIONS of Americans were suddenly aligning their selves with Feudalism . . . I bet your sweet bippy you'd see it everywhere.
    A screaming comes across the sky.
    It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
    Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow

  10. #180
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

    Quote Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker View Post
    You never know. I wouldn't put it past them. Why wouldn't they?

    They exploit race and gender - why not sociological ideals? If our country becomes more split regarding our ideology then you'll likely see companies choosing sides.

    You have to consider scale: suddenly they had a market with MILLIONS of non-users at their disposal. Honestly: it was probably one of the msot wise business decisions they could have made.

    So imagine if we fractured ideologically and MILLIONS of Americans were suddenly aligning their selves with Feudalism . . . I bet your sweet bippy you'd see it everywhere.
    Feudalism is one thing, communism is quite different. Advocating the rise of communism would be suicide for large corporations.

Page 18 of 19 FirstFirst ... 816171819 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •