• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

Have Feminists Been Used By Corporations To Exploit Women For Profit?

  • Yes

    Votes: 8 42.1%
  • No

    Votes: 11 57.9%

  • Total voters
    19
Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

Edward Bernays, the father of modern propaganda, was famous for his Torches of Freedom march. Basically, Bernays was hired by the big tobacco companies to get women to smoke so the companies could increase their profits by selling women cigarettes. To accomplish this, Bernays got prominent women, who were involved in the campaign for women's rights, to organize a giant march of women cigarettes, as a symbol of their freedom.

The Museum of Public Relations



It appears that the rise in feminism can be traced to the desire by corporations to exploit women for profit.

So the question is, have feminists been used by corporations to exploit women to increase corporate profit?



French author Alan Soral gives provides a comprehensive answer to your question.
 
Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

partly l agree but l can claim she is free and independent and l dont think she is as idiotic as rihanna.it depends on how one interprets the concept of feminism.it doesnt mean denying your nature ,your evolutional facts and trying to change your hormones

First of all, I strongly disagree with your assertion that she is free and independent. To see how this is so, if you closely examine her song, the shoes that she wears, she did not make. Someone else made them. So she is dependent on those people. What if all of a sudden there was no one to make shoes. She would have to do it herself. The house that she lives in, she did not build. She depends on others to do that. What she does do is sing and expose her body to make money to facilitate her so called "independence." And quite frankly, it is rather sad that although there are women much more intelligent and have a much more to contribute of substance to human society, they are barely known, while Beyonce is very rich and famous. It's a very backward situation.

But all that aside, because I really hate to say those things about a black woman, being that I am a black male. Let's assume that what you have said is indeed true. The problem is that Beyonce's so called freedom and independence has come at the expense of other women who are not as fortunate and actually have to work very hard at jobs that pay very little to get by. By her activities, Beyonce promotes the idea that one can be free and independent by obtaining objects that the average black woman especially, will have to work very hard, sometimes two or three jobs, to obtain. And even in those cases, many times the fruit of such labor is only enough to be able to afford the basic necessities and not the type of Prada shoes that Beyonce can afford. So what kind of freedom is that?
 
Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

Once again we have a clear cut case of an ideology that takes an innoxious word such as "feminism" or feminist" and prevaricates it into something pejorative, which in my opinion, renders the question as less than intelligent.

If we take it for granted that the first part of your assertion is true, I fail to understand how A causes B. Could you please clearly explain what you mean?
 
Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?



French author Alan Soral gives provides a comprehensive answer to your question.


That was an excellent analysis. Could you please point me to some other reference materials for further study? Thank you very much for that informative post.
 
Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?



French author Alan Soral gives provides a comprehensive answer to your question.


It should also be noted that adding women to the work force added a massive amount of workers to the workforce, which as you would expect, drove down wages. The very fact that both parents have to work today is proof of that. They also drove up the cost of daycare by pushing for further regulation, which ironically enough made it harder for women to work and have children.
 
Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

Every ideology on the planet has been exploited by corporations for profit. Communism may be utterly opposed to everything that a cheap garment manufacturer stands for, because that doesn't them from making a buck off Che's face on a t-shirt. The OP trying to single out feminism is inconsistent and merely projection on his part.
 
Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

Every ideology on the planet has been exploited by corporations for profit. Communism may be utterly opposed to everything that a cheap garment manufacturer stands for, because that doesn't them from making a buck off Che's face on a t-shirt. The OP trying to single out feminism is inconsistent and merely projection on his part.

What is troubling in the case of feminism is that although it purports to be against the objectification of women, it has lent itself to such objectification, and has thus allowed women to be psychologically conditioned to believe that purchasing commodities produced by corporations (e.g. cigarettes) will empower them and make them independent, when in fact the opposite is true.

Furthermore you assertion of projection on my part is absurd because it is based on the notion that I am an advocate of communism.
 
Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

First of all, I strongly disagree with your assertion that she is free and independent. To see how this is so, if you closely examine her song, the shoes that she wears, she did not make. Someone else made them. So she is dependent on those people. What if all of a sudden there was no one to make shoes. She would have to do it herself. The house that she lives in, she did not build. She depends on others to do that. What she does do is sing and expose her body to make money to facilitate her so called "independence." And quite frankly, it is rather sad that although there are women much more intelligent and have a much more to contribute of substance to human society, they are barely known, while Beyonce is very rich and famous. It's a very backward situation.

But all that aside, because I really hate to say those things about a black woman, being that I am a black male. Let's assume that what you have said is indeed true. The problem is that Beyonce's so called freedom and independence has come at the expense of other women who are not as fortunate and actually have to work very hard at jobs that pay very little to get by. By her activities, Beyonce promotes the idea that one can be free and independent by obtaining objects that the average black woman especially, will have to work very hard, sometimes two or three jobs, to obtain. And even in those cases, many times the fruit of such labor is only enough to be able to afford the basic necessities and not the type of Prada shoes that Beyonce can afford. So what kind of freedom is that?

you should have told me that you are anti capitalist ,wellcome to the club :cool:

yes in this respect we can claim none of us are free..
 
Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

you should have told me that you are anti capitalist ,wellcome to the club :cool:

yes in this respect we can claim none of us are free..

It's certainly true that I am not a big fan of the way capitalism is currently being practiced. That said, while I think government has a role to play in insuring that people conduct business in a fair manner that is consistent with the long term sustainability of human society, I also don't believe in government setting prices and overly regulating markets. Another problem that I have with our current system is that I think people with money have far too much influence over government. I think that an intelligent class of people who have a foremost focus on the interests of society as a whole should have the strongest influence over government, rather that people who have large amounts of money.
 
Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

What is troubling in the case of feminism is that although it purports to be against the objectification of women, it has lent itself to such objectification, and has thus allowed women to be psychologically conditioned to believe that purchasing commodities produced by corporations (e.g. cigarettes) will empower them and make them independent, when in fact the opposite is true.

Men who worked at Phillip Morris created Virginia Slimms, so blaming feminism for that is bull****. They would just as cheerfully sold a cigarette's for housewives if that is what would have made them more money. Every person in America is conditioned to buy consumer goods, so once again you are inconsistently singling about feminism without cause.

Furthermore you assertion of projection on my part is absurd because it is based on the notion that I am an advocate of communism.

No, its your thread blubbering about masculinity being destroyed by the media that motivated that particular comment.
 
Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

Men who worked at Phillip Morris created Virginia Slimms, so blaming feminism for that is bull****. They would just as cheerfully sold a cigarette's for housewives if that is what would have made them more money.

First of all, in some instances feminists have directly participated in the exploitation. For example

Feminist Ruth Hale also called for women to join in the march saying, “Women! Light another torch of freedom!

In the case of Virginia Slims, while it is true that men designed the brand, feminists such as Billie Jean King allowed themselves to be associated with the brand name by playing in and accepting money from Virginia Slims sponsored events. Not only that but the Center for Women's Policy Studies has accepted sponsorships from Philip Morris and/or R J Reynolds. One it's website it claims to be the first feminist policy analysis institution.

The Center for Women Policy Studies was founded in 1972 as the nation’s first feminist policy analysis, research and advocacy institution.

So why didn't such women and organizations speak out against the exploitation of women by these companies? You tell me.

They would just as cheerfully sold a cigarette's for housewives if that is what would have made them more money.

Since you brought up housewives, this ad appears to denigrate the role of a woman as a housewife

76end018.jpg


Every person in America is conditioned to buy consumer goods, so once again you are inconsistently singling about feminism without cause.

I have stated what is problematic in this particular instance. Do I need to repeat what I said for you?

No, its your thread blubbering about masculinity being destroyed by the media that motivated that particular comment.

Thread blubbering! :lamo

I like your spirit.

That said madam, no one said anything about masculinity being destroyed. What was said was asked was if their was a war being waged on masculinity. Your comment makes one wonder if that was some sort of Freudian slip? ;) JK
 
Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

But - you have to admit it was pretty ridiculous that it was illegal for women to smoke in public.

WHEN was that? Curiosity is freeing - I did some research.

Chapter 2. Patterns of Tobacco Use Among Women and Girls - Women and Smoking - NCBI Bookshelf

In New York, a law was passed in 1908 making it illegal for women to smoke in public (Sullivan 1930; Sobel 1978). However, smoking among women began to increase, and some women smoked openly in the 1920s, as social and cultural changes lessened the taboos discouraging tobacco use by women (Sullivan 1930; Brooks 1952; Tennant 1971; Wagner 1971; Sobel 1978; Gritz 1980; USDHHS 1980; Ernster 1985; Waldron 1991). Printers'Ink noted in 1924 that World War I advanced the custom of smoking among women (Wessel 1924). Although Grace Coolidge is believed to have been the first First Lady to smoke cigarettes, Eleanor Roosevelt was the first to smoke publicly (Hoover 1934).

So it was passed in 1908 - repealed a short time later.

Just a silly notion - right along with prohibition that came later.

Growing up I always thought smoking was sexy - especially when women did it. Needless to say, I started smoking when I was a teenager and I even used an opera stem for a long time.
 
Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

Edward Bernays, the father of modern propaganda, was famous for his Torches of Freedom march. Basically, Bernays was hired by the big tobacco companies to get women to smoke so the companies could increase their profits by selling women cigarettes. To accomplish this, Bernays got prominent women, who were involved in the campaign for women's rights, to organize a giant march of women cigarettes, as a symbol of their freedom.

The Museum of Public Relations

It appears that the rise in feminism can be traced to the desire by corporations to exploit women for profit.

So the question is, have feminists been used by corporations to exploit women to increase corporate profit?


Capital based morals for a price is to be expected under any form of Capitalism.
 
Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

Capital based morals for a price is to be expected under any form of Capitalism.

Real morals cannot be based on capital. What you are speaking of is a business transaction, not morals.
 
Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

Edward Bernays, the father of modern propaganda, was famous for his Torches of Freedom march. Basically, Bernays was hired by the big tobacco companies to get women to smoke so the companies could increase their profits by selling women cigarettes. To accomplish this, Bernays got prominent women, who were involved in the campaign for women's rights, to organize a giant march of women cigarettes, as a symbol of their freedom.

The Museum of Public Relations



It appears that the rise in feminism can be traced to the desire by corporations to exploit women for profit.

So the question is, have feminists been used by corporations to exploit women to increase corporate profit?

Yes,

It has always been my belief that corporations are behind feminism. It makes complete sense when you think about it and it really does not take that much thinking to understand the concept. More workers equals a larger economy to profit from.

At one point, families were able to have 1 full time worker and 1 full time to raise the children. No longer the case! Now, corporations have made it almost impossible for someone to have that option. The feminist movements goal is to tear apart the family. They are useful idiots for corporations. Corporations have funded the propaganda and steered the movement in this direction in order to profit from it. The more men and women hate each other, the more they will have children out of wedlock and all of us will have to be paid slave wages in order to survive. In order to survive we must buy things. When we buy things, we line the pockets of the very people who are trying to destroy our families.

The destruction of the family in America is a corporate dream.
 
Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

So - after women's suffrage, winning the right to use birth control, and being able to become things such as governors of states such a s Texas.

Look at marketing history: corporations will exploit anyone and anything to make a few sales. It's called marketing.

I guarantee you just as many - if not more - products have been marketed to men to further sales.

Uh what?!?!?

When I was single, I had the same Sofa, bed and furniture for years!!!! Corporations don't target men nearly as often as they target women. Some sources state that women control 80% of household spending. Why in the hell would any smart corporation target men more than women? Certainly there are niches that target men specifically, but women are the prime target. It does not take a mathematics or economics major to understand this....
 
Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

Oh, and women are finding out that the whole women's suffrage thing was a bunch of horse crap. They are more unhappy now then they have every been. They have been sold this crap cake of how wonderful it is to be in the workforce just to find out how un-wonderful it is to HAVE to work. Men have known this for centuries. That is why it is called work and not pleasure. Because work is not pleasurable! Corporate America have served women the same crap sandwhich us men have been forced to take a bite of for thousands of years. Congratulations!!! Enjoy your 30 minute lunch!
 
Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

Real morals cannot be based on capital. What you are speaking of is a business transaction, not morals.

Social morals for free may require some faith; capital morals for a price only requires capitalism and an Institution of money based markets.
 
Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

But - you have to admit it was pretty ridiculous that it was illegal for women to smoke in public.

It is ridiculous if viewed in the light that it was fine for men to do so. On the other hand it is a bad habit no matter who is doing it.
 
Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

Uh what?!?!?

When I was single, I had the same Sofa, bed and furniture for years!!!! Corporations don't target men nearly as often as they target women. Some sources state that women control 80% of household spending. Why in the hell would any smart corporation target men more than women? Certainly there are niches that target men specifically, but women are the prime target. It does not take a mathematics or economics major to understand this....

Of course they do - anytime a product is designed for men or can be sold to men they will target men. They identify "Men who do home improvement" as their demographic and then - wham. We have a macho-male geared commercial string.

Shaving cream, body wash, power tools, trucks, fast food, soda, candy - I mean, the list goes on forever and ever.

Watch any commercials lately? Gender is often exploited. Marketing plain and simple. Common place - funny - entertaining - sexist - whatever. It sells products.
 
Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

Yes,

It has always been my belief that corporations are behind feminism. It makes complete sense when you think about it and it really does not take that much thinking to understand the concept. More workers equals a larger economy to profit from.

At one point, families were able to have 1 full time worker and 1 full time to raise the children. No longer the case! Now, corporations have made it almost impossible for someone to have that option. The feminist movements goal is to tear apart the family. They are useful idiots for corporations. Corporations have funded the propaganda and steered the movement in this direction in order to profit from it. The more men and women hate each other, the more they will have children out of wedlock and all of us will have to be paid slave wages in order to survive. In order to survive we must buy things. When we buy things, we line the pockets of the very people who are trying to destroy our families.

The destruction of the family in America is a corporate dream.

I agree with what you have said here with two exceptions. I don't think feminists have a goal to tear apart the family, neither do I think that the destruction of the family is a corporate dream. Having said that, feminists, in order to achieve their goal of independence for women, have been used by corporations such that women, instead of becoming independent, have merely substituted one type of dependency for another. And that has led to the erosion of the family. Not only that but they have been mislead by corporations into believing that the consumption of corporate commodities is itself is empowering and liberating when in fact, the opposite is true. With regards to corporations, they don't care about anything except making money. And if the destruction of the family is a by product of that, they don't care. As far as they are concerned that's just tough, it's life, too bad.
 
Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

Social morals for free may require some faith; capital morals for a price only requires capitalism and an Institution of money based markets.

And I will repeat, there is no such thing as capital based morals. Morals have to do with what is right and wrong. Capital does not care for right or wrong. To capital what is right is what makes more capital. And killing an innocent person is fine if it results in making more capital. Quite frankly, that is a big the problem in the world today. The US has gone into places like Iraq and killed innocent people to secure oil supplies for the sake of making money.
 
Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

I agree with what you have said here with two exceptions. I don't think feminists have a goal to tear apart the family, neither do I think that the destruction of the family is a corporate dream. Having said that, feminists, in order to achieve their goal of independence for women, have been used by corporations such that women, instead of becoming independent, have merely substituted one type of dependency for another. And that has led to the erosion of the family. Not only that but they have been mislead by corporations into believing that the consumption of corporate commodities is itself is empowering and liberating when in fact, the opposite is true. With regards to corporations, they don't care about anything except making money. And if the destruction of the family is a by product of that, they don't care. As far as they are concerned that's just tough, it's life, too bad.

While I think you're touching on a good point I think you're also skewing it out of proportion.

The Feminists did not foster the idea of marketing to women - the COMPANY fostered the idea. They covered the cost of advertisement and contacted women who were willing to pose as models in ads.

For one: women are not unifiably reliant on any one product these days because it 'makes us dependent'. I think you can throw out that belief because it's false. Are men unifiably reliant on a product to 'make them manly'? No.

Makeup has been around for thousands of years and, if anything, it's less popular. Many women don't and never will wear it (I don't). So some things come and go like fashions - and the overall reliance on them is nil. Some things are sort of a necessity and each gender is equally marketed to: shaving cream, for example. Oddly, my favorite shaving cream that's sort of expensive is never advertised (Aveeno).

Makeup, Cigarettes, Shaving Cream, and Lawn Mowers have not altered the family dynamic in any way, shape or form. Things have not altered or destroyed the family dynamic. Products do not do that. Social values and other things do that. Beliefs and Morals are what do that.

This thread began by discussing Cigarettes. Marketing an unhealthy product to what was seen as a new demographic. Business common sense: try to branch out into as many facets of society as possible and gender is just one facet. (Quitters are another - fashion smokers are another . . . thus we have a variety of nocotein free or reduced cigarettes and fashionable cigarette items, gender geared or gender neutral. Marketing to a niche interest. Oddly enough: marketing to a niche interest that's pushing against traditional cigarette forms).

A non-cigarette, non-gender but equally disturbing trend can be seen when you look at companies like Proctor Gamble which produces Crest toothpaste. There's at least one tube of toothpaste in almost every home in the United States. Toothpaste is good business because it's seen as a necessity. So when they looked around a while back and saw that they had pretty much encouraged the need or sale of the product for every man or women in the United States they decided to branch out.

Of course, that required them to find a place that had a huge demographic to tap into - and then they had to make it happen. Where'd they go? Well Japan and China, of course. The Orient. The Orient, you see, doesn't rely on the use of manufactured toothpaste. They rely on things like Green Tea to swish with.

So they then analyzed the culture - hired cultural anthropologists to go over there, explore the state of dental hygiene in the Orient, and then worked with marketers to create a necessity for toothpaste.

How is the international marketing campaign for dental hygiene to sell toothpaste and related products going? Proctor and Gamble has that covered: Global Toothpaste Market to Reach US$12.6 Billion by 2015, According to New Report by Global Industry Analysts, Inc.

Marketing basics:
1: Identify your demographic and market to their interests.
2: If there is not a demographic with an interest then create an interest.

If you do this well you're King of the Mountain.

All major brands (General Motors, Ford, Proctor and Gamble, Kenmore (which was a woman-owned company from its start, btw), McDonald's, Walmart) - all of these big companies are BIG success stories because they mastered the art of demographic appeals.
 
Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

And I will repeat, there is no such thing as capital based morals. Morals have to do with what is right and wrong. Capital does not care for right or wrong. To capital what is right is what makes more capital. And killing an innocent person is fine if it results in making more capital. Quite frankly, that is a big the problem in the world today. The US has gone into places like Iraq and killed innocent people to secure oil supplies for the sake of making money.

You seem to have a limited view of morals.

Capital based morality for a price is more real than Faith in social morals for free.
 
Re: Have Feminists Been Used To Exploit Women For Corporate Profit?

While I think you're touching on a good point I think you're also skewing it out of proportion.

The Feminists did not foster the idea of marketing to women - the COMPANY fostered the idea. They covered the cost of advertisement and contacted women who were willing to pose as models in ads.

For one: women are not unifiably reliant on any one product these days because it 'makes us dependent'. I think you can throw out that belief because it's false. Are men unifiably reliant on a product to 'make them manly'? No.

I don't think that it's so much that I have skewed the issue out of proportion, but it is rather that you have misunderstood what I said. First of all I did not say that women fostered the idea. What I did say is that feminists have been used by corporations to increase profits. One example was Ruth Hale who encouraged women to smoke in Bernays' Torches of Freedom march.

Neither did I say that women are unifiably reliant on one product. What I did say was that by allowing feminism itself to be associated with the consumption of commodities, feminists have assisted in corporations in conditioning women consumers that they will become free and independent through the consumption of those products, and that in itself is not liberating but rather enslaving.

Makeup, Cigarettes, Shaving Cream, and Lawn Mowers have not altered the family dynamic in any way, shape or form. Things have not altered or destroyed the family dynamic. Products do not do that. Social values and other things do that. Beliefs and Morals are what do that.

That is certainly true. However what is also true is that capitalists are motivated to drive down wages as much as possible. So the larger the pool of available labor is, the more downward force is applied to wages. And feminism, by promoting the notion that a woman who stays at home and takes care of children is essentially a slave whereas a woman who works for wages is independent, has not made women independent, rather is has merely substituted one type of dependency for another. The video someone posted earlier inspired me to read some Marx yesterday. I think Marx summed this type of dependency up well when he said

He, who before was the money-owner, now strides in front as capitalist; the possessor of labour-power follows as his labourer. The one with an air of importance, smirking, intent on business; the other, timid and holding back, like one who is bringing his own hide to market and has nothing to expect but — a hiding.
 
Back
Top Bottom