D & G

That's a rape!
Fashion duo Dolce and Gabbana pulled an advertising campaign that depicted a woman lying on the ground with one man arched over her, holding her wrist, as a few other men looked on. While D & G called it an 'erotic dream', critics dubbed this a 'fantasy' rape. Rape. Wow. Now, I realize that there are groups whose jobs it is to be offended by everything, but don't you think you're trivializing rape here? I mean, rape is a horrible and violent act perpetrated on both men and women. I can't help but feel like the emotional impact of the word might be lost a bit if someone calls rape every time a guy exerts, or appears to exert, any kind of power (physical or otherwise) over a woman in an advertisement.

On a personal note, I've heard numerous women say that they like a guy who isn't afraid to take charge and go after what he wants in the bedroom. I don't recall any of those women saying they want to be raped. Despite what National Organization for Women might want you to think, there's a big difference. So let's stop using "rape" as a buzzword to satisfy personal agendas and save it for when it actually means something.
Here's the link to the article for anyone who wants to read an interview with D & G.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17490782/site/newsweek/page/1/

Rings a Bell!
This kind of thing gets me thinking back to my graduate student days. During college, I took a couple courses that basically consisted of sitting around, looking at ads, and trying to find ways in which they demeaned women in order to have some debate. And guess what? If you try really hard and take your mind to ridiculous realms of thought, you can pretty much say that any ad that even features a female is offensive. Hint: the girl who used the word 'patriarchal' in the first class of the semester was a sure sign that things were gonna get interesting.

And they did. One class, she comes out with the idea that diamond rings are "rings of oppression." She explained that in the long long ago, men would tie their women up to symbolize that the women were like property. Fast-forward many moons, and now diamond rings are a remaining symbol of a man's ownership over a woman. While I agree that the former is possible, the latter is just pure bullshit. Always the one to try and stir things up, I asked, "So when your boyfriend proposes with a ring, you won't accept it?" She shot back with, "I'm going to marry a musician so he won't be able to afford one," which is a total cop-out response and a thinly veiled attempt not to make a hypocritical ass out of herself.

Try This At Home!
This is for the men. When it comes time to take that next step in your relationship, instead of buying your girlfriend an engagement ring, use the money for a down payment on a house, or perhaps start a savings account for your future child. Explain the reasoning behind not adorning her finger with a diamond. Then see if you can count to ten before she dumps you.

Or better yet, if you're already married, steal your wife's ring and pawn it for cash. Then use that cash to buy something less oppressive, like a flat screen plasma TV or a Playstation 3. Explain it's for the greater good of her gender. I'm willing to bet she says something like, "What stupid cunt told you that?"

Oops!
Oh, and by the way, men wear wedding rings, too. Ms. Feminist never accounted for that simple, yet vital, fact. Who's oppressing whom? Fucking idiot.

What's a timing belt?
Most of the debate of women's depictions in advertisements center on gender roles and stereotypes. These issues are not limited to the media. Speaking from my experiences, it seems as if certain women appreciate gender stereotypes, but only when not applied to them. For example, a girl expecting me to open the car door or pay for everything on a date is supposedly less sexist than me expecting her to be able to cook or sew. Women want men to have the best of both masculine and feminine traits, but expecting women to have some of those same feminine qualities is somehow sexist and wrong. Some may have the opinion that a guy is less of a man in if he can't fix a car, which seems to be somewhat acceptable, yet if I were to imply that a certain female were any less of a woman because she couldn't cook, then suddenly I'm the asshole.

Come one people, let's get real. Our genders beget certain expectations. It's reality. It's the basis of attraction and of traditional gender roles, many of which are perfectly reasonable and not archaic in the least. It's the reason when I go out, I don't look for the chick with the mullet arm wrestling the bouncer for fun, nor do most girls look for the guy braiding his friend's hair in the corner booth. It's not always right, but it's not always wrong. I'm not into cars, but I don't get offended when an ad depicts an ultra muscular handsome guy as the driver/owner of Brand X car. Everyone benefits from gender stereotypes, yet we all lose out a little, too. There will always be gender roles that you'll fit, while others you may not. There are always gonna be expectations that you'll meet and exceed, while others will always be unrealistic. Most girls are not size zero supermodel types, but most guys don't have six pack abs and bulging biceps. While gender relations are not perfect, the playing field is more level than it's ever been. So let's just all shut the fuck up and enjoy each other for what we are: human beings.