Another Little Reminder
Misandry. The hatred of men and things male. Anybody out there is welcome to explain to me why this television ad for Progressive Insurance, captured in the above video, does not pertain to the hatred of men and things male.
Do you think that Progressive Insurance would hire a savvy ad agency that would do their motivational research? And do you think it is possible that this ad was designed to tap the base emotions of its targeted (female) audience? And if so, what might that, in theory, tell us about the contemporary zeitgeist -- especially the female zeitgeist? Do you believe that such queries might expedite us along the pathway of a deeper, albeit darker, understanding of the world?
Or. . do you feel that all of this is just a coincidence, and that the ad itself was merely bad judgment and bad taste by a daffy amateur scriptwriter who acted on a lark? Do you feel that the ad was intended only as a witty, ironic "jeu d'esprit" or something like that?
In addition, do you feel that the present writer needs to "lighten up", and "laugh it off", and "stop taking things so seriously"?
Oh, very well. It is only a dot, you would say -- but one among thousands. Connect those dots if you wish to grok why the MRAs are so bat-shit mean and crazy, and why they are NOT going to shut up, and why more and more of them are popping up all the time.
Go ahead Sparkles: connect those dots and make the connection! I am plumb tired of spelling it out. Get off your lazy ass and do the work yourself.
Oddly enough, I personally see nothing wrong with this advertisement, aimed at the female market, which compares buying auto insurance on the internet with cyber-voodoo revenge castration. I think this is just fine.
Furthermore, I would see nothing wrong if the Progressive Insurance Company should ALSO run an ad for the male market, regaling them with the counterpart voodoo fantasy about a man (let's call him Chris Martin) who tortures and humiliates a woman from the distant safety of his computer screen. However, decency forbids I should narrate the exact possibilities that occur to me -- so I will draw a veil of discretion here.
I can make absolutely no moral objection to running such an advertisment, depicting a treatment of women similar to the treatment of men depicted in the existing ad. And if Progressive actually did run such an ad, showing a woman being treated in such a way, by a man, via computer network, then I would make nary a squeak about this. I would be serenely untroubled by such an eventuality, and I would enjoy a glass of claret.
And yes, I fully realize that patriarchy has degraded women with these kinds of television ads for 4,627 years. Well, at least until recently. And I know it is jolly well time for women to get a piece of that action too. Indeed, that is why I think men and women should be permitted to enjoy such fun EQUALLY.
Yes. If men and women initiate serious domestic violence at an equal rate, then symmetry dictates that they ought to initiate entertaining show-biz violence at an equal rate also.
Isn't that what feminism is all about? Equality?
Surely no feminist could object to what I am proposing here.
So let's open up a window and get some equality in here. Then those nasty MRAs will have nothing to complain about any more, and misogyny might go into remission instead of growing and growing as it shows every sign of doing.
And isn't that what feminism is all about? Less misogyny?
In order to create a mental resonance, go and read this again: