# Has the media and corporations left Men behind?



## V0dka (Jun 27, 2019)

It's come to my attention in the last year or so that corporations of various kinds across almost all types of products in the last 10 years or so have been aggressively pursuing the Female demo, at the expense of the male demo.

*Trade shows.*





*Sports.*




*Videogames.*









*Movies*




*Even media.*




And I think this comes primarily from no, not feminist groups, not social justice marxist communists.  They've always been there, they've been there since the 60's.  It's _corporations_, corporations that realize they can get more money out of Women now, than Men.



_The "feminization of America" is a paradox. It is a triumph of the feminist movement -- and a sign of anti-feminist backlash. It represents a new level of respect for women's strength and independence -- and a patronizing calculation about female gullibility and weakness. It suggests that cultural politics has infected the free market -- and that the free market is controlling both politics and culture more than ever.

At the core of these contradictions is an idea new to our culture and our time: Women are now thought to have more in common with other women than they do with men of similar ethnicity, religion, or income level, their interests coinciding more with those of other women than with those of their own fathers and brothers and husbands and sons. Women now constitute a class -- a dominant class.

One phrase that crops up again and again in the mouths of those trying to sell products and shows and candidates to women is "soft focus," which implies gauzy emotional appeals over hard, rational argument. The ultimate in soft focus was this year's major advertising event, the Summer Olympics on NBC. The Olympics are, of course, a sporting event, and sporting events traditionally earn an audience that is something like 75 percent male. Horst Stipp, the network's director of social and developmental research, says, " Our research suggested that men would keep watching, but women could be added. " By placing the 19-day event in soft focus, NBC garnered huge ratings -- they were up 21 percent from 1992 -- and NBC grossed $ 700 million in advertising.

"Women on-line are probably in higher positions and incomes than men on-line -- you're getting influencers." But then she adds that a new marketing campaign from CompuServe will have "a much more emotional pitch . . . that may strike core values particularly present in women." In other words, women are sentimental.

So which is it? Are women power-wielding "influencers" or flowzy, blowzy creatures of emotion? Is this the ultimate triumph of feminism or its savage reversal?

Barbara Lippert, an advertising critic at Adweek, says, "The curious thing going on in terms of ads appealing to women is the imagery: Men and women have essentially reversed roles. For 30 years, if somebody was stupid and bought a product and got smart, it was a woman. Today it's a man. If someone is cooking, it's a man. We're ogling male nipples and breasts and pecs." The most famous of such ads is the one for Diet Coke in which women working in an office scramble to catch a glimpse of a disrobing construction worker. There's a curious con job that's being practiced in the name of feminism here. Women are being peddled the delusion that they're liberated enough to view men as sex objects, in order to get them to buy a product to keep themselves thin.

https://www.weeklystandard.com/christopher-caldwell/the-feminization-of-america_

The marketing idea is, in the modern age, with Women now more equal in earning power to Men than ever before, Women are better consumers. They are social media influencers, they will recommend products for their friends.  They are more likely to buy a product and try it if they are advertised to.  Men, conversely, are typically a weak consumer base, they tend to buy what they need, not what they want, they don't have terms like "retail therapy", they typically only try a new product if they are able to use it in person first.  They are more brand loyal.  They are picky about quality.  All bad things to have in a consumer.  

And even if they don't pander to the Male demo, they don't have to worry, because the Women in their lives will ask them to take them to the movie they want to go to, or buy the thing they want.  Men will act as a consumer proxy through Women.  And also cost of the shopping and buying decisions are often made by the Women, especially in family situations, where their kids go to school, what they eat, what they watch, what they wear, what their husband wears.

Women are the perfect marketing vector.  So you are seeing the market shift more and more to try and pander to their tastes, their wants.

So what do you guys think, crazy conspiracy theory or what?


----------



## Rand /pol/ (Jun 27, 2019)

Imagine throwing a shitfit over a conference banning strippers and a video game character's tits being small.


----------



## Zero0 (Jun 27, 2019)

Woman respond better to advertising.

And nobody gives a shit about what men want.

Think that's pretty much it.


----------



## V0dka (Jun 27, 2019)

Ron /pol/ said:


> Imagine throwing a shitfit over a conference banning strippers and a video game character's tits being small.



Well it was just an observation I've noticed. Do you think it's the correct assumption?  People talk about the "culture wars" but I don't think it's a culture war I think it's in fact a consumer war.


----------



## SmileyTimeDayCare (Jun 27, 2019)

Few thoughts:

I hit six trade shows a year sometimes more but there are six I'm always at. I think two of those at one point had _booth girls._ They really aren't a thing outside of cons and consumer hand jobbery like E3.

What a lot of companies do is hire local hot chicks to man their booth in professional attire and hand shit out. You aren't getting tits and hot young girls out of that arena because men.

The Pedowood shit is just that...The Tomb Raider girl, Stewart, and Ridley all have boyish looks. This lets the old queens jack it to girls and appear normal while they are really fucking pedos.

Women fall for advertising so it is geared to them. Go listen to old radio shows. You had three ads: Cigarettes, Car shit, and bitch shit. The car ads were like _Hey our shitty battery is better. _ while the bitch shit was _Lux will make your hair look great and everyone will love you. Johnny will marry you and give you great missionary sex. _You get the idea. Oh sorry and buy warbonds shit.

There's a certain amount of femization I'm sure but I think a lot of the fringe types are just taking the place of previous counter culture shit.  Or something I dunno I lost interest halfway through typing this shit.


----------



## V0dka (Jun 27, 2019)

SmileyTimeDayCare said:


> Few thoughts:
> 
> I hit six trade shows a year sometimes more but there are six I'm always at. I think two of those at one point had _booth girls._ They really aren't a thing outside of cons and consumer hand jobbery like E3.
> 
> ...



You sound drunker than me.


----------



## Lemmingwise (Jun 27, 2019)

You forget that women are in some ways a poorer investment as consumers, as they're far less loyal than men if you have a consistent product. More conducive to new trends and fads.

I don't think women are the perfect marketing vector; there's value in selling different products to different demographics.

Gilette's sales did not go up with their woke feminist advert.

Pepsi apologized for their ad.






The idea is being sold to corporations by marketing departments that it's a smart investment or a good ad, but that doesn not mean it aligns with reality. The most important thing in having market share is being the first. If you can't be the first, then it is to be different. It just means there is a space for male-focused products and advertising and those with desire to grow will take advantage of it.





Of course they have to deal with the backlash, because both activists and competitors will try and prevent them from being able to do so.
Also look at the removal of booth babes. That's not different companies deciding it's not in their best economic interest to use booth babes, that's a mixture of outside activists and trade show hosts making rules forbidding it. There were always booths without booth babes, and booths with booth babes. For some products it was a boost, for some it was a detriment. The removal is not happening for economic reasons.

It's more of an alliance of circumstance.

This is the superficial layer of course.

There's also the long term plan to destroy gender/sex and a lot of this is also aligned with those plans.


----------



## SmileyTimeDayCare (Jun 27, 2019)

V0dka said:


> You sound drunker than me.



Low effort != drunk.


----------



## V0dka (Jun 27, 2019)

Lemmingwise said:


> You forget that women are in some ways a poorer investment as consumers, as they're far less loyal than men if you have a consistent product. More conducive to new trends and fads.
> 
> I don't think women are the perfect marketing vector; there's value in selling different products to different demographics.
> 
> ...



I agree that it doesn't always work, but I see them trying to find new ways to bring female consumers to market.  Take Ghostbusters 2016 for example, from a marketing perspective it should make sense.  We take the Ghostbusters IP, make it an all girl comedy team, we throw in Chris Hemsworth, and the Female Demo should eat it up, and buy all the tie in products.









But it didn't quite pan out the way they wanted, back to the drawing board.


----------



## Lemmingwise (Jun 27, 2019)

V0dka said:


> I agree that it doesn't always work, but I see them trying to find new ways to bring female consumers to market. Take Ghostbusters 2016 for example, from a marketing perspective it should make sense. We take the Ghostbusters IP, make it an all girl comedy team, we throw in Chris Hemsworth, and the Female Demo should eat it up, and buy all the tie in products.



Except they forgot that women aren't funny.

And women buying tie-in products to their favorite movie? That's mostly male (autist) territory, isn't it?


----------



## REGENDarySumanai (Jun 27, 2019)

Lemmingwise said:


> Except they forgot that women aren't funny.
> 
> And women buying tie-in products to their favorite movie? That's mostly male (autist) territory, isn't it?


Most autists are male so yes.


----------



## OB 946 (Jun 27, 2019)

Most studies show that women are the primary consumers in society. In the majority of households, women decide what to buy and men decide how much to spend. It makes sense. However, that being said, we live and exist on the internet. 90% of people don't give half a fuck about any of the shit posted here. People, men and women alike, aren't part of woke culture. There's been a massive push from "industry experts" to cater to these woke policies and exclude traditional audiences with the premise that the younger, hip crowd will provide more money. Shareholders, not knowing a goddamn thing about the cultural divide, go along with it. Fortunately these companies are starting to lose their ass on these shifts and are starting to understand what makes money, which is a more traditional model.

I give it like a max of 5 more years of this bullshit before people start to revert back to what was keeping them in the black. Nobody wants to be Blizzard 2.0 where they have to lay off half their staff because they accidentally drove their fucking company into the dirt. People DO want to be the next CDPR that can pull millions of rabid fanatics to consume anything they produce. CDPR, which a little over a decade ago was a few dudes working in a dump in Poland, is now one of the most influential and successful video game companies on the planet. Don't think that the shareholders at EA, Take Two, Act-Bliz, etc aren't asking the CEO why the fuck they can't do that. It's only a matter of time.


----------



## V0dka (Jun 27, 2019)

Lemmingwise said:


> Except they forgot that women aren't funny.
> 
> And women buying tie-in products to their favorite movie? That's mostly male (autist) territory, isn't it?



Male autists are too rare to be an effective marketing vector.

But Women...









In fact you can get Women to buy all tie ins if you are able to grab the female demo, and they will show it off on social media as well, doubling the adversiting.


----------



## Lemmingwise (Jun 27, 2019)

V0dka said:


> Male autists are too rare to be an effective marketing vector.
> 
> But Women...
> 
> ...



Yes, but what product do you tie-in to ghostbusters? Ghostbusters perfume? At best I can see a ghostbuster themed rollerblades for rollerderby or something. Hardly one of the female oriented markets with mass appeal.


----------



## V0dka (Jun 27, 2019)

Lemmingwise said:


> Yes, but what product do you tie-in to ghostbusters? Ghostbusters perfume? At best I can see a ghostbuster themed rollerblades for rollerderby or something. Hardly one of the female oriented markets with mass appeal.











If you can launch a Burger King perfume and a Wonder Woman perfume, you can surely launch a Ghostbusters perfume.

But think on a wider scale.  Women have panties, bras, makeup, bags, purses, shoes, earrings, necklaces, armbands, dresses, skirts, tops, jackets, socks, leggings, little stupid keychains they have, phone cases, etc etc all ripe for marketing.  A guy in an all themed outfit based on his favorite franchise looks like an autist.  A girl looks like shes fashion aware.


----------



## Lemmingwise (Jun 27, 2019)

Burger king perfume is a japanese product. Nuff said.


----------



## V0dka (Jun 27, 2019)

Lemmingwise said:


> Burger king perfume is a japanese product. Nuff said.



Let me give you some more examples.  There's so many vectors to get women to buy tie in products.  Things Men wouldn't give a flying fuck about.


----------



## The Flawless Gazelles (Jun 27, 2019)

i'm sure the vibrator is officially licensed from disney


----------



## V0dka (Jun 27, 2019)

The Flawless Gazelles said:


> i'm sure the vibrator is officially licensed from disney



It's Elsas official vibrator!


----------



## Red Hood (Jun 27, 2019)

SmileyTimeDayCare said:


> Few thoughts:
> 
> I hit six trade shows a year sometimes more but there are six I'm always at. I think two of those at one point had _booth girls._ They really aren't a thing outside of cons and consumer hand jobbery like E3.
> 
> ...


Hey they also advertised fuel, like...

BLUE COAL!


----------



## From The Uncanny Valley (Jun 27, 2019)

V0dka said:


> Male autists are too rare to be an effective marketing vector.
> 
> But Women...
> 
> ...



Disney Princess merch is like the female version of triforce tats


----------



## Lemmingwise (Jun 27, 2019)

The perfect product for frigid women?


----------



## TiggerNits (Jun 27, 2019)

Uncanny Valley said:


> Disney Princess merch is like the female version of triforce tats



Back in the day, if a chick had a Playboy Bunny tattoo or shirt, you knew she was easy but an emotional wreck. My younger employees tell me it's shifted to a Disney purse


----------



## V0dka (Jun 27, 2019)

Uncanny Valley said:


> Disney Princess merch is like the female version of triforce tats



Must be a lot of money changing hands then


----------



## V0dka (Jun 27, 2019)

BigRuler said:


> and where have you been for the dozens of years before that? cause this stuff has been going on for a LOT longer than the past year



Yes I realize that now.  Take the "Gamers are Dead" articles from 2014 for example.





Now why did these articles drop?  Because typically, male gamers were making fun and making memes and trolling a girl who had a reputation for sleeping around to get what she wanted in the indie gaming scene.  This is a no-no, because the marketers at this point are trying to attract women into gaming, they are the new, cashed up corporate friendly consumer.  So these "gamers" have to be made an example of.  Under the veil of Social Justice and equality of course.

You'll find a lot of these companies doing things in the name of of social justice, but what they are really trying to do is attract the female demographic.  Take Sonys recent world wide change of Terms of Service.  It's about creating a safe space for female gamers.  To try and lure more of them into playing.  You see it in the media as well with calls to action against sexism and misogyny in gaming.  Where does this lead us?  The marketers pushing us to a more Female oriented market.  Because that's where the money is.  This includes trying to get more Women in as developers and designers, because they need to figure out what Women want in videogames.


----------



## MI 814 (Jun 27, 2019)

So women are hugely into games where you go around ripping people apart and grey dull depressing imagery that's akin to the Holocaust/Iraq?
From my experience most women can't stand violent games like that. They tend to prefer RPGs/Mobile Games/Platformers more than anything to be honest. Some are into more light hearted violent games like Overwatch and TF2 but I don't see how you can market those primarily to Women without alienating 60% of your demographic.
They should just make new products aimed at women instead of forcing men to go along with it.


----------



## V0dka (Jun 27, 2019)

BoomerDenton said:


> They should just make new products aimed at women instead of forcing men to go along with it.



I think they believe that is too costly, and the losses they make up from a portion of Men not playing such a game would easily be outweighed by the all the various IP products they could sell to Women, who will then also show off these purchases on instagram or twitter, spreading word of mouth and possible sales.


----------



## Marissa Moira (Jun 27, 2019)

BoomerDenton said:


> So women are hugely into games where you go around ripping people apart and grey dull depressing imagery that's akin to the Holocaust/Iraq?
> From my experience most women can't stand violent games like that. They tend to prefer RPGs/Mobile Games/Platformers more than anything to be honest. Some are into more light hearted violent games like Overwatch and TF2 but I don't see how you can market those primarily to Women without alienating 60% of your demographic.
> They should just make new products aimed at women instead of forcing men to go along with it.


The RPGs have to be very light in mechanics.

Stuff like DOS2 isn't liked by women. Yeah sure they'll get into the character creation aspect, but try and get them to steal a barrel of death fog right at the start so you can save it for later will cause them to drop the game.

Witcher 3 is another game where most women won't make it past the tutorial where you fight a fuckload of enemies right after you get off your horse.


----------



## V0dka (Jun 27, 2019)

Marissa Moira said:


> The RPGs have to be very light in mechanics.
> 
> Stuff like DOS2 isn't liked by women. Yeah sure they'll get into the character creation aspect, but try and get them to steal a barrel of death fog right at the start so you can save it for later will cause them to drop the game.
> 
> Witcher 3 is another game where most women won't make it past the tutorial where you fight a fuckload of enemies right after you get off your horse.



For a crude attempt from marketers look at Battlefield 5





Battlefield V has a female protagonist with a prosthetic arm as the face of the game, and the game also include bizarre non-historical visual customization.

Now what recent popular protagonist with Women had a prosthetic arm?




What FPS game has bizarre visual customization thats popular with Women?






It's marketing department paint by numbers.


----------



## Niggernerd (Jun 27, 2019)

Lemmingwise said:


> Yes, but what product do you tie-in to ghostbusters? Ghostbusters perfume? At best I can see a ghostbuster themed rollerblades for rollerderby or something. Hardly one of the female oriented markets with mass appeal.


ghostbuster ectoplasm anal beads


----------



## CheezzyMach (Jun 27, 2019)

Crippled Eagle said:


> Most studies show that women are the primary consumers in society. In the majority of households, women decide what to buy and men decide how much to spend. It makes sense. However, that being said, we live and exist on the internet. 90% of people don't give half a fuck about any of the shit posted here. People, men and women alike, aren't part of woke culture. There's been a massive push from "industry experts" to cater to these woke policies and exclude traditional audiences with the premise that the younger, hip crowd will provide more money. Shareholders, not knowing a goddamn thing about the cultural divide, go along with it. Fortunately these companies are starting to lose their ass on these shifts and are starting to understand what makes money, which is a more traditional model.
> 
> I give it like a max of 5 more years of this bullshit before people start to revert back to what was keeping them in the black. Nobody wants to be Blizzard 2.0 where they have to lay off half their staff because they accidentally drove their fucking company into the dirt. People DO want to be the next CDPR that can pull millions of rabid fanatics to consume anything they produce. CDPR, which a little over a decade ago was a few dudes working in a dump in Poland, is now one of the most influential and successful video game companies on the planet. Don't think that the shareholders at EA, Take Two, Act-Bliz, etc aren't asking the CEO why the fuck they can't do that. It's only a matter of time.


I'll also add, because people keep bringing it up Tomb Raider only went in a more "feminist" direction after both Legends and Underground under-performed back to back and the series had been in a decade long slump.

I think the only decent performing game of the 2000s was Anniversary.


----------



## Fek (Jun 27, 2019)

I think it's just a trend based around social media that hasn't quite died out yet. Women have typically had more "purchasing power" than men and I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with that. It's just how we're typically wired ("god no, I don't want to go shopping..just get whatever it's fine," he says).

So combine that with an (anecdotal) example:

My old lady buys dumb shit with some frequency, namely "collectible" gaming bullshit. It's her weakness (and her money), so whatever. I tend to buy far less, but far _more expensive_ dumb shit.

She buys from everywhere and anywhere so long as it's "*o**n sale" *(the magic words). I tend to buy from x place and x place only, dickering for a better deal if possible.

I think marketing departments just put more value into her way of handling things (combined with the above mentioned purchasing power) than my own. That doesn't suddenly mean it's worthless to pander to men; it's just a case of one out of touch marketing department copying another copying another copying one with its proverbial head lodged up Twitter's ass.


----------



## Sīn the Moon Daddy (Jun 27, 2019)

Fek said:


> I think it's just a trend based around social media that hasn't quite died out yet. Women have typically had more "purchasing power" than men and I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with that. It's just how we're typically wired ("god no, I don't want to go shopping..just get whatever it's fine," he says).
> 
> So combine that with an (anecdotal) example:
> 
> ...


It's really nothing new. It's just marketing trying to figure out what to do with social media, and realizing that social media is all about tits and casserole recipes. Women also have more money than ever before and that just whips those freaks into a greedy lather.

Basically I don't really think it's bad either.


----------



## Pargon (Jun 27, 2019)

I don't even give a shit. I'm so autisic that I'd prefer every product in the world be marketed the same way: said product on a table so you can see what it looks like while someone with a voice like Scientist Man spends thirty seconds of voiceover telling you what it's called, what it does, where you can buy it and for how much. The end.

Advertising is obnoxious, and targeted advertising doubly so because it's pandering at best and dishonest at worst. I recognize the need for it in society but 1000% of advertising trends and gimmicks make me want to throw myself off a cliff so screw it, put all copy writers on the same boat and torpedo it to Kindgom Fuck.


----------



## UQ 770 (Jun 27, 2019)

Its probably just the result of marketing being a trendy job in this day and age, so a lot of women who get useless degrees go into marketing based on the idea that their gender studies crap makes them the authority or something. Its pretty clear that those types are obessessed with hunky men and seem to barely give a flying fuck about actually empowering women or even marketing to them at all. Othr than bitching and moaning about "toxic masculinity", the way products are sold to women is still pinker and frillier than ever. If anything, being a brainless plastic bimbo covered in Boris Karloff levels of makeup has become even more mainstream, not less, despite how much they bitch about these things. 

Our resident vodka addict does raise a point that female characters seem to be getting smaller and daintier as time goes on. I love a chick with a big rack as much as the next guy, but that stuff is pretty dumb in a more realistic setting. Even dumber though are girls who look like 12 year olds being cast as these invincible heroes. Its just uncomfortable, and its hypocritical. They've moaned about girly mags promoting an unnatrual standard of thinness, how do you think a woman is going to feel if she happened to be a bit taller than average? You're not gonna get shorter no matter how much you starve yourself. The only chicks over four feet tall cast in this stuff are usually hambeasts. There's some kind of weirdly petty psychology going on here, and I haven't had enough to drink to put my finger on it yet.


----------



## V0dka (Jun 27, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> Its probably just the result of marketing being a trendy job in this day and age, so a lot of women who get useless degrees go into marketing based on the idea that their gender studies crap makes them the authority or something. Its pretty clear that those types are obessessed with hunky men and seem to barely give a flying fuck about actually empowering women or even marketing to them at all. Othr than bitching and moaning about "toxic masculinity", the way products are sold to women is still pinker and frillier than ever. If anything, being a brainless plastic bimbo covered in Boris Karloff levels of makeup has become even more mainstream, not less, despite how much they bitch about these things.
> 
> Our resident vodka addict does raise a point that female characters seem to be getting smaller and daintier as time goes on. I love a chick with a big rack as much as the next guy, but that stuff is pretty dumb in a more realistic setting. Even dumber though are girls who look like 12 year olds being cast as these invincible heroes. Its just uncomfortable, and its hypocritical. They've moaned about girly mags promoting an unnatrual standard of thinness, how do you think a woman is going to feel if she happened to be a bit taller than average? You're not gonna get shorter no matter how much you starve yourself. The only chicks over four feet tall cast in this stuff are usually hambeasts. There's some kind of weirdly petty psychology going on here, and I haven't had enough to drink to put my finger on it yet.



Even though we seemingly have a pro feminist media and organizations.  With women empowerment and acceptance at the center.









Plastic surgery is up, way up.  And there are thousands of sponsored beauty, and fashion channels.









And if you show Women without makeup?  That's a faux pas.





What happened to body positivity and feminism all of a sudden?   Well, it was never really there, it was just a smokescreen, it was all calculated pandering, while at the same time targetting other insecurities, so women would buy stuff.


----------



## UQ 770 (Jun 27, 2019)

V0dka said:


> What happened to body positivity and feminism all of a sudden?   Well, it was never really there, it was just a smokescreen, it was all calculated pandering, while at the same time targetting other insecurities, so women would buy stuff.



Yeah, I'd argue this is a lot more at the root of the problem than "YOU'RE A WHITE MALE REEEE". Hell, I'd put money on the reeeing being the result of this marketing instead of the cause of it. When you buy into the unattainable image, inevitably find that you'll never achieve it, then descend and end up as a fat, self-hating, nerd frames-wearing dangerhair who most men find unfuckable and most other women find too annoying and autistic to be around, all that's left is your stupid hobbies and dumb SJW opinions. I guess the only thing women hate more than men is each other.


----------



## Sīn the Moon Daddy (Jun 27, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> I guess the only thing women hate more than men is each other.


I've never seen anyone complain as bitterly about women as a woman. Incels don't even hold a candle to it.


----------



## Heartmoth (Jun 27, 2019)

Women play fortnite, among stacys and beckys both
My mom even asked me to teach her how to play fortnite
Personally I don't mind that advertising campaigns are becoming more directed to women.
The gender role of only men playing video games dissolving means that video games wont have to pander,
Because video games will be come to seen universal, regardless of gender. Nobody will care to "tone things down for the ladies". It'll just be about making a good game.

In time.


----------



## UQ 770 (Jun 27, 2019)

Sīn the Moon Daddy said:


> I've never seen anyone complain as bitterly about women as a woman. Incels don't even hold a candle to it.



I'm too drunk to bother pulling up statistics, but its pretty common knowledge by now that body issues, overeating and self-harm tend to arise in young women because the bitch queens tend to pursue and denigrate women who have more desirable traits and make their lives hell during adolescence. Not just good looks and a nice body, but also intelligence (actual nerdy chicks are like, total nervous wrecks every time I encounter them) and especially a lack of neurosis. If you aren't freaking out at every little thing and acting like an attention whore, prepare to have your school years be made absolutely fucking miserable.


----------



## V0dka (Jun 27, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> Yeah, I'd argue this is a lot more at the root of the problem than "YOU'RE A WHITE MALE REEEE". Hell, I'd put money on the reeeing being the result of this marketing instead of the cause of it. When you buy into the unattainable image, inevitably find that you'll never achieve it, then descend and end up as a fat, self-hating, nerd frames-wearing dangerhair who most men find unfuckable and most other women find too annoying and autistic to be around, all that's left is your stupid hobbies and dumb SJW opinions. I guess the only thing women hate more than men is each other.



Hating on Men is a profitable exercise really.  You can sell lots of anti male consumer goods.  And keep Women reading and watching your articles and videos.  Which means ad revenue and if you promote a "women friendly" show or movie, they may go see it.


----------



## MI 814 (Jun 27, 2019)

Heartmoth said:


> Women play fortnite, among stacys and beckys both
> My mom even asked me to teach her how to play fortnite
> Personally I don't mind that advertising campaigns are becoming more directed to women.
> The gender role of only men playing video games dissolving means that video games wont have to pander,
> ...



But won't that just make really bland and soulless looking games with no visual flair to avoid repelling males or females?


----------



## Heartmoth (Jun 27, 2019)

BoomerDenton said:


> But won't that just make really bland and soulless looking games with no visual flair to avoid repelling males or females?


Ideally it'll get to the point where females and males aren't repelled by those flairs because they've been normalized in society. Thereby allowing complete artistic freedom.


----------



## UQ 770 (Jun 27, 2019)

V0dka said:


> Hating on Men is a profitable exercise really.  You can sell lots of anti male consumer goods.  And keep Women reading and watching your articles and videos.  Which means ad revenue and if you promote a "women friendly" show or movie, they may go see it.



Might just be the fact that I'm trying to preserve my liquor cabinent this evening talking, but the more I think about this the more it seems like a thinly veiled attempt at covering up how misanthropic and narcissistic they are. I guess that's not a huge revelation, but it does immediately make my outrage evaporate into simple disgust. Society would be so much better in general if we just cut out all of this social posturing bullshit.


----------



## MI 814 (Jun 27, 2019)

Heartmoth said:


> Ideally it'll get to the point where females and males aren't repelled by those flairs because they've been normalized in society. Thereby allowing complete artistic freedom.


Gotcha, I would want that too tbh. 
Though I will probably just stick to games that interest me and many of those happen to be gory shooters like Doom.


----------



## UQ 770 (Jun 27, 2019)

Heartmoth said:


> Ideally it'll get to the point where females and males aren't repelled by those flairs because they've been normalized in society. Thereby allowing complete artistic freedom.



It'd be nice if people just took flairs less seriously in the first place. See also: the entire debate surrounding cultural appropriation.


----------



## V0dka (Jun 27, 2019)

Heartmoth said:


> Ideally it'll get to the point where females and males aren't repelled by those flairs because they've been normalized in society. Thereby allowing complete artistic freedom.



Aren't we optimistic about Tabula Rasa and how Men and Women are functionally identical?






You could see the split start to happen as far back as 2006, as they got more women into gaming that weren't traditional gamers, in attempts to figure out how to get these "normie women" into the market.


----------



## Sprig of Parsley (Jun 27, 2019)

Everything else that's occurred in this thread thus far aside:

Personal opinion is that women are more profitable to court for a number of reasons.

1. Women control the lion's share of domestic spending.  Women shop for themselves, for their kids, for their husbands.  A guy may take umbrage to the retarded Gillette campaign, but if he's married his wife won't give a shit and may even think it was great.  She will buy Gillette razors for him, and he will roll his eyes and use them because why fucking fight about it at that point?
2. You can sell most men a product, but you can sell most women an IDENTITY.  Most men like their polo shirts and power tools and craft beers.  Most women ARE their cosmetics, their jewelry, their dress, their iPhones, their shoes.  Make a good product and a man will be a happy customer.  Make your product a fashionable identity and women will throw money in wads at you to be that thing you're selling.  Men aren't immune to being sold an identity, but women EMBRACE it wholeheartedly.
3. This is getting the DEEPEST into personal opinion (backed by personal observation), but a lot of women couldn't manage money if their lives depended on it.  There is, for some reason, a greater disconnect between one's means and one's wants with a great many women.  In my time working any number of sales positions, I could generally rely on women to roll up with massive purchases of outlandishly expensive goods of nearly any sort.  Men were typically more conservative, typically only veering into spendthrift behavior with very certain types of items, and not particularly often at that.


----------



## UQ 770 (Jun 28, 2019)

Sprig of Parsley said:


> 2. You can sell most men a product, but you can sell most women an IDENTITY.



That's a nice paradigm for now but its clear that marketers have been working to make it the same for men as well. More or less, it appears to be working. For the ones who reject that mainstream identity, there is a whole other set of hucksters ready to sell you an aggressive parody of "male" identity that is clearly a product of the same thinking. The people who are proponents of this stuff pretend to be enemies, but in reality they talk to each other and formulate things to work to this dynamic.

The reason women spend so recklessly is that they've already been conditioned to accept this and be impulsive and vain in their purchases. The goal of modern advertising is to create this same condition in men.


----------



## V0dka (Jun 28, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> The reason women spend so recklessly is that they've already been conditioned to accept this and be impulsive and vain in their purchases. The goal of modern advertising is to create this same condition in men.



They are trying, and you mostly end up with the "manchildren" or "soyboys"


----------



## UQ 770 (Jun 28, 2019)

V0dka said:


> They are trying, and you mostly end up with the "manchildren" or "soyboys"



That was literally my entire point.


----------



## Sīn the Moon Daddy (Jun 28, 2019)

What even is mainstream male identity?

But I get it. They've been selling music as an identity for a while now. Gangster rappers wanted to have gangster fans. Most were all too willing to play along.

I don't know why you would want to be a soyboy. They look like fags and the beards aren't tricking anyone into thinking they're male


----------



## UQ 770 (Jun 28, 2019)

Sīn the Moon Daddy said:


> What even is mainstream male identity?



That's actually an important piece of this whole scenario. There sort of never was one, other than a very vague and general association of success and some aggression with being manly. Those are two traits I would think can occur in both genders, otherwise women would be total drooling exceptionals with zero mental capacity for anything short of basic language. 

Now, there are two big ideas of "male indentity": Be a Good Ally manchild bitch. Yeah, the most prominent ones are annoying sex pests, but I'm sure there are a lot of schlubby, easy-going guys out there who have gotten suckered into this narrative and try to emulate that to be seen as acceptable.

The other one is basically catering to every stereotype associated with Toxic Masculinity. Aggressive incels with no self-restraint that talk like tourettes patients and engage in autistic rants about how women hate them. This identity is encouraged to neutralize any guy who might start asking the wrong type of questions as well as provide a villain they can point to when screeching about rape culture.

You'll notice both of these identities *heavily* concern themselves and obessese over the way women think, and more or less have a poor grasp of what other men are supposed to be thinking.


----------



## V0dka (Jun 28, 2019)

Sprig of Parsley said:


> Everything else that's occurred in this thread thus far aside:
> 
> Personal opinion is that women are more profitable to court for a number of reasons.
> 
> ...



Yes, I agree.  Mens only real marketing weakness is sex.  Porn, Sex Workers, Cam girls, Premium Snapchats, Patreon lewds, Viagra.  But that's a finite market with maximum saturation, and most Men aren't going out to buy merchandise with their favorite porn star on the front.  Especially in this social climate.





With Women you have a near limitless vector of marketing opportunities with related tie in follow ons because they operate socially and image wise, Not only to Men, but in measuring themselves against other Women.  Across all sorts of categories.


----------



## Fek (Jun 28, 2019)

Sīn the Moon Daddy said:


> What even is mainstream male identity?



As far as the intended narrative would have you believe? If anything, I'd go with the feminization of men occurring in a lot of "male fashion" bullhonky. Extremely tight shitty pants, effeminate/softer colored sweaters/shirts, loafers/slip-ons without any fucking socks (you goddamn heathens), etc.

It's sort of like 80s upper-middle class male fashion cranked up a few notches on the fagometer.

In reality, there is no mainstream male identity because men should really be forging their own style throughout their lives.

..I hope.


----------



## UQ 770 (Jun 28, 2019)

V0dka said:


> Yes, I agree.  Mens only real marketing weakness is sex.  Porn, Sex Workers, Cam girls, Premium Snapchats, Patreon lewds, Viagra.  But that's a finite market with maximum saturation, and most Men aren't going out to buy merchandise with their favorite porn star on the front.



Speak for yourself dude. I know plenty of guys who aren't out to fuck every single thing that moves. The guys who get suckered into that sort of thing are, again, acting out of impulsive behavior. Which marketing tries to encourage because impulsive behavior leads to purchases even when you don't need them or had no real desire for the thing in the first place. Women are also sick fucks into blowing their money on sex garbage as well, that aspect is just kind of covered up. Pick up any cheap romance book marketed to women some time and flip to a random passage. Its filled with degeneracy to rival any porn site.


----------



## V0dka (Jun 28, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> Speak for yourself dude. I know plenty of guys who aren't out to fuck every single thing that moves.



So none of your friends ever looked at porn in their life?



Locomotive Derangement said:


> Pick up any cheap romance book marketed to women some time and flip to a random passage. Its filled with degeneracy to rival any porn site.



Yes, we know, 50 Shades of Grey was a best seller. Then made into a movie.  And yet it wasn't classed as actual porn.  Because Women operate differently to Men.  But they'll also buy a vibrator to use after they've finished reading.  A vibrator is part of most girls top drawer.  A fleshlight is for weirdo men who are forever alone.  Interesting how functionally the same device is thought of differently?  That's where I see the female oriented market manifest again.


----------



## UQ 770 (Jun 28, 2019)

V0dka said:


> So none of your friends ever looked at porn in their life?



Looking at/jerking off to porn as proof of being a sex maniac is not only an outdated idea, its like, literally out of the 1980s radical feminist playbook. I agree that some people take it way too far and jerk off like thirty times a day, but I don't think its an indicator of anything in its own right. Also as I said, women look at porn too, to which:



V0dka said:


> Yes, we know, 50 Shades of Grey was a best seller. Then made into a movie.  And yet it wasn't classed as actual porn.  Because Women operate differently to Men.



You sweet summer child, this is so much older than 50 Shades of Grey. But seriously, some of the shit you'll read in cheap romance novels is nauseating. To say nothing of what certified lunatics like Anne Rice got up to. I'd go as far to say that 50 Shades of Grey is the outlier; a piece of web fiction that achieve mainstream success. Its nowhere near as detailed as this shit tends to get. Sadly.


----------



## V0dka (Jun 28, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> You sweet summer child, this is so much older than 50 Shades of Grey. But seriously, some of the shit you'll read in cheap romance novels is nauseating. To say nothing of what certified lunatics like Anne Rice got up to. I'd go as far to say that 50 Shades of Grey is the outlier; a piece of web fiction that achieve mainstream success. Its nowhere near as detailed as this shit tends to get. Sadly.



Yes and once again the Women come out on top as the superior consumer.  You can put those books out in plain view, supermarkets, drug stores etc etc.  And where do you find the porn for Men?  Tucked away in a corner, in a small shop in a seedy alley.  It's not mainstream friendly.


----------



## UQ 770 (Jun 28, 2019)

V0dka said:


> Yes and once again the Women come out on top as the superior consumer.  You can put those books out in plain view, supermarkets, drug stores etc etc.  And where do you find the porn for Men?  Tucked away in a corner, in a small shop in a seedy alley.  It's not mainstream friendly.



I lay that down entirely to the fact that its in text form and therefore not instantly explicit. Consuming porn in public has probably become more common across the board now that you can pretend you're doing something important on your phone.


----------



## V0dka (Jun 28, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> I lay that down entirely to the fact that its in text form and therefore not instantly explicit. Consuming porn in public has probably become more common across the board now that you can pretend you're doing something important on your phone.



But thats one of the ways I think Women and Men operate differently when it comes to porn and fiction.  Women typically operate on a mental level, when the read something, they imagine experiencing it themselves.  When Men typically operate, it's on a visual level, they have to see something to process it.

Take for example Bella from Twilight and Rey from Star Wars.  People have said these characters are blank, and are Mary Sues. These are movies trying to be written for Women, they aren't supposed to be characters separate from the viewer, they are supposed to be the Avatar for the female viewers to experience the movie.   Similarly to when Women reading romance novels, THEY are supposed to be the heroine.  They are supposed to be experiencing what she is experiencing.

I think thats one of the key differences between how Men and Women process media and entertainment.






Which is funny when Women talk about power fantasy with Men, they are coming from the angle that Men process entertainment in the same way.  No, Men don't imagine they are Captain America when watching the movie.


----------



## UQ 770 (Jun 28, 2019)

V0dka said:


> I think thats one of the key differences between how Men and Women process media and entertainment.



I get the idea, but I'm really not convinced that it operates on such a fundamental level like that. I'm more willing to throw my hat in with the camp that says the women who fantasize in a more upfront manner are simply ignored. Likewise, I'm pretty sure the men who obessively put themselves into a story they get off too are probably ignored as well. Arguing about this shit on the level of sexuality is a huge waste of time though because humans are inherently degenerate and are going to get off to whatever they get off too. I refuse to subscribe to the theory that functioning human beings are slave to their sexuality outside of short bursts. That's exactly the shit radical feminists and "you know you want it" types have been trying to ram down people's throats (and other parts) for years. I don't buy it, otherwise sex would be even more casual in society than it is now.


----------



## V0dka (Jun 28, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> I get the idea, but I'm really not convinced that it operates on such a fundamental level like that. I'm more willing to throw my hat in with the camp that says the women who fantasize in a more upfront manner are simply ignored. Likewise, I'm pretty sure the men who obessively put themselves into a story they get off too are probably ignored as well. Arguing about this shit on the level of sexuality is a huge waste of time though because humans are inherently degenerate and are going to get off to whatever they get off too. I refuse to subscribe to the theory that functioning human beings are slave to their sexuality outside of short bursts. That's exactly the shit radical feminists and "you know you want it" types have been trying to ram down people's throats (and other parts) for years. I don't buy it, otherwise sex would be even more casual in society than it is now.



I understand what you are saying, and sure, I agree, but I think the proof is in the market.  If the majority of Women wanted visual porn, and not written porn, then the market would operate that way.  And I'm sure that there are some Men than enjoy a well written sex scene.

But the market the way it is, I think the general consensus is clear.


----------



## UQ 770 (Jun 28, 2019)

V0dka said:


> I understand what you are saying, and sure, I agree, but I think the proof is in the market.  If the majority of Women wanted visual porn, and not written porn, then the market would operate that way.



Eh. At the end of the day, people will often take what they can get. If the supply is not there, then the demand eats shit and settles for less, sometimes.


----------



## Dom Cruise (Jun 28, 2019)

Oh yes, males have been completely abandoned by modern culture, almost everything is geared toward a female audience/market and anything that isn't explicitly geared towards females is at best gender neutral (like say The Avengers movies)

Imagine how terrible it must be to be a little boy in today's culture, there is nothing made just for you anymore, you are completely unwanted and unloved by modern society.

Basically the 2010s is just a weird reversal of the 1980s, the 1980s was almost as male dominated a culture as the 2010s is female dominated, I think it's hopefully just a phase and things will even out into more neutral territory likes the 90s and 2000s.


----------



## V0dka (Jun 28, 2019)

Dom Cruise said:


> Oh yes, males have been completely abandoned by modern culture, almost everything is geared toward a female audience/market and anything that isn't explicitly geared towards females is at best gender neutral (like say The Avengers movies)



You see it across all movies these days.  Female leads look typically non-threatening to other Women, while the guys are all super buff.  More like romcoms, a female oriented genre.  Almost every male star needs to have a shirtless scene in a movie now.  You can barely find a bikini shot from below the neck in a mainstream movie these days.






Even the reboot of Baywatch, which was know for its hot girls in bikinis, is now a bromance comedy.  The girls are typically wearing more than they were in the TV show.







Dom Cruise said:


> magine how terrible it must be to be a little boy in today's culture, there is nothing made just for you anymore, you are completely unwanted and unloved by modern society.



I wonder if it's a factor in some Men wanting to be Women.


----------



## Lemmingwise (Jun 28, 2019)

BoomerDenton said:


> So women are hugely into games where you go around ripping people apart and grey dull depressing imagery that's akin to the Holocaust/Iraq?
> From my experience most women can't stand violent games like that. They tend to prefer RPGs/Mobile Games/Platformers more than anything to be honest. Some are into more light hearted violent games like Overwatch and TF2 but I don't see how you can market those primarily to Women without alienating 60% of your demographic.
> They should just make new products aimed at women instead of forcing men to go along with it.




But then how do you insert your agenda of removing the gender binary into games?


----------



## MI 814 (Jun 28, 2019)

V0dka said:


> Yes and once again the Women come out on top as the superior consumer.  You can put those books out in plain view, supermarkets, drug stores etc etc.  And where do you find the porn for Men?  Tucked away in a corner, in a small shop in a seedy alley.  It's not mainstream friendly.



You sounded like a out of touch marketer right then lol.


----------



## MI 814 (Jun 28, 2019)

Lemmingwise said:


> But then how do you insert your agenda of removing the gender binary into games?


How the fuck is that gonna make things better for people?


----------



## Lemmingwise (Jun 28, 2019)

BoomerDenton said:


> How the fuck is that gonna make things better for people?



Why do you presume an altruistic, humanist motive?


----------



## UQ 770 (Jun 28, 2019)

V0dka said:


> You see it across all movies these days.  Female leads look typically non-threatening to other Women, while the guys are all super buff.  More like romcoms,



There. That's exactly what I was looking for but couldn't put my finger on. Its like every genre has become a rom-com wearing the skin of whatever it was originally supposed to be. Even as a kid I hated rom-coms because they exemplified everything I find vapid and artifical about modern society. I know its a common joke that guys hate rom-coms, but I personally find them extremely depressing to watch because every single character in them is always air-headed and morally bankrupt. Its just not pleasant to watch, I'd rather put on a horror flick if I want to be disgusted by inhumanity. Modern Hollywood is Invasion of the Body Snatchers except the Body Snatchers are Bridgette Jones tie-ins.


----------



## Sprig of Parsley (Jun 28, 2019)

...I fucking hate romcoms.


----------



## V0dka (Jun 28, 2019)

BoomerDenton said:


> How the fuck is that gonna make things better for people?



This isn't about making things better for people, it's about money, Women bring the money, Women spend the money.  The only ones who are even more susceptible to advertising and forcing people to buy stuff for them are kids.  Which is why the videogame lootbox is such a big issue, they are trying to figure out a way to monetize to children to the point that its technically and legally not gambling, but almost is.


----------



## Kaiser Wilhelm's Ghost (Jun 28, 2019)

It's not surprising that women are targeted subtly or not so in terms of advertising. 

They are single handedly the biggest consumer market in the world. 

I'm not being hyperbolic, it's a well documented fact that women spend more on average than men, and that has always been the case. 

In the pre 60's era it was referred to household management and a wife's purchasing power was tied to her male counterpart. She bought everything that was needed for the management of the household, and also would have an allowance. The male would also have an allowance. This was the general standard for the time.   

Now even then, several companies hired psychologist to create advertising methods in order to entice sales. From dish soap to cleaners, soap operas were created to keep housewives entertained and sell advertiments, because they knew they were the largest consumer classes for those items. 

Then think for a moment how subtle motivation works on people on a psychological level. 

Until ad campaigns and media reinforced in the 1950's, a glorified femme fatale smoking. 

The habit was largely a male one, but through the manipulation of the media, as well as some very well targeted advertising, women started to take up smoking. 

Within a couple of years, women became the single largest demographic for smokers of that age range, and even now they make up the biggest numbers in terms of early adopters and lifelong smokers.    

Same bias confirmation can be seen with clothing sales. If you go to a clothes store that is unisex, look at the sizes of the selections. Males and children combined, will not match the size of the female clothing section. 

The reason being is that they are specifically the main consumers of fashion products and accordant industries. 

So it makes sense from a marketing perspective, to try and feminize or at least equalize traditional male interest markets, as these particular markets opened up to a more readily available and in part on average wealthier consumer class (when not discounting years taken out of workplace for child rearing, or life changes, a women on the same hours earns more than male counterparts in the same job over a lifetime period.) 

It's no wonder that there would be a change to try and make it more market friendly. 

Men at the same time seem to have lost a majority of the traditional male interests and dare I say it, safe spaces of male interaction in exchange for new interests which promote consumerism. (Video games, popular culture stuff, etc.) Companies now want to cash in on these popular franchises more, and a perfect way to do it, is by getting more general female involvement in fandoms. 

I can guarantee you, that there is no move to feminize wood working.


----------



## V0dka (Jun 28, 2019)

Kaiser Wilhelm's Ghost said:


> I can guarantee you, that there is no move to feminize wood working.



No, theres little money to be made there in the corporate sense, they buy a piece of lumber, and some tools and thats the end of their spending for quite some time.  There's no marketing or consumer opportunities there.

But you see Women getting targetted in Home Renovation and DIY Decor TV Shows and youtube channels.  Either the Woman works alone on planning and decorating, and the b/f or a friend or a bunch of guys come and do the heavy lifting.











Because what the fuck do guys care for a "Dream Kitchen" or "Dream Bathroom"?  As long as everything fucking works and its not rotting, its a dream to them, they are horrible consumers for this, they need the prodding from the Women, who've been watching the shows.


----------



## Slap47 (Jun 28, 2019)

Women have always been the consumers.

There is a roman proverb that talks about half of the roman economy going to Persia to buy silk for fancy dresses and makeup.

Women used to be alright, now they're insane and hate men.


----------



## V0dka (Jun 28, 2019)

Kaiser Wilhelm's Ghost said:


> So it makes sense from a marketing perspective, to try and feminize or at least equalize traditional male interest markets, as these particular markets opened up to a more readily available and in part on average wealthier consumer class (when not discounting years taken out of workplace for child rearing, or life changes, a women on the same hours earns more than male counterparts in the same job over a lifetime period.)
> 
> It's no wonder that there would be a change to try and make it more market friendly.
> 
> Men at the same time seem to have lost a majority of the traditional male interests and dare I say it, safe spaces of male interaction in exchange for new interests which promote consumerism. (Video games, popular culture stuff, etc.) Companies now want to cash in on these popular franchises more, and a perfect way to do it, is by getting more general female involvement in fandoms.




See this is the important point here.  Some people talk about "culture wars" and "women invading mens spaces", and I think that's just a line you are fed.  The real idea is, women never invaded mens spaces, the spaces left men for women, for the money.  And people seemed to have missed the forest from the trees.


----------



## Dom Cruise (Jun 28, 2019)

By the way, I said the 2000s was a more "neutral" time but thinking again, the 2000s was a very male oriented culture as well, the differences in attitudes about women in the 2000s versus the 2010s is night and day.

Like for example all those Axe Body Spray commercials, remember those? You can't even imagine an advertisement like that today, it may as well be some sexist 1950s ad for as out of lockstep with modern culture as they are and we're only talking the prior decade.


----------



## Sīn the Moon Daddy (Jun 28, 2019)

V0dka said:


> No, theres little money to be made there in the corporate sense, they buy a piece of lumber, and some tools and thats the end of their spending for quite some time.  There's no marketing or consumer opportunities there.
> 
> But you see Women getting targetted in Home Renovation and DIY Decor TV Shows and youtube channels.  Either the Woman works alone on planning and decorating, and the b/f or a friend or a bunch of guys come and do the heavy lifting.
> 
> ...


It was astonishing to watch Ana Kasparian remodeling her own bathroom. Hopefully she's out sick on the day Cenk finally snaps and brings a gun to work.


----------



## Kaiser Wilhelm's Ghost (Jun 28, 2019)

V0dka said:


> No, theres little money to be made there in the corporate sense, they buy a piece of lumber, and some tools and thats the end of their spending for quite some time.  There's no marketing or consumer opportunities there.
> 
> But you see Women getting targetted in Home Renovation and DIY Decor TV Shows and youtube channels.  Either the Woman works alone on planning and decorating, and the b/f or a friend or a bunch of guys come and do the heavy lifting.
> 
> ...



Women have always been the homemakers. Not that men don't appreciate asceticism, but guaranteed any major home renovations in my experience have always been predicated on male labor, and female planning.


----------



## V0dka (Jun 28, 2019)

Dom Cruise said:


> By the way, I said the 2000s was a more "neutral" time but thinking again, the 2000s was a very male oriented culture as well, the differences in attitudes about women in the 2000s versus the 2010s is night and day.
> 
> Like for example all those Axe Body Spray commercials, remember those? You can't even imagine an advertisement like that today, it may as well be some sexist 1950s ad for as out of lockstep with modern culture as they are and we're only talking the prior decade.



Prime Time Television 1980's


----------



## Lemmingwise (Jun 28, 2019)

V0dka said:


> Prime Time Television 1980's


This is from roughly 10 years ago of prime time tv:


----------



## Syaoran Li (Jun 28, 2019)

Dom Cruise said:


> Oh yes, males have been completely abandoned by modern culture, almost everything is geared toward a female audience/market and anything that isn't explicitly geared towards females is at best gender neutral (like say The Avengers movies)
> 
> Imagine how terrible it must be to be a little boy in today's culture, there is nothing made just for you anymore, you are completely unwanted and unloved by modern society.
> 
> Basically the 2010s is just a weird reversal of the 1980s, the 1980s was almost as male dominated a culture as the 2010s is female dominated, I think it's hopefully just a phase and things will even out into more neutral territory likes the 90s and 2000s.



I'm not gonna lie, this post made me realize just how much I miss the late 1990's and the 2000's. Maybe it was because I was a kid in the 90's and 2000's, but things did feel better and in the case of the late 90's, objectively were better if you lived in the United States because of the economic prosperity.

Even the 2000's was a better time up until about 2007-2009 when the Great Recession was in full swing and the seeds of the current culture wars were planted before sprouting in 2011 with Occupy Wall Street.

Yes, 9/11 and the resulting wars were bad but the economy was doing well (aside from a very brief and mild recession in late 2001 and early 2002 following 9/11 and the Dot Com bubble bursting) and pop culture seemed more fun and varied than in the 2010's.

While a lot of bad trends of 2010's pop culture started in the 2000's such as superhero movies, Harry Potter, the decline of mainstream music, and hipster culture emerging at the tail end of the 2000's, it didn't seem as bad because there were still more options and variety.

(Yes, I know the Harry Potter books started to come out in the late 90's, but it didn't become the massive cornerstone of Millennial pop culture until the movies in the early 2000's)

There was plenty of female-oriented and gender-neutral entertainment options but male-oriented entertainment wasn't excluded and derided like it is in the 2010's, particularly in the case of entertainment aimed at boys and young males. You had social and political messages in lots of pop culture works from the 90's and 2000's, but it wasn't shoehorned into everything like it is now.

The internet was a lot more free and less corporate in the 2000's than in the 2010's while still being a hell of a lot more accessible and user-friendly than in the 1990's and while mid-budget games and movies were in decline in the 2000's, they were still there, unlike the 2010's.

2010's cinema seems to be the same mix of capeshit, unwarranted sequels and remakes, tired romantic comedies, and boring pretentious indie films every single fucking year.

Even the oft-derided summer blockbusters were better in the 1990's and 2000's simply because there was more variety to them, as opposed to the capeshit and "woke" updates to pre-existing IP's.



Dom Cruise said:


> By the way, I said the 2000s was a more "neutral" time but thinking again, the 2000s was a very male oriented culture as well, the differences in attitudes about women in the 2000s versus the 2010s is night and day.
> 
> Like for example all those Axe Body Spray commercials, remember those? You can't even imagine an advertisement like that today, it may as well be some sexist 1950s ad for as out of lockstep with modern culture as they are and we're only talking the prior decade.



Again, I miss the 1990's and 2000's so much. But I repeat myself.

The good news is that America is built on the pendulum effect, both culturally and politically. History has proven this time and again.

The woke malaise of the 2010's will end eventually, and we'll probably see more masculine entertainment reemerge as we go further into the 2020's and 2030's.

Right now, the corporations are near-exclusively pursuing the female demographic while ignoring male audiences, if not outright rejecting them.

But the bubble of SJW culture will eventually burst and the major corporations will stop listening to the vocal minority more and more (barring true believers like Google, although if the DOJ investigations fuck them up enough, that may diminish) and start seeing dollar signs in pursuing a long-neglected demographic.

I don't know when exactly that will happen, but it will happen eventually. The darkest hour is always before dawn.


----------



## Dom Cruise (Jun 28, 2019)

Syaoran Li said:


> I'm not gonna lie, this post made me realize just how much I miss the late 1990's and the 2000's. Maybe it was because I was a kid in the 90's and 2000's, but things did feel better and in the case of the late 90's, objectively were better if you lived in the United States because of the economic prosperity.
> 
> Even the 2000's was a better time up until about 2007-2009 when the Great Recession was in full swing and the seeds of the current culture wars were planted before sprouting in 2011 with Occupy Wall Street.
> 
> ...



I feel the exact same way about the 2000s, the 2000s in hindsight wasn't as bad of a decade as it seemed at the time, some unfortunate things happened, but the 2010s is worse.

I think the key difference is between the 90s and 2000s was that mainstream American culture was very nihilistic, a lot of people just wanted to get drunk, get high, get laid and party till the break of dawn.

And if you weren't into that they couldn't have cared less, you were free to carve out your own path in life and do what you wanted, the party people weren't paying any attention to you.

But human beings are not naturally nihilistic creatures, most people want to have some form of meaning in their lives and after 20 years of nihilism the vacuum in mainstream American culture after it abandoned traditional Christian values gradually became filled by left wing , Marxist, identity politics, hence the SJWs.

The trouble is, the last thing SJWs do is leave everyone else alone, they want everyone to be indoctrinated into their little cult, no longer are you free to carve out your own path in life, you have to live the way SJWs think you should live.

So 90s and 2000s America was more nihilistic, but at least more free, today there's been a return of morality but it's a corrupt, evil morality and it's very, very controlling.


----------



## MI 814 (Jun 28, 2019)

Women would enjoy smoking because it's really more or less a neutral thing. But getting women into games and movies that fear a lot of gore and dark imagery doesn't feel quite so plausible to me. 
What I am saying is just because you can get women into one thing, doesn't mean you can get the same result in other mediums.


----------



## V0dka (Jun 28, 2019)

BoomerDenton said:


> Women would enjoy smoking because it's really more or less a neutral thing. But getting women into games and movies that fear a lot of gore and dark imagery doesn't feel quite so plausible to me.
> What I am saying is just because you can get women into one thing, doesn't mean you can get the same result in other mediums.



Then you just change whats in the medium.  If women don't like exploding heads and blood spatters, remove them. If men are mad, fuck em, they aren't spending as much as these new women players.  That's what I mean when the market is changing to suit Women, to attract them.  Remember Christina Hendricks?  Basically the modern day version of Pamela Anderson or Marilyn Monroe?  She went off and did Broadway, obscure movies and TV, then voice acting.  Fucking voice acting?  What does that tell you? If this were the 1940's or 1950's she'd be the number 1 box office draw. 







 Now, a girl that looks like a 12 year old boy plays Lara Croft in Tomb Raider.


----------



## Drunk and Pour (Jun 29, 2019)

I've heard the reason for this is ironically sexist.  Women do most of the shopping, so it's profitable to advertise to them.  Like that Gillette ad.


----------



## nonvir_1984 (Jun 29, 2019)

V0dka said:


> Male autists are too rare to be an effective marketing vector.


Well, I'm not sure that's fair. There's a shit load of allegedly human males like Bob "MovieBob" Chipman - Obese Fascist Eugenics-Loving Elitist Pop Culture Critic with a Mario & MCU Fetish..
If you go to a big hardware store on a Saturday you'll see them.  So, in some respect not they have not.
But in general I agree that the future is vagina.


----------



## MI 814 (Jun 29, 2019)

V0dka said:


> Then you just change whats in the medium.  If women don't like exploding heads and blood spatters, remove them. If men are mad, fuck em, they aren't spending as much as these new women players.  That's what I mean when the market is changing to suit Women, to attract them.  Remember Christina Hendricks?  Basically the modern day version of Pamela Anderson or Marilyn Monroe?  She went off and did Broadway, obscure movies and TV, then voice acting.  Fucking voice acting?  What does that tell you? If this were the 1940's or 1950's she'd be the number 1 box office draw.  Now, a girl that looks like a 12 year old boy plays Lara Croft in Tomb Raider.
> 
> View attachment 819955



Sure though you want to make games exclusively to women? 
Because that's basically what you are getting at. I think you aren't thinking necessarily with what's really happening, but with other examples in the past and applying it to wildly different things. 
Games like GTA wouldn't be popular with that many women and those games sell billions of copies regardless. Again, SURE you want to throw out men and just make a few millions rather than billions?


----------



## V0dka (Jun 29, 2019)

BoomerDenton said:


> Sure though you want to make games exclusively to women?



Maybe not exclusively, probably up to the point where turning off too many Men would be a profit negative.  Losing 1 guy player to 1 girl player is a good trade, losing 3 guys per 1 girl is probably a bad trade


----------



## NN 401 (Jul 1, 2019)

https://youtu.be/6rQPDb-PJyI


Do you know what I miss?


The 80s and 90s muscle chicks.

Jeannette Goldstein, Grace Jones, Cynthia Rothrock.
And they weren’t depicted as freaks either but badass chicks who had their own sexiness.

It just seemed like we had a greater diversity of female leads and ancillary characters.

Now it vacillates between skinny waifs thanks to Joss Whedon and body positive types (read: fat).


On topic:


Most of you are missing something very important.

The Kathleen Kennedy’s of the world aren’t trying to cater to women.

They’re catering to _themselves._

They’ve realized that to a certain extent marketing and Hollywood can bend the values of the general population.

How else did premarital sex, single motherhood, and rampant consumerism gain such a foothold?

They’re trying to reshape the world into their own image.

An image that reflects not a diversity of values but theirs alone and gives them asspats wherever they go for being the pinnacle of those fucked values.


Most of the high level positions in corporations, government and elsewhere that are so coveted aren’t filled with middle or even upper middle class people.

But rather the children of people who know people, went to the same schools, etc.

They’re essentially circle jerking themselves off and each other with offerings like Fembusters and what not.

If tomorrow they decided, because they have no real soul or core values, that white is right and all that Nazi Jazz is trendy that’s what you’d see all of sudden.


----------



## V0dka (Jul 1, 2019)

BlastDoors41 said:


> Do you know what I miss?
> 
> 
> The 80s and 90s muscle chicks.
> ...



Those types are still around, but only Men would really be interested in them, and Men aren't profitable enough.  You'll find them off in some obscure corner of the internet.


----------



## Biscuit1984 (Jul 4, 2019)

Ron /pol/ said:


> Imagine throwing a shitfit over a conference banning strippers and a video game character's tits being small.



Imagine being so short sighted that you cannot see how liberty is eroded by making one small concession at a time. 

You are a low test faggot and you should be ashamed of yourself


----------



## V0dka (Jul 4, 2019)

Biscuit1984 said:


> Imagine being so short sighted that you cannot see how liberty is eroded by making one small concession at a time.
> 
> You are a low test faggot and you should be ashamed of yourself



Maybe he's just gay.

I mean can you imagine something like this happening during primetime in America today?  With Women instead of Men?  No way, they'd be pulled off the air.


----------



## Jarolleon (Jul 4, 2019)

Pargon said:


> I don't even give a shit. I'm so autisic that I'd prefer every product in the world be marketed the same way: said product on a table so you can see what it looks like while someone with a voice like Scientist Man spends thirty seconds of voiceover telling you what it's called, what it does, where you can buy it and for how much. The end.
> 
> Advertising is obnoxious, and targeted advertising doubly so because it's pandering at best and dishonest at worst. I recognize the need for it in society but 1000% of advertising trends and gimmicks make me want to throw myself off a cliff so screw it, put all copy writers on the same boat and torpedo it to Kindgom Fuck.


So they should all be like those Blue Coal radio ads?


----------



## UQ 770 (Jul 4, 2019)

Biscuit1984 said:


> Imagine being so short sighted that you cannot see how liberty is eroded by making one small concession at a time.
> 
> You are a low test faggot and you should be ashamed of yourself



If we've reached a point where kicking a bunch of thots out of a shitty marketing event already pre-designed for stupid people to just consume product and don't ask questions somehow counts as liberty being eroded, then our culture is so unbelieveably far fucking gone that there is zero hope for anything. Seriously, what kind of blasted, corporate wasteland hellscape do you live in where the last bastion of liberty is an advertising gimmick? And a rather effortless one at that?



V0dka said:


> Those types are still around, but only Men would really be interested in them, and Men aren't profitable enough.  You'll find them off in some obscure corner of the internet.



Uh, where did you find these? Asking for a friend.


----------



## V0dka (Jul 4, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> Uh, where did you find these? Asking for a friend.



I dunno where, I just randomly find stuff and have to figure out who it is.

Julia Vin - Power lifter




Rin Nakai  - Japanese Wrestler





Nastascha Enciosa - Fitness Model


----------



## Biscuit1984 (Jul 5, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> If we've reached a point where kicking a bunch of thots out of a shitty marketing event already pre-designed for stupid people to just consume product and don't ask questions somehow counts as liberty being eroded, then our culture is so unbelieveably far fucking gone that there is zero hope for anything. Seriously, what kind of blasted, corporate wasteland hellscape do you live in where the last bastion of liberty is an advertising gimmick? And a rather effortless one at that?
> 
> Uh, where did you find these? Asking for a friend.



Great way to completely miss the point

The issue is not women getting their tits out at some conference. The issue is that spastics like the homosexual I responded to continue to make minor concessions everywhere while scolding other people into compromises over little things. Lots of little things that eventually end up with society looking like it does today. This is exactly why conservatives have lost the culture war. One little concession after the other, like a pack of spineless cucks wanting to look like the moderate voice of reason as they claim the moral high ground constantly. 

Its completely subversive behavior and as must as I detest the average shitlib, I detest the pearl clutching cucks even more.


----------



## UQ 770 (Jul 5, 2019)

Biscuit1984 said:


> Great way to completely miss the point
> 
> The issue is not women getting their tits out at some conference. The issue is that spastics like the homosexual I responded to continue to make minor concessions everywhere while scolding other people into compromises over little things. Lots of little things that eventually end up with society looking like it does today. This is exactly why conservatives have lost the culture war. One little concession after the other, like a pack of spineless cucks wanting to look like the moderate voice of reason as they claim the moral high ground constantly.
> 
> Its completely subversive behavior and as must as I detest the average shitlib, I detest the pearl clutching cucks even more.



So you'd rather get cucked by a corporation (you ain't sticking your dick in that thot no matter how hard you try) than get cucked get by a bunch of soyboys? 

Oh wait. Same thing.


----------



## V0dka (Jul 5, 2019)

Biscuit1984 said:


> Great way to completely miss the point
> 
> The issue is not women getting their tits out at some conference. The issue is that spastics like the homosexual I responded to continue to make minor concessions everywhere while scolding other people into compromises over little things.
> 
> Its completely subversive behavior and as must as I detest the average shitlib, I detest the pearl clutching cucks even more.



Once again I don't think it's woke concessions, it's just a smokescreen for basically saying "We want women in our industry, either as consumers or designers, so we can market to women"

Look at these designers, all these are Men talking about their young daughters.  If you read between the lines, all the feminist/woke talk is just, "we need women gamers, they spend the cash."  Apparently all these people are talking about their young daughters, never their young sons. 

I guess the hormone therapy will fix that.


----------



## UQ 770 (Jul 5, 2019)

V0dka said:


> Once again I don't think it's woke concessions, it's just a smokescreen for basically saying "We want women in our industry, either as consumers or designers, so we can market to women"
> 
> Look at these designers, all these are Men talking about their young daughters.  If you read between the lines, all the feminist/woke talk is just, "we need women gamers, they spend the cash."  Apparently all these people are talking about their young daughters, never their young sons.
> 
> I guess the hormone therapy will fix that.



Just fucking drop dead from alcohol poisoning already dude. You're making me want to beat you to it.


----------



## V0dka (Jul 5, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> Just fucking drop dead from alcohol poisoning already dude. You're making me want to beat you to it.



I'm trying, but it's expensive.


----------



## Sīn the Moon Daddy (Jul 5, 2019)

V0dka said:


> I'm trying, but it's expensive.


You're doing God's work. Bless you child


----------



## Dom Cruise (Jul 5, 2019)

V0dka said:


> Once again I don't think it's woke concessions, it's just a smokescreen for basically saying "We want women in our industry, either as consumers or designers, so we can market to women"
> 
> Look at these designers, all these are Men talking about their young daughters.  If you read between the lines, all the feminist/woke talk is just, "we need women gamers, they spend the cash."  Apparently all these people are talking about their young daughters, never their young sons.
> 
> ...



Why can't they just say "because swimsuits look cool on female characters" or "women didn't fight in this war as a rule"?

Fucking cuck losers.


----------



## V0dka (Jul 5, 2019)

Dom Cruise said:


> Why can't they just say "because swimsuits look cool on female characters" or "women didn't fight in this war as a rule"?
> 
> Fucking cuck losers.



That doesn't play into the consumer message they are trying to send "Don't sexualize women, they are more than ornaments"  "Women can do anything!" you are just turning away a far more profitable demographic by telling them things they don't want to hear.


----------



## Dom Cruise (Jul 5, 2019)

V0dka said:


> That doesn't play into the consumer message they are trying to send "Don't sexualize women, they are more than ornaments"  "Women can do anything!" you are just turning away a far more profitable demographic by telling them things they don't want to hear.



If they're such faggots that they can't handle a little sexy or can't understand history they don't deserve games to play.

Thing is though, many women don't find sexy offensive, as evidenced by so many female cosplayers, it's a bullshit stereotype and it's vocal minority should be ignored.


----------



## V0dka (Jul 5, 2019)

Dom Cruise said:


> Thing is though, many women don't find sexy offensive, as evidenced by so many female cosplayers, it's a bullshit stereotype and it's vocal minority should be ignored.



I don't know if it is a dumb stereotype or if it is the minority though, but the marketing teams apparently think the stereotype is a real thing.  Emotional arguments in articles, Women seeing other Women as competition if they are too sexy.  Anti-Male sentiment.  Outrage clickbait.

Women wanting to see a representation of themselves in media was one I found interesting, because guys usually don't go "I want to see a skinnyfat guy in more movies saving the world. Where's basement dweller representation!"  If the Man is charming and handsome and well built, Men think of it as something to aspire to, something that might motivate themselves to be better than they are. But I've found Women far more talk of wanting a sort of "self-insert" they want to empathize with the character, or have it represent them.  Similar to the romance novels I was talking about eariler in the thread.

I think it's why Men get so confused when they see these new female characters, because they just seem so removed from reality.  Either they are perfect in every way, or a passive macguffin for the male characters, but not too attractive as to alienate other Women from imagining being them.  Because they are supposed to be the female power fantasy.  The same one they accuse of Men having for male characters.


----------



## UQ 770 (Jul 5, 2019)

Dom Cruise said:


> Why can't they just say "because swimsuits look cool on female characters" or "women didn't fight in this war as a rule"?
> 
> Fucking cuck losers.



I wouldn't mind more works with powerful female characters in them. Maybe I'm just the living embodyment of that joke where a dude is seen playing a female character in an RPG and when questioned on it he declares "I'd rather be staring at a girl's ass the whole time than a guys!". But the way they're going about it today is definitely the wrong way to do it and its totally full of shit. Fucking crap like Overwatch and Fortnite has demonstrated that total fantasy universes with almost no plot at all will attract players, so why not just create a gritty  WW1-esque world where women being able to fight in those wars in the norm? Then again, I guess those games aren't very historically accurate anyway, look at the number of fucking machine guns and extremely rare pistols that showed up in Battlefield 1 just to make the game more like a modern FPS.



V0dka said:


> That doesn't play into the consumer message they are trying to send "Don't sexualize women, they are more than ornaments"  "Women can do anything!" you are just turning away a far more profitable demographic by telling them things they don't want to hear.



I understand you're quoting the hypothetical mentality of a marketer here, but I could never understand this sentiment. Its been argued that having men with idealized bodies in fiction is just still just catering to men because "its a power fantasy" but like... women don't have power fantasies? Somehow? I'm beginning to lean heavily on the idea that I could out-market circles around these assholes on even a bad day. "And you get a power fantasy, and you get a power fantasy, and you get a power fantasy! Oh, you want an actual story? Right this way!"


----------



## Fek (Jul 5, 2019)

BlastDoors41 said:


> https://youtu.be/6rQPDb-PJyI



That channel is quite the gem on the ol' Youtubes. Good pacing, addresses any/all major (and sometimes minor) woke talking points with well thought out (and expressed) counterpoints.

Gold star out of 10.



Dom Cruise said:


> If they're such faggots that they can't handle a little sexy or can't understand history they don't deserve games to play.
> 
> Thing is though, many women don't find sexy offensive, as evidenced by so many female cosplayers, it's a bullshit stereotype and it's vocal minority should be ignored.



In my own experience - the way a woman reacts to seeing another woman trying to act sexy (especially in person) will immediately tell you how self confident she is (and, possibly, how far/fast to run..). If it's deeply offensive or troubling to her, then she's just a loser. Same thing if a dude shits himself over a better grade of man being appealing to his woman.

Now, a loser is more easily manipulated because they have no fucking spine to stand on their own morals/principles/merit/own two feet, right? They're just a wet goopy mess of insecurities. *SO,* if you had to market something, and you knew you had to do it deceptively in order to sell a shit load of it, which group would you focus on: The confident, or the losers? Which group would you try to "nuture" into expanding? I believe this is what @V0dka is striking at the heart of with their posts, or that was my (condensed) take on 'em.



Locomotive Derangement said:


> I wouldn't mind more works with powerful female characters in them. Maybe I'm just the living embodyment of that joke where a dude is seen playing a female character in an RPG and when questioned on it he declares "I'd rather be staring at a girl's ass the whole time than a guys!". But the way they're going about it today is definitely the wrong way to do it and its totally full of shit.
> 
> _<snip>_
> 
> Its been argued that having men with idealized bodies in fiction is just still just catering to men because "its a power fantasy" but like... women don't have power fantasies? Somehow?



The classic female power fantasy involves getting the biggest baddest man she can vag-wrangle into doing what she wants him to do while being exceedingly desired by said badass man. The same scenario from the man's point of view is the basis for an absolute fuck load of stories both in and out of gaming (hell, look at fucking _Mario.._same deal). Men want to be the badass who gets the hot chick, and women want to be the hot chick who gets the badass. I'm not sure how you take this female power fantasy and turn it into a highly successful/marketable game without it ending up just being a visual novel that reads like smut your mom/grandmother has laying on a coffee table in her living room.

Now, of course that doesn't mean there aren't plenty of other tropes that men or women find more appealing than the other sex would (_Candy Crush_ destroys my soul to even be near, but most women I've ever known to play it will spend hours engrossed in it). I just stuck to the oldest (probably biggest) example for the sake of argument, because, well.."power fantasy."


----------



## UQ 770 (Jul 5, 2019)

Fek said:


> The classic female power fantasy involves



I keep hearing this line but what in the hell is it about estrogen that supposedly causes this desire? Isn't wanting an army of people to do shit for you or having a badass bodyguard also a pretty universal power fantasy? Sure if you want something done right you gotta do it yourself, but its also nice to sit back, put your feet up and have a drink while some unlucky bastard gets the task of doing the hard work for you.


----------



## V0dka (Jul 5, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> I keep hearing this line but what in the hell is it about estrogen that supposedly causes this desire? Isn't wanting an army of people to do shit for you or having a badass bodyguard also a pretty universal power fantasy? Sure if you want something done right you gotta do it yourself, but its also nice to sit back, put your feet up and have a drink while some unlucky bastard gets the task of doing the hard work for you.



I'd say its an evolutionary trait.  If you are the "stronger sex", you are expected, and are the one that does out and do the life threatening duties, since you are more likely to succeed.  If you are the "weaker sex", you are the one that takes care of other duties that while not life threatening, are still important, like securing the home and teaching and caring for the next generation. 

It's all part of my theory that Men have evolved to work on an overt physical level, why they typically have better strength, speed, reaction times, and spatial awareness to Women.  While Women are typically specialized in covert non-physical levels, social awareness, empathy, memory.  Ever notice how whenever a Woman has a fight with a Man she's able to remember everything he's ever done wrong down to the finest detail and bring it all up like a barrage of machineguns?  It's why Women have historically made the best spies.


----------



## UQ 770 (Jul 5, 2019)

V0dka said:


> I'd say its an evolutionary trait.  If you are the "stronger sex", you are expected, and are the one that does out and do the life threatening duties, since you are more likely to succeed.  If you are the "weaker sex", you are the one that takes care of other duties that while not life threatening, are still important, like securing the home and teaching and caring for the next generation.
> 
> It's all part of my theory that Men have evolved to work on an overt physical level, why they typically have better strength, speed, reaction times, and spatial awareness to Women.  While Women are typically specialized in covert non-physical levels, social awareness, empathy, memory.  Ever notice how whenever a Woman has a fight with a Man she's able to remember everything he's ever done wrong down to the finest detail and bring it all up like a barrage of machineguns?  It's why Women have historically made the best spies.



Even if you're a dude though, don't you enjoy the idea of owning slaves a little? Of having laborers to do the hard work for you? Christ, even the term "Robot" is Czech for "serf" or "peasant".


----------



## V0dka (Jul 5, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> Even if you're a dude though, don't you enjoy the idea of owning slaves a little? Of having laborers to do the hard work for you? Christ, even the term "Robot" is Czech for "serf" or "peasant".



You're probably asking the wrong person.


----------



## Sīn the Moon Daddy (Jul 5, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> Even if you're a dude though, don't you enjoy the idea of owning slaves a little? Of having laborers to do the hard work for you? Christ, even the term "Robot" is Czech for "serf" or "peasant".


An assistant henchman would be nice.


----------



## TenMilesWide (Jul 5, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> Even if you're a dude though, don't you enjoy the idea of owning slaves a little? Of having laborers to do the hard work for you? Christ, even the term "Robot" is Czech for "serf" or "peasant".


Generally if we're talking about the male power fantasy, the impossibly ideal man to look up to in media, it's the guy who's of the mind that he should try to get everything done himself, and has the power to actually make that happen. He doesn't have or need anyone to get their hands dirty for him, he shoulders it all on his own. 

Realistically you'd want to command people under you, sure, but power fantasies aren't about realism.


----------



## escapegoat (Jul 5, 2019)

In which a bunch of supposedly observant incels just now noticed Mom does the grocery shopping and Walmart runs, same as Grandma did.


----------



## UQ 770 (Jul 5, 2019)

TenMilesWide said:


> Generally if we're talking about the male power fantasy, the impossibly ideal man to look up to in media, it's the guy who's of the mind that he should try to get everything done himself, and has the power to actually make that happen. He doesn't have or need anyone to get their hands dirty for him, he shoulders it all on his own.
> 
> Realistically you'd want to command people under you, sure, but power fantasies aren't about realism.



Well, a common male power fantasy is being a high class, cynical corporate business owner with lots of underlings and the cash to buy their way out of everything. I suppose technically spending your own money on a service is "doing things yourself" but only by a pretty stretched version of that definition. Though maybe I'm interpreting that situation too literally.


----------



## Sīn the Moon Daddy (Jul 5, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> Well, a common male power fantasy is being a high class, cynical corporate business owner with lots of underlings and the cash to buy their way out of everything. I suppose technically spending your own money on a service is "doing things yourself" but only by a pretty stretched version of that definition. Though maybe I'm interpreting that situation too literally.


I feel like there's probably a few really archetypal fantasies.

Personally I'm the lone hero.
 I don't need any backup dancers


----------



## V0dka (Jul 5, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> Well, a common male power fantasy is being a high class, cynical corporate business owner with lots of underlings and the cash to buy their way out of everything. I suppose technically spending your own money on a service is "doing things yourself" but only by a pretty stretched version of that definition. Though maybe I'm interpreting that situation too literally.



But do you imagine you are Tony Stark while watching Iron Man?  Do you imagine you are Lex Luthor?  I feel for Men there is a barrier there, you look at those characters and say you'd like to be more like them, but you don't typically self insert and think you ARE them, especially while watching the movie.  I think Women though want characters they can immediately connect and empathize with in movies, in real time.  Which is why you see these female characters Men are confused about, is she a Mary Sue?  A Blank Slate?  Why are all these guys fighting over this homely chick that barely does anything?


----------



## UQ 770 (Jul 5, 2019)

V0dka said:


> But do you imagine you are Tony Stark while watching Iron Man?  Do you imagine you are Lex Luthor?



I guess I'm at my limit here since whatever form of dissociative problem I probably have prevents me from flat-out imagining myself as the person on the screen. I can identify with characters quite a bit, but I'm completely at a loss when people start talking beyond that. Same deal with "immersion" in vidya. I'd certainly love to be a guy with a ton of money or a monster that can bench-press a Mack truck or both or whatever, but I stop short of actually thinking of myself as any of those characters. Maybe someone can elaborate on this one and bridge that gap.



V0dka said:


> I think Women though want characters they can immediately connect and empathize with in movies, in real time.



This isn't a universal thing that people of any gender do? Christ, that's news to me.


----------



## Sīn the Moon Daddy (Jul 6, 2019)

I've pictured myself as the muscular badass on a number of occasions throughout my life. It really isn't a thing that is confined to just women.


----------



## V0dka (Jul 6, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> This isn't a universal thing that people of any gender do? Christ, that's news to me.





Sīn the Moon Daddy said:


> I've pictured myself as the muscular badass on a number of occasions throughout my life. It really isn't a thing that is confined to just women.




In videogames I think it's different.  Men are in control in a game, they are responsible for the actions they are doing, so they can immerse themselves in a character, especially if they can customize it to their liking. 

Similarily, when Men imagine things, they are in control of their own fantasy, for all intents and purposes, they are the fantasy.  Similarly to how boys imagine they are Spiderman, and act it out, there is a direct connection there.

When Women read a romance novel or watch a movie with a Woman lead, why do they have to represent them?  Why are they written in a either Mary Sue like way, or a Passive Macguffin that the male characters want?   Why is it that such fanfiction is so popular with women to write?

I think theres some sort of difference there in how Men and Women process fantasy.  Men require direct action or internal imagination for a fantasy to play out.  Women can use a sort of stand-in or vessel to empathize with in a 3rd party sense.


----------



## UQ 770 (Jul 6, 2019)

V0dka said:


> In videogames I think it's different.  Men are in control in a game, they are responsible for the actions they are doing, so they can immerse themselves in a character, especially if they can customize it to their liking.
> 
> Similarily, when Men imagine things, they are in control of their own fantasy, for all intents and purposes, they are the fantasy.  Similarly to how boys imagine they are Spiderman, and act it out, there is a direct connection there.
> 
> ...



Its possible women just aren't encouraged enough to be creative or imaginative. otherwise your interpretation paints a grim picture of the human race where half of our species is boring and shallow just because they have bobs and vagene. Though that accusation would make me a massive hypocrite since I've observed before that like 90% of the population lacks much of an imagination altogether.


----------



## V0dka (Jul 6, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> Its possible women just aren't encouraged enough to be creative or imaginative. otherwise your interpretation paints a grim picture of the human race where half of our species is boring and shallow just because they have bobs and vagene. Though that accusation would make me a massive hypocrite since I've observed before that like 90% of the population lacks much of an imagination altogether.



I wonder if it's some kind of reversal.  See a young boy will imagine himself as Spiderman and then act out getting bad guys and saving people etc, this is repeated as they get older with say, imagining yourself as a soldier while playing airsoft, or imagining yourself as a skilled assassin, while playing a FPS and such. While Women seem to weave a scenario first and then by proxy plop themselves into it.  I don't think it's a lack of imagination, I think it's the way they approach it is different.  At least in general terms, since Mary Shelly wrote Frankenstein, so obviously there are exceptions on both sides.

For a crude example take Bella from Twilight, there was this whole world full of Vampires and Werewolves with all these politics and wars and such, until one day, Bella got dropped right in the middle of it and everyone wanted her.  What's special about her?  Nothing in reality, shes just like you, the reader.

You see this repeated again in Star Wars but in a more Mary Sue-like way.  What's special about Rey?  Nothing, she doesn't have any famous parents or anything, she could be anyone, even you.  They try to keep her as ambiguous as possible, because the more blank she is, the more female viewers can identify with her.

At least thats my working theory at the moment.


----------



## Sīn the Moon Daddy (Jul 6, 2019)

I can relate to Bella Swan far more than I should. 

In any case I suppose I misunderstood what you described. Male fantasies do tend to be very active and centered around being unfettered. 

The idea of completing a task for a particularly beautiful woman to earn her affection isn't exactly unmanly either. Tales of chivalry, the knight questing for his Lady, etc.


----------



## ICametoLurk (Jul 6, 2019)

Drunk and Pour said:


> Like that Gillette ad.


 The commercial isn't targeted at men, even tho it is a product for men. it is targeted at the wives, mommies, and girl friends of men to make the subconscious choice to purchase Gillette products when the opportunity arises. Like, she at walmart and her bf asked her to pick up some razors. After she breaks down in tears she will pick up a pack of Gillette. Gillette doesn't even assume you have control of the purse strings to get to decide. That is how much they really think of you and your masculinity. >:3


----------



## UQ 770 (Jul 6, 2019)

I just had a whole post typed up and cleared it because the answer occured to me. We've been having this entire debate over this whole question of how mentally different the minds of men and women are or aren't, but it kind of ignores the original title of the thread. Have corporations left men behind? It seems so... but because women do all of the shopping/women are more profitable/more impulsive purchasers? I don't think so. 

But my opinion doesn't matter, because its pretty damn clear that _corporations themselves _seem to believe that. This sounds so stupidly obvious to me now that I say it, but marketing starts at the top. The marketers who make the real bank are the ones who shill their brand in the board rooms. Is any of this profitable? Who knows, because people just blindly buy into shit these days anyway. Some old bat clops into the board room in her high heels and starts yammering about how women are the next big demographic. Marketing is the psychology equivalent of reading fucking tea leaves anyway, so the directors just go with whatever sounds good to them because lunch is in ten minutes and Mister CEO really wants to fuck his secretary again.

For instance, does anyone here really think that Gillette ad hurt their sales any more than marginally? People bitched about it for awhile, and a few people sperged out about older-fashioned razors and such, but I doubt the numbers dropped more than a handful. This kind of controversy may even have been cultivated deliberately to cover up the fact that companies like Gillette are probably losing ground to the trendy hipster brands.


----------



## V0dka (Jul 6, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> I just had a whole post typed up and cleared it because the answer occured to me. We've been having this entire debate over this whole question of how mentally different the minds of men and women are or aren't, but it kind of ignores the original title of the thread.



If Men and Women weren't mentally different, then why has advertising changed so much in the last 30 year or so?  You are fed this line that Women and Men are the same, and yet, you see the advertising market and media market changing to the point I can barely stand to read anything put out by mainstream media, wheres the facts? Where's the evidence?  Where's something tangible to convince me?

It's almost like a sleight of hand in a way.  Men and Women are the same, but we are changing our marketing parameters, just because.  Well it's certainly not garnering my interest now, so I assume you are in search of some other demographic.

It's like the media is gaslighting you.  "Things have always been like this we aren't changing things you stupid men!  We aren't here to take away your toys!"  Maybe they aren't, but they aren't making toys for you anymore.


----------



## UQ 770 (Jul 6, 2019)

V0dka said:


> If Men and Women weren't mentally different, then why has advertising changed so much in the last 30 year or so?  You are fed this line that Women and Men are the same, and yet, you see the advertising market and media market changing to the point I can barely stand to read anything put out by mainstream media, wheres the facts? Where's the evidence?  Where's something tangible to convince me?



Dunno, I came to that conclusion entirely on my own. Nobody is feeding me the idea that men and women are the same at all, if anything thirdwaver feminists are feeding me the idea that women are dainty little daisygirls being constantly assailed by toxic masculinity and their endless discomfort is somehow worse than the endless discomfort the average guy like me seems to feel on a constant basis. Seems to me most of the human race is afflicted with some kind of fucking mental issue these days. I can't really divine genders when most personalities boil down to *fucked up*, _fucked up_ and fucked up.


----------



## V0dka (Jul 7, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> Dunno, I came to that conclusion entirely on my own. Nobody is feeding me the idea that men and women are the same at all, if anything thirdwaver feminists are feeding me the idea that women are dainty little daisygirls being constantly assailed by toxic masculinity and their endless discomfort is somehow worse than the endless discomfort the average guy like me seems to feel on a constant basis. Seems to me most of the human race is afflicted with some kind of fucking mental issue these days. I can't really divine genders when most personalities boil down to *fucked up*, _fucked up_ and fucked up.



If thats the case, how does a Man who is transgender then become a Woman?  There's a hypocrisy.  Either theres a functional way in Men and Women brains operate, or there isn't.


----------



## AF 802 (Jul 7, 2019)

V0dka said:


> If thats the case, how does a Man who is transgender then become a Woman?  There's a hypocrisy.  Either theres a functional way in Men and Women brains operate, or there isn't.



All it is is a trend, either that or people who were abused as babies trying to escape their past.


----------



## V0dka (Jul 7, 2019)

Give Her The D said:


> All it is is a trend, either that or people who were abused as babies trying to escape their past.



I don't know many trends than result in a fucked body and altering brain chemistry, maybe heroin, was that a trend?


----------



## UQ 770 (Jul 7, 2019)

V0dka said:


> I don't know many trends than result in a fucked body and altering brain chemistry



I do motherfucker, have you looked at the drug addiction, suicide rate and alcohol deaths lately? Re.tarded people have _finally_ begun labeling it "Despair Deaths" after two fucking decades of watching a path of destruction bloom straight under their noses. People don't troon out for fun the same way I'm not drinking myself to death just because I enjoy it. People dump tons of chemicals and shit into their body under some kind of extreme mental issue, and the world is just barely waking up to the fact that wanting to bomb your own brain chemistry into oblivion either chemically or with an acute lead injection is a serious problem.


----------



## Sprig of Parsley (Jul 7, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> I do motherfucker, have you looked at the drug addiction, suicide rate and alcohol deaths lately? Re.tarded people have _finally_ begun labeling it "Despair Deaths" after two fucking decades of watching a path of destruction bloom straight under their noses. People don't troon out for fun the same way I'm not drinking myself to death just because I enjoy it. People dump tons of chemicals and shit into their body under some kind of extreme mental issue, and the world is just barely waking up to the fact that wanting to bomb your own brain chemistry into oblivion either chemically or with an acute lead injection is a serious problem.


The reason it's taken this long because honestly people don't give a fuck until it's THEIR kid or THEIR parent or THEIR friend and we've finally hit a point where enough kids, parents, friends etc. are fucking themselves up and the rest of these assholes realize there might be a problem because it's starting to affect THEM.

Welcome to the state of mental health in Year of our Lord 2019.  We have bits of Star Trek-tier technology but we're still fucking quasi-stone age about treating mental illness because people are unempathetic pieces of shit.


----------



## MI 814 (Jul 8, 2019)

People still don't realise that women aren't really into action movies as the general aesthetic and style of those aren't really things women care for.
Saying it's the same as smoking is ridiculous. Smoking doesn't involve people/monsters being blown to bits and aggressive imagery. It seems to me that Vodka is just trying to parrot what Marketting executives think rather than what's the reality. 

The next thing we need is someone's whose name is related to the brain to come in and claim that Get Woke Go Broke doesn't exist even though it clearly does (just it's not always apparent or always guaranteed to happen)


----------



## V0dka (Jul 8, 2019)

BoomerDenton said:


> People still don't realise that women aren't really into action movies as the general aesthetic and style of those aren't really things women care for.
> Saying it's the same as smoking is ridiculous. Smoking doesn't involve people/monsters being blown to bits and aggressive imagery. It seems to me that Vodka is just trying to parrot what Marketting executives think rather than what's the reality.



Why do marketing executives think this way though?  We all know Women buy the most stuff, do the most shopping, we know Women in general don't want their Man watching a spring break wet t-shirt contest or enjoy watching tanks level buildings.  

As Women have gained more financial and legal independence from Men, they, being the more receptive and spendy consumers, would now get the majority of the pandering, marketing and alterations to existing male markets to attract their business.  And this is reflected in media as well.


----------



## NN 401 (Jul 16, 2019)

@ V0dka

Women want to be Helen of Troy?!?

Has anyone bothered to ask a woman (that you trust) what they think?

Looked at any of the historical feminine archetypes littered throughout history?

Isis, Inanna, Parvati, Athena, changing woman????

Or taken a more than cursory look at media aimed at women _other than Fiftyshades of Gray or Twilight!_


Because this is what I’m seeing as female power fantasies.

Sailor Moon
Magic Knight Rayearth
Jem
Strawberry Shortcake
Rainbow Bright
My little pony (the original obviously)

This of course doesn’t take into account shows with a gender neutral focus or had a sizeable female contingent despite being aimed at males.



Princess Zelda down there is what women aspire to be.
“In my dreams I’m beautiful... and bad!!” (Brownie points for who I’m referencing here and what franchise)

Dudes don’t get it because it’s all pink and delicate and shit.

Being glamorous and beautiful, a leader who can hold court and ride into battle, with a strong group of female friends and a hot, masculine boyfriend whose demeanor is tempered with kindness and one that can competently hold his own.  ( shit... sex in the city for all its flaws hits these metrics too.)


----------



## SilkGnut (Jul 16, 2019)

Locomotive Derangement said:


> Its possible women just aren't encouraged enough to be creative or imaginative. otherwise your interpretation paints a grim picture of the human race where half of our species is boring and shallow just because they have bobs and vagene. Though that accusation would make me a massive hypocrite since I've observed before that like 90% of the population lacks much of an imagination altogether.


Estrogen is one hell of a drug, it is no coincidence that nearly every troon ends up as a ghoulish parody of their former selves. 

Keep in mind the problem does not so much lay with women themselves so much as a society that is structured to exploit them while making them feel empowered. Edward Bernays was a smart man, more people should check out his books.


----------



## NN 401 (Jul 16, 2019)

SilkGnut said:


> Estrogen is one hell of a drug, it is no coincidence that nearly every troon ends up as a ghoulish parody of their former selves.
> 
> Keep in mind the problem does not so much lay with women themselves so much as a society that is structured to exploit them while making them feel empowered. Edward Bernays was a smart man, more people should check out his books.




Century of the Self.


This is why I can’t take muh “bio troofs” and any of this evo psych shit seriously.

None of it remotely accounts for the massive impact mass media has had on people and their self image and culture.

Watching that thing and reading about mimetics paints a sobering picture of the human psyche and emphasizes why certain archetypes were so important.


----------



## UQ 770 (Jul 17, 2019)

SilkGnut said:


> Estrogen is one hell of a drug, it is no coincidence that nearly every troon ends up as a ghoulish parody of their former selves.



Estrogen does have some interesting effects but introducing troons into the equation just tosses the issue into the mire. Regardless of the precise effects of estrogen or testosterone, I'm pretty sure they are not meant to interact the way hormone blockers/HRT make them do. Far as I'm concerned, if you put both at once into a syringe and injected it into a person, they'd probably exhibit instant schizophrenia before they expired ten minutes later.


----------



## #zzz (Apr 30, 2020)

I was interested in this topic since I came across a strange thing interacting with people on Twitter.  Arguing with another Man about a topic I was asked to provide some personal details of myself to support my arguments.  Which I thought absurd, surely if the argument is flawed you can use logic to prove me wrong without getting personal.

Years later when I was researching marketing I came across this chart.  Which made me think that feminization has leaked over from marketing, into online communication on social platforms.






After all if you are on Twitter the value of your input is based not on the strength of your argument, but on your identity and background and popularity.  If someone with no followers and a brand new account was to challenge a viewpoint of someone, no matter how well though out the argument, the person would be dismissed as a troll.  They have to build a rapport first, to build an identity, so their views can be seen as something valid and worth examining.

So I think things have already progressed past simple marketing.


----------



## FunPosting101 (Apr 30, 2020)

If most modern marketing HAS left men behind, all that means is that the people who re-discover the male market will make a fucking mint sooner or later. There's a reason why a game as unconcerned with the feelings of women like GTA5 sold so much for example.


----------



## Shield Breaker (Apr 30, 2020)

Outside of really egregious stuff like Gillette, the reason marketing focuses on women so much is because we're the ones who buy stuff most of the time. Men usually grab whatever is cheap or what we tell them to pick up, if they shop at all.


----------



## #zzz (Apr 30, 2020)

FunPosting101 said:


> here's a reason why a game as unconcerned with the feelings of women like GTA5 sold so much for example.



It's also why Fast and the Furious was such a popular franchise with NINE installments.  It tells you theres an untapped market there, but I think through media and socially its largely suppressed and shamed.


----------



## Xarpho (Apr 30, 2020)

SilkGnut said:


> Estrogen is one hell of a drug, it is no coincidence that nearly every troon ends up as a ghoulish parody of their former selves.



I think it's more of the fact that trannies (much like run-of-the-mill druggies) were already mentally ill to begin with...depression, anxiety, etc. and rather than seek real help somehow got sucked into the trooniverse to become what they are.


----------



## 2021Murder (Apr 30, 2020)

I remember the big reason the Bevis & Butthead revival wasn't given a 2nd season despite huge ratings was because of the demographic, it was largely male, and what could you offer a man that he couldn't just steal. its a big reason entertainment is more women focused now too. the amount of women that know how to pirate or what the fuck a torrent is or a private tracker is abysmally small compared to the amount of men who pirate their tv/films/videogames. Even clothes, your wardobe will always have a longer shelf life than a woman's and you are much more likely to buy online than try out in a store.


----------



## FunPosting101 (Apr 30, 2020)

2020Suicide said:


> I remember the big reason the Bevis & Butthead revival wasn't given a 2nd season despite huge ratings was because of the demographic, it was largely male, and what could you offer a man that he couldn't just steal. its a big reason entertainment is more women focused now too. the amount of women that know how to pirate or what the fuck a torrent is or a private tracker is abysmally small compared to the amount of men who pirate their tv/films/videogames. Even clothes, your wardobe will always have a longer shelf life than a woman's and you are much more likely to buy online than try out in a store.


What I'm hearing here is that women need to be taught about torrenting and how to do it. It will help take care of this problem quite handily if women are also as inclined to torrent stuff as men are.


----------



## Niggernerd (Apr 30, 2020)

Shield Breaker said:


> Outside of really egregious stuff like Gillette, the reason marketing focuses on women so much is because we're the ones who buy stuff most of the time. Men usually grab whatever is cheap or what we tell them to pick up, if they shop at all.


Pretty much. I can't remember the last time i took more than 5 minutes to pick my shit. I see a toothpaste i grab because idc if they tested on monkeys just need pearly whites.


----------



## TFT-A9 (Apr 30, 2020)

Women are better consoomers than most men because consooming tends to play heavily on sentimentality, brand loyalty and a kind of disregard for one's means in the face of one's wants


----------



## Ughubughughughughughghlug (Apr 30, 2020)

V0dka said:


> I agree that it doesn't always work, but I see them trying to find new ways to bring female consumers to market.  Take Ghostbusters 2016 for example, from a marketing perspective it should make sense.  We take the Ghostbusters IP, make it an all girl comedy team, we throw in Chris Hemsworth, and the Female Demo should eat it up, and buy all the tie in products.
> 
> View attachment 817982
> 
> ...



Funny enough, the dude was supposed to be the male version of a bimbo (dumb but attractive), but it flew over most people's heads.


----------



## Pee Cola (Apr 30, 2020)

FunPosting101 said:


> What I'm hearing here is that women need to be taught about torrenting and how to do it. It will help take care of this problem quite handily if women are also as inclined to torrent stuff as men are.



This reminds me of the concept of WAF (Wife Acceptance Factor),  a term coined in the '80s to describe the design elements in tech such as hifi gear and computers that appeal to women.  Originally relating to a device's styling, it's since moved on to encompass ease of use.

If you want a classic example of how WAF has been successfully employed, one need look no further than Apple during its transition from struggling computer maker to personal entertainment powerhouse.  Steve Jobs _really _got WAF, which is why every Apple product from the iMac G3 onwards has such an emphasis on form over function ... and a big reason why Apple is where they are today.

If there was an all-in-one piracy device that is as easy to use as an iPod, the gender imbalance among pirates would rapidly equalise IMHO.


----------



## #zzz (Apr 30, 2020)

Robert Sanvagene said:


> This reminds me of the concept of WAF (Wife Acceptance Factor),  a term coined in the '80s to describe the design elements in tech such as hifi gear and computers that appeal to women.  Originally relating to a device's styling, it's since moved on to encompass ease of use.
> 
> If you want a classic example of how WAF has been successfully employed, one need look no further than Apple during its transition from struggling computer maker to home entertainment powerhouse.  Steve Jobs _really _got WAF, which is why every Apple product from the iMac G3 onwards has such an emphasis of form over function ... and a big reason why Apple is where they are today.
> 
> If there was an all-in-one piracy device that is as easy to use as an iPod, the gender imbalance among pirates would rapidly equalise IMHO.



It's really funny I think because it's as if where sociology and psychology has stopped or regressed in the recent decades, marketing seems to have taken up the slack, because they need results that work in a economic setting.


_The quote “Men are from Mar’s women are from venus” from the 1991 book of the same name by John Gray is probably one of the world’s most well known.   Also from the same book is this fantastic quote *“Men are motivated when they feel needed while women are motivated when they feel cherished.”*

If you convert this to eCommerce speak:-

*For Women, Cherished = feeling comfortable about buying and feels appreciated by the vendor. This equates to:-*_


_Great customer service_
_Good advice_
_Good product + listens to product feedback_
_Great value, great offers, loyalty + Rewards scheme_

_Discount voucher on Birthday!_

_Regular holiday based communication_


_*For Men, Needed = Problem solving*_


_Product solves the problem whatever that might be, eg something causing the Female partners stress (he can’t switch off to the problem – he’s stressed because she is stressed and so he wants to fix it)_
_How-to videos, – make it easy to solve the problem (DIY tasks for example)_

_Provide solutions to problems via the products stocked – content addressing the “Pain Points”._









						Gender Marketing: The Differences Between Men and Women
					

In recent times mainstream advertising has shied away from gender targeting and tended towards being unisex. Why? For the simple reason that by gender targeting, - excluding one gender entirely, you effectively reduce your potential audience by half. Typically there is no reason to do so and it mig




					www.optimonk.com
				










			https://books.google.com.au/books?id=bOq2AwAAQBAJ


----------



## Wraith (Apr 30, 2020)

It's not 'leaving' when they are pushing men down and behind.


----------



## Gar For Archer (Apr 30, 2020)

Ughubughughughughughghlug said:


> Funny enough, the dude was supposed to be the male version of a bimbo (dumb but attractive), but it flew over most people's heads.


Had they marketed it as a girl-power satire comedy of the common tropes you’d see in your typical testosterone-fueled male-led action movie, it could have worked. In this context, Hemsworth’s character makes sense as a parody of the dumb blond bimbo who’s only kept around for her looks, and beating the main villain by punching him in the dick would’ve been over the top, but in the right way.

Instead, they decided to market it as this feminist movie that was better than its outdated male-led counterparts by virtue of being more progressive - but filtered through this lens, all the elements of satire instead turn into mean-spirited hypocrisy.

Ghostbusters 2016 was a victim of a marketing team with their head up their asses, who desperately wanted the movie to be something more than it was. It could have just been a forgettable but inoffensive girl-power comedy, but instead it got turned into one of the key engagements of the ongoing culture war.


----------



## Honka Honka Burning Love (Apr 30, 2020)

Gar For Archer said:


> Had they marketed it as a girl-power satire comedy of the common tropes you’d see in your typical testosterone-fueled male-led action movie, it could have worked. In this context, Hemsworth’s character makes sense as a parody of the dumb blond bimbo who’s only kept around for her looks, and beating the main villain by punching him in the dick would’ve been over the top, but in the right way.
> 
> Instead, they decided to market it as this feminist movie that was better than its outdated male-led counterparts by virtue of being more progressive - but filtered through this lens, all the elements of satire instead turn into mean-spirited hypocrisy.
> 
> Ghostbusters 2016 was a victim of a marketing team with their head up their asses, who desperately wanted the movie to be something more than it was. It could have just been a forgettable but inoffensive girl-power comedy, but instead it got turned into one of the key engagements of the ongoing culture war.


There is also the problem that Janine in Ghost busters 1/2 wasn't a pretty airhead, they are Parodying something that didn't happen in the original movies.


----------



## #zzz (May 2, 2020)

Another thing I've noticed that has a very feminine slant is wikipedia.  Your source is not allowed to be an original source or paper, you aren't allowed to argue from an original source, your source must be secondary, an article, which allows consensus to take shape.  Which is a popular way for Women to decide on things, they tend to talk with others and all agree on a consensus to make a decision.  A Masculine approach would argue the original research until he was blue in the face, but in wikipedia their policy doesn't allow that.  It doesn't matter if your source is true or not or whether it's provable or not, it's a fringe, "unreliable", and therefore exempt source.


----------



## Ughubughughughughughghlug (May 3, 2020)

It's all about money, man. Of course politics, too, but a lot of women-centric stuff is out of a misguided notion that they need to appeal to women and that appealing to women is done by being feminist faggots. This mentality has appeared in a million other ways. It's like when churches try talking in slang and playing pop music at the pulpit to get the young to go. Same thing. Got to tap that youth market, they think. They don't realize that by pivoting to one market they drive away the other market, you know, the one that actually appreciated htem and that they were good at serving.

They've done this a lot with football. Put women commentators and shit in it, not with any overt political emssaging, but just to try to appeal to women, even though nobody wants that shit.

It makes commerical sense in that women are the big spenders, but it doesn't work when they piss off and drive away the men who were their core audience. Businesses need to learn to be content with excelling at doing one thing and not trying and failing to be masters of all trade.s


----------



## CDWLTY (May 3, 2020)

NeoGAF Lurker said:


> Long story short, men are left behind but it’s at their own peril. Thanks to the internet, a lot of companies are failing because they can’t compete with these small online-centric businesses because they’re not afraid to market to men. It’s get woke go broke writ large.


If you want an interesting time, watch the old, original dollar shave club ad with a group of private college genderites. It's interesting to see how some people immediately queued up in rage looking for points to dissect in a fury, while most of the males or working types just saw a funny commercial.


----------



## b0x (Jan 15, 2022)

Ughubughughughughughghlug said:


> It makes commerical sense in that women are the big spenders, but it doesn't work when they piss off and drive away the men who were their core audience. Businesses need to learn to be content with excelling at doing one thing and not trying and failing to be masters of all trade.s








I wonder if the production team thinks that they can alienate the "cis white men" and gain notoriety, in turn drawing in the "we are allies" crowd.


----------



## Xarpho (Jan 15, 2022)

#zzz said:


> It's really funny I think because it's as if where sociology and psychology has stopped or regressed in the recent decades, marketing seems to have taken up the slack, because they need results that work in a economic setting.
> 
> 
> _The quote “Men are from Mar’s women are from venus” from the 1991 book of the same name by John Gray is probably one of the world’s most well known.   Also from the same book is this fantastic quote *“Men are motivated when they feel needed while women are motivated when they feel cherished.”*
> ...


Fascinating. A lot of the department stores (even today) often ratchet up sales around holidays, like Memorial Day Sales or something (historically, even creating their own named sales days like Foley's Red Apple Sale...I'm sure other regionals did something similar), and use lots of "x % off" to lure (primarily female) customers in to make them think they're getting a good deal.

One of the other things I've noticed that in these modern "women oriented" marketing attempts is that usually it's not just trying to market to women, there's a lot of spite that comes down when it gets questioned, if not implied in the commercial outright. Ghostbusters 2016 is a great example, when marketing was questioned and scorned, the company and the director went on a huge tour to talk about trolls and sexism, and one of the first big incidents of YouTube like/dislike manipulation.


----------



## ditto (Jan 15, 2022)

#zzz said:


> Years later when I was researching marketing I came across this chart.


That chart also explainswhy women fall for traditional MLMs and men for crypto.


----------



## InteracialBowelSyndrome (Mar 3, 2022)

Well if men feel attacked we can always vote with out wallets or revolt physcially. Here in Canada, the state-owned CBC always plugs neo-Marxist and man hating bullshit, and they've got their reporters shit on and even a few of their vehicles vandalized or destroyed.

Keep pushing men into a corner, and they're gonna lash out. And when that happens, what are said media and corporations gonna do? "Men plz halp."


----------



## b0x (Mar 16, 2022)

Here's a video of things Women get away with in media that Men can't.


----------



## Marley Rathbone (Mar 16, 2022)

I've always assumed that most women actually enjoy being in the presence of beautiful sexy women.


----------



## Gravityqueen4life (Mar 16, 2022)

women are more than willing to spent money on products they dont necessarily need and that's why the market cater to them so much. not to say there aren't men that waste their money on useless crap too (soy cucks and their funko pops) but women are just easier to manipulate with marketing.


----------



## Retired Junta Member (Mar 17, 2022)

Women are just more present in the marketing and on the market because they buy more. Or better: they buy many different thing while men have comparatively less choice in shopping. 
There’s also a trend in making women believe that their shopping habits could become a source of income by reselling clothes, creating stuff, whatever.


----------



## Sailor Kim Jong Moon (Mar 18, 2022)

Retired Junta Member said:


> Women are just more present in the marketing and on the market because they buy more. Or better: they buy many different thing while men have comparatively less choice in shopping.
> There’s also a trend in making women believe that their shopping habits could become a source of income by reselling clothes, creating stuff, whatever.


Ok but also women use items to mark their status and group. That’s why they obsess over Pinterest.

Example: Middle/Upper class WASP bitches all dress the same - look up Christian fall aesthetic. The tall boots, vests, cute sweaters, blonde or brunette hair with a slight wave, etc. Their houses also look the same “THIS HOUSE RUNS ON SWEET TEA AND JESUS” or they have the same gray/white color palette - doesn’t matter if they’re going for farmhouse or coastal. Look at the family photos they take - always on a rural road in front of some shitty fencing OR all white on a beach though that’s falling out of favor for the wood fence on dirt road. Their planners match their water bottles match their nails. They got these essential oils and shit all over their house. Their daughters are decked out in giant bows. Manicures are all the same too. All the lunches they pack for their kids - organic, whole food shit.

I don’t hate them. I want to be them. But alas, im just a humble kiwi and know my limitations. Plus I’m not spending all that $$$ on matching accessories and manicures and trendy kitchen backsplash. Fuckin crazy.

Anyway, this shit applies to a lot of niches. Women are always trying to covertly signal using their stuff. I think, I can’t think of any other reason for the conformity.

Disney hoes are signaling their borderline personality with Disney tattoos and childish shit. Tranny bitches are also… signaling their borderline personality but with ugly ass hair colors and rainbow shit. Redneck women are signaling their rural interests and conservative values with camo and mudding shit. Upper class city thots show their liberal attitudes with their boho chic fashion and furniture from world market.

Look, I don’t make the fucking rules. I barely understand them myself. What I know is that what you got signals who you are and where you belong. And every corporation on the planet is salivating to dictate which commodity is the basis these female groups form around.

Most women understand this intuitively. But if you’re a dumb bitch like me you have to work hard to notice the patterns of consumption that loosely define each group. Or maybe I’m autistic, as I’ve mentioned many times today.

Men? They buy a nice PC or some … fishing rods? I don’t know what y’all buy. Wallets? Shitty beer with pretty pictures on the can? Uhhh… balls that dangle off your truck? Whatever it is “penis people” purchase, it sure doesn’t seem you gotta upkeep an image with every purchase like your female counterparts.

By the way - soyboy faggot redditors that obsess over funkopops and Star Wars merch are practically eunuchs. That’s why their consumerism almost comes off as feminine and weak. Theyre signaling in the way women signal - with purchases. But instead of looking like a cute WASP with happy family or a boho chic Coachella hoe, they’re fat, sad little men. I will give it to the male trannys- they have some understanding of consumption. But they’re so autistic they can’t see the specific constellation of brands and aesthetic choices required for social stability and signaling. That’s why they look like Buffalo Bill raped a build-a-bear workshop. 

Edit: by the way, I’m pretty sure this is the best analysis of female consumption patterns y’all gonna get here. I’ll take my informative stickies and in return you may cite me in future sociology textbooks.


----------

