On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 09:15:49 -0800, Mark Borgerson
 wrote:

>In article , 
>greg1199{at}yahoo.com says...
>> 
>> Viking wrote:
>> > Macy's ad--men standing around, waiting obediantly to carry what the
>> > woman buys. Text: "Golfers bring caddies. Shoppers bring
husbands."
>> >
>> > Let them know what you think:
>> >
>>
http://www.macys.com/catalog/syndicated/remote/remotesyndication.ognc?Brand=FDSSURVEY
>> 
>> My response to the add:
>> 
>> Despite the stated purpose of this comment box, I cannot tell you of an
>> in-store experience, because I will no longer be in any of your stores.
>>  Why?  I find one of your recent advertisements greatly offensive and
>> insulting.  The add shows men standing around, waiting obediantly to
>> carry what their wives buy. The text reads, "Golfers bring caddies.
>> Shoppers bring husbands."
>> 
>> Firstly, whoever wrote that is a flat sexist who thinks of men as
>> little more than servants women use to do the heavy lifting.  Also, has
>> it occurred to you that men do, at times, use your store?  This will
>> undoubtedly come as a shock to someone dim enough to liken married men
>> to golf caddies, but the floor space you use to sell men's clothing
>> often attracts .... men, and you arrogantly take them for granted when
>> you insult them.
>> 
>> Why do you insult men in an effort to woo female shoppers?  Is it your
>> opinion that women enjoy seeing men insulted?  Is it therefore your
>> opinion that most women, even married women, hold men in some degree of
>> contempt?  What would lead you to believe such a thing about women?
>> 
>> If I receive some incentive from you, I may reconsider whether to
>> enter, ever again, one of your stores.  Otherwise, Dillards is just as
>> good, and they don't insult men for fun and profit.
>> 
>\
>You could have added:   "Since when are the golfers using the caddies'  
>money  to pay the greens fees?"
>
>
>Mark Borgerson
>


Really, BM?

If someone else had said what you just said, you would have responded
by challenging that person to prove that women use their husband's
money to shop in all instances.

And then if that person had bothered to respond that married women use
their husband's money to shop in MOST instances, you would have
responded, "That's probably true, but can you PROVE it?  And aren't
there a large number of unmarried female shoppers?  And besides,
aren't most married women at least employed PART-TIME, so who's to say
whose money they're spending?"

In the end, you would have pedanticized this secondary factual issue
to death in order to draw heat away from the overriding issue of
whether this ad was appropriate - and you probably would have found
some other reason to justify the ad.

So you're willing to allow yourself the freedom to criticize
women-firstism once in a while, are you?  When are you going to allow
others that same freedom?



--------------------------------------
grizzlieantagonist{at}yahoo.com

"Ladies and gentlemen - let's have a round of applause for tonight's
player of the game - FRAN-CIS-CO SAN-N-N-N-TOS!
    - Brian Anthony (P.A. announcer at Grizzlie Stadium), June 11, 2004


"Populus me sibilat, at mihi plaudo."(The people
hiss at me, but I am well satisfied with myself).

    - Horace, the Roman poet


Logical positivism, dominant in American and
British universities, is suicidally bent upon
establishing the impossibility of knowing any-
thing.  (As Wyndham Lewis suggested in "Self
Condemned", the neo-positivist pedant reduces
himself to a mosquito, able to wound, nearly
invulnerable to counter-assault - but only an
insect, not a man).

     - Russell Kirk, Enemies of the Permanent
       Things


--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/12/05 12:42:30 AM ---