Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

200p

The Modern Man

Recommended Posts

Well I laughed.

This was supposed to be an advert filmed in the past - the old computers was the clue.

But I have no doubt in 2017, this is image is still true today, (high house prices, grown adults with retro computers living at home) even if you can get reduced fat cheese.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The man in the add was older than the woman. To me that's another treat your husband like a child add. It's one of those things where though invisible superficially, once you notice it you see it everywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This Audi advert is a beautifully shot piece:

This analysis is absolutely spot on:

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2017/02/real-message-behind-audis-super-bowl-ad-isnt-exactly-uplifting-one/

Quote

The Internet is in the proverbial tizzy about Audi’s “feminist” Super Bowl advertisement, in which the automaker comes out in favor of equal pay for women.

At first blush, the spot seems to be nothing but the usual corporate slacktivism, a feel-good fluff-vertorial making a “brave stand” in support of an issue that was decided long ago. I’m reminded of Joaquin Phoenix’s brilliant portrayal of Commodus in Gladiator, arriving in full armor as soon as he can do so without any risk. “Father, have I missed the battle?” Well, Audi, you’ve missed the war; if there’s a place in the United States where women are actually paid significantly less for doing the same job as men, it’s not evident from what I’m reading.

After watching the one-minute advertisement carefully, however, I understood feminism, or equal pay, is the last thing Audi wants you to take away from it. The message is far subtler, and more powerful, than the dull recitation of the pseudo-progressive catechism droning on in the background. This spot is visual — and as you’ll see below, you can’t understand it until you watch it and see what it’s really telling you.

Let me tell you up front: chances are you won’t like what Audi has to say.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, hotairmail said:

 

There's an awful lot of men who slip into the role easily. They seem to want a mother rather than a wife. They then end up competing for attention with their own children like a child.

There are so many threats to such a man's existence that he has no option but to be cowed into submission.  The wife has social and legal dominance over him and that carries with it many implied threats.  Mainstream media mocks him while simultaneously praising his wife and treating her like a victim (of his gender) at the same time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, canbuywontbuy said:

There are so many threats to such a man's existence that he has no option but to be cowed into submission.

+1

For most men, one bad divorce will ruin them financially for life. I imagine when you have all of your wealth invested into a marriage, and also you want to keep seeing your kids - then I imagine it's very hard to stand up against bad behavior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JoeDavola said:

+1

For most men, one bad divorce will ruin them financially for life. I imagine when you have all of your wealth invested into a marriage, and also you want to keep seeing your kids - then I imagine it's very hard to stand up against bad behavior.

I ran into that, I sucked up for a bit, bitter experience taught me not to cowtow. I still have to tolerate sh1tty behaviour but I'm much less tolerant than before - I've seen many separated dads being treated like an ATM and absolutely emotionally abused with the kids being used as a weapon. To use a cliche I took the red pill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are just as many mummy's boys as daddy's girls.....Some people never grow up. As many vulnerable men as there are vulnerable women.....Strong and weaker in both sexes.....Strong does not mean good and weak does not mean bad, just different.....What sex you are is immaterial.;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd just like to go on record as probably the only divorced woman in the UK who didn't take her husband for a penny.  He even got all the LP's! 

Nor did I take him for his pension, which funds his alcoholism, as I was well aware at the time that I could.  Of course, there may have been an ulterior motive there. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Bossybabe said:

I'd just like to go on record as probably the only divorced woman in the UK who didn't take her husband for a penny.  He even got all the LP's! 

Nor did I take him for his pension, which funds his alcoholism, as I was well aware at the time that I could.  Of course, there may have been an ulterior motive there. ;)

+1;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw some elder / academic / sociologist or some-such (sure I should have heard of him) on Hard Talk. He reckoned that our weapons were now too dangerous for us to continue our warrior ways.

Made me wonder about men's status in the world, much of which has surely been built on testosterone and aggression.

I couldn't help thinking however that his weapon argument was a little shaky. The scale of our weaponry surely reflects the numbers we must subdue in the event of aggression. Who would create a nuclear weapon if the world population was 52?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Sledgehead said:

Saw some elder / academic / sociologist or some-such (sure I should have heard of him) on Hard Talk. He reckoned that our weapons were now too dangerous for us to continue our warrior ways.

Made me wonder about men's status in the world, much of which has surely been built on testosterone and aggression.

I couldn't help thinking however that his weapon argument was a little shaky. The scale of our weaponry surely reflects the numbers we must subdue in the event of aggression. Who would create a nuclear weapon if the world population was 52?

 

Errr yeh, just a bit.  We could wipe all life on the planet's surface 50 times over by the 1980s. Building a rudimentary nuclear bomb (given the materials) is not that hard either.  Fortunately, the materials needed are hard to get hold of and need expensive centrifuges to refine them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Bossybabe said:

I'd just like to go on record as probably the only divorced woman in the UK who didn't take her husband for a penny.  He even got all the LP's! 

Nor did I take him for his pension, which funds his alcoholism, as I was well aware at the time that I could.  Of course, there may have been an ulterior motive there. ;)

I used to work with a lovely woman. She had divorced her husband because he kept playing away, but she had decided that it would be better for their son if hls father had a nice house and money to do stuff so she was happy with token maintenance (she had a very good job, and her dad was also minted, so she was in a position to be quite relaxed about money).

He then remarried, had another kid, put it about a bit and got absolutely taken to the cleaners by his second wife. Proper living in a bedsit eating beans on toast territory.

Oh well :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Sledgehead said:

Saw some elder / academic / sociologist or some-such (sure I should have heard of him) on Hard Talk. He reckoned that our weapons were now too dangerous for us to continue our warrior ways.

Made me wonder about men's status in the world, much of which has surely been built on testosterone and aggression.

I couldn't help thinking however that his weapon argument was a little shaky. The scale of our weaponry surely reflects the numbers we must subdue in the event of aggression. Who would create a nuclear weapon if the world population was 52?

IMO that's not the problem with the argument.

The issue is, is it an important part of humanity that people can undertake war, be aggressive, use terrible weapons?   Maybe it isn't but we don't know this.  Perhaps without an occasional worry about war/aggression we'd all by happy in our utopia and progress would stop?  Perhaps it is man's (woman's) aggression that is the same driver that produces scientific determination or business leadership.  

It is similar to arguments about eliminating 'negative traits' through breeding / genetic engineering.  Is the gene that encodes bipolar or depression linked to creative genius (not that a genius would have to be bipolar, or that bipolars are geniuses -- just that the genes are linked in some way -- say, there are five genes, two 'on' three 'off' is bipolar, four 'on' one 'off' is genius, two different ones on is just normal).  Is the encoding for homosexuality (if you believe in the 'nature' explanation) linked to alpha male behaviour?    We just don't know.

As for the weapons being too dangerous for us to continue -- that is why we have arms controls.  Which are then broken by the next tinpot dictator -- best not get rid of them completely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   28 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.