Radelaide said:
mshcherbatskaya said:
Radelaide said:
Chipperz said:
Radelaide said:
chronobreak said:
This is good, except everyones gonna start screaming "BAWW Equal Rights!"
Just to clear that up, it's their contest, and they have no obligation to make it multi-gender. I'm sure after all the complaints, they'll cave and give the women some contest of their own. The prize sucks anyways though, it should be something manly, like a week splitting wood or working in a chewing tobacco factory.
Of course they are. I can imagine a whole bunch of feminist groups getting rather vexed about this then being asked what they hope to achieve by the noise they're making, they shrug and say something about "girls being just as good as boys." Honestly, I'm all for equal rights, but I have a feeling this competition would appeal more to a male demographic to a female one.
Are these the same feminist groups that keep going on about how anything that men like is childish and infantile? They probably won't care...
Yeah, but since it's excluding the wimmins, they're all like "OMG YOU FILTHY MEN!! WHY WOULD YOU EXCLUDE WOMEN!?!?!?!"
I dunno, sometimes I'm ashamed to be a wimmins
What "feminists" are these? I'm a feminist, what some categorize as a radical feminist, and I haven't the faintest idea of what you are talking about.
The extremist ones who make such a big deal out of situations like this.
Note the "radical" in my self-description. I am one of the extremists. Keep in mind that, just because someone uses feminist terminology to rant or complain doesn't mean they are a feminist. In fact, if you ask a woman who is ranting about "equality" if she considers herself a feminist, she will probably say no. Seriously. The exception to this, in my experience, is in college, where you have young women who are frustrated both by the sexism around them but by their lack of tools to address it. But college politicals of any stripe, liberals, conservatives, objectivists, feminists, masculinists, vegans, libertarians, tend to make big deals out of just about any kind of situation.
The other exception would be the women you see on the news ranting. But really, think about that for a minute. If you are a reporter looking for dramatic news footage, are you going to point your camera at the ten women who are calmly explaining why they think a situation is biased, or the one wingnut yelling and waving a sign off to the side?
Oddly enough, my initial reaction was not one of outrage, but bafflement. It seemed, just from a PR standpoint, idiotic beyond words. Then, according to the response from IGN, we find out that it was the movie studio who put on the restriction because they wanted to create a buzz amongst a specific demographic. Again with Teh Dumb. I don't see the business savvy of hard-limiting who you market to. Sure, you can aim your promotions at a certain demographic, promotions so targeted they might as well have sniper scopes on them - Axe commercials anyone? - without overtly excluding the other people who might get interested in what you have to offer. I thought about this and the furor it is causing in certain circles, and I see only one logical possibility and that is viral marketing, using a wave of protest to surf their product (in this case, a movie) into the limelight. In short, there's only one way this makes any sense to me - it's a troll. A corporate troll, and like any troll, it's to stir up a fuss and gain attention for itself.
I'm inclined to treat Tristar's marketing the way I would any other troll - report and move on.
EDIT: I just saw the post about the contest change. Interesting.
