- Highlight
- #1
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?
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?
