Comments on: What women want

By: Ricardo Amaral

Ricardo Amaral — Thu, 29 May 2008 20:32:51 +0000

I think this pervasive image is particularly strong in US sitcoms (it’s not just about Everybody Loves Raymond, but we can track back to King of Queens, Friends, Simpsons, Flintstones and even on an extreme basis, Married with Children). This is not true in Brazil, at least. For once, women are still playing more of a old-fashioned feminine role, but as mischievously pulling men’s strings. It’s definitely more colourful than what usually comes up from protestant countries, where women are either very strong, self-assured and culturally interested, or just plain dumb and waiting for their hero.
A bit of simplification, but the point is that it is a very cultural subject, difficult to place as one thing only.

By: Seth Goodkind

Seth Goodkind — Wed, 21 May 2008 02:24:04 +0000

I would argue that women are still not allowed to “live out loud” except where it fits into the patriarchally acceptable model of female liberation. Co-opted feminism as it were.
Reknowned feminist bell hooks would probably argue (and I would agree) something along the lines that the fact that people complain about, or notice that the Raymond archetype exists is because in a patriarchal culture, it is considered normal for a male to be the domestic dominator. No one would bat an eye if Ray was emotionally browbeating his wife all the time, thats standard for our culture. Just like female serial killers, Aileen Wuornos for example, around whom huge media attention was generated by the fact that she was a woman. Gary Ridgeway killed over 48 women, but men killing women (particularly sex workers) is par for the course with patriarchy.

Source:
hooks, bell. The Will to Chnage: Men Masculinity and Love. New York. Washington Square Press, 2004

Wikipedia.org. Online. 20 May 2008. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aileen_Wournos

Wikipedia.org. Online. 20 May 2008. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Ridgeway

By: peter spear

peter spear — Mon, 19 May 2008 05:52:34 +0000

in thinking about my previous post i recognized that i ended it abruptly and with an inappropriate tone which is, i guess, indicative of the sensitivity of the issue. my experience has taught me that it is very difficult for us to allow room for a beneficial outcome of masculine creativity and power.

i have found that when an articulate and thoughtful man (even in the context of market research) speaks of creativity and emotional vulnerability, it is a very difficult thing, indeed, to reconcile it with our notions of masculine power, productivity, contribution, and creativity.

By: peter spear

peter spear — Sat, 17 May 2008 09:02:29 +0000

grant, as ever, i’m absolutely on board with the observations around gender here. the labrador analogy is apt and, as you say, most likely a defense mechanism. i’ve found in my research that post-feminist men really don’t have all that much access to masculine imagery or language that does not, in fact, reference or reinforce a pro-women ideology. which is only meant to identify the lack of a fluent or comfortable way of being pro-men, which is a pretty startling indication of disempowerment. (in my mind).

there is resistance on all sides to any level of complexity or nuance and a generalized inability to see past blunt notions of power and appetite. i recently had a young man in conversation indicate that after a one-night stand experience he worried, in the morning, that she would think he was a mistake. “you are the mistake?” I asked. “Yeah.”

My client dismissed this young man as lacking in self-confidence, never mind the audience in attendance and the room full of strangers around him.

By: Andrew McMillen

Andrew McMillen — Sat, 17 May 2008 06:07:55 +0000

Those are some pretty gross generalisations you’ve got going on here, Grant. Nonetheless, as the previous commenter wrote, thanks for initiating the discussion.

By: GirlPie

GirlPie — Sat, 17 May 2008 04:40:11 +0000

Thanks for a male’s POV on what we call ‘The RAYMOND Syndrome’ (after “Everybody Loves Raymond”, the sitcom about the sweet boob played by Ray Romano.) I wonder if these “big pups” are working it, as I notice that my Boypie loads the dishwasher so poorly that I take over so the dishes will get clean… lazy like a fox, I’m thinking.

Your point that this ‘dumb hubby’ insults the women who choose these men is a good one. But it is coming from advertisers; a client called with a brand that’s selling a “universal flaw” we women-of-a-certain-age (over 29!) must deal with: a bad hair day — horrors! Yes, it happens to all of us, but no, it’s not a great example of our value/priorities/etc.

Thanks for getting us thinking.