Using codes of masculinity to sell products to guys is nothing new, but it’s usually about beer, “hard lemonade” or deodorant. It’s also usually funny, and pokes fun at male insecurities while celebrating them. A new Snickers commercial, however, seems to just be about beating the crap out of sissies.
It opens on a guy in bright yellow shorts sashaying down a sidewalk. He’s speedwalking. Suddenly a truck comes roaring over the houses and smashes onto the street beside the man. Mr. T is in the back of the truck behind a Gatling gun. He yells at the man to stop speedwalking: “You a disgrace to the man race!” he shouts. Then he fires candybars at the man, and the man dances around on the sidewalk in fear and takes off running. The tagline: “Snickers. Get some nuts.” (You can watch it here.) Yum! Now when I want to satisfy my hunger and think about shooting down a mincing, nutless homo in suburbia, I’ll know what candy bar to buy! Thanks, Snickers!
Bob Garfield at the magazine Ad Age wrote an open letter last week to the CEO of Omnicon, the ad corporation responsible for the spot, accusing him of using “dehumanizing stereotypes” and “jokey violence” in of all things a candy commercial.
This letter is to you, but it is equally to your colleagues throughout the industry. Are you so bereft, of ideas and simple humanity, that you must be reduced to stereotyping and bullying? That you must identify an “other” to ridicule, or worse? That you must build a brand on the backs of people who have harmed no one save for challenging a high-school locker-room standard of masculinity?
He points out that Omnicom says it practices corporate responsibility by “ensuring that we use our position to promote socially responsible policies and practices and that we make positive contributions to society across all of our operations.” Then why, in a candy ad that you assume is at least partially targeted to children, would you go this route? Garfield points out that it’s not just about anti-gay attitudes, or more broadly about gender roles and what’s “okay” for one sex or another. It’s really about attacking people who are different or seen as weak:
You don’t have to be gay to be the target of macho aggression. If you are slight, or weak, or meek or odd. If you don’t like football or groove on Liza. If you read books. If you drive a Neon. If for any reason you don’t fulfill the masculinity expectations of the bully, you are therefor[sic] a faggot and: ridiculed, berated, laughed at, marginalized, stuffed into a locker, beaten up, murdered. Ass-wiggling speedwalker = faggot. It’s code. Likewise sweater-draped poodle walkers who squeal “oooooooh!” This kind of ad, which normalizes and even incites contempt or worse for the supposed faggots, is therefore homophobic whether the runner is gay or not.
Some Ad Age readers have commented that Garfield is being too politically correct and that it’s all in good fun. After all, it’s not a crime to offend someone. At the very least, one of them argued, kids today don’t have the same anti-gay culture of past generations.
Is this true? I’d love to hear from Consumerist readers who are, say, in their early twenties or younger: has bullying based on codes of masculinity abated in recent years? Is that sort of behavior really a thing of the past? Because if it is, good for humanity—but I wonder if a Snickers ad that shows a pop-culture icon firing a large gun at a big ole’ sissy is teaching kids it’s time to bring it back.
But enough about that cheery world of high-school—the real question, writes CV Harquail on her blog Authentic Organizations, is why a global corporation that claims social responsibility would produce a spot that undermines its promises to do good.
What I don’t understand about the responses to Garfield’s letter is that so few people are focused on holding Wren accountable for aligning his organization’s actions with its words. Why is this?
Striving for authenticity, for alignment between who you say you are, what you believe about yourself, and how you behave as an organization, is the responsibility of the organization’s leadership.
And responsibility for being authentic is not confined to leadership: Keeping behavior aligned with the organization’s statements of purpose, vision and value is the responsibility of every employee. The people at Omnicom know this– it’s right here in Omnicom’s Code of Conduct statement:
Our reputation depends, to a very large measure, on you taking personal responsibility for maintaining and adhering to the policies and guidelines set forth here. Your continued cooperation in this regard is appreciated.
“An Open Letter to Omnicom President-CEO John Wren” [AdvertisingAge via Towleroad]
“Homophobia and (In)Authenticity at Omnicom: What can a leader do?” [Authentic Organizations]
More From Consumerist
-
Turns Out Hiding $250K Worth Of Meth Inside Snickers Bar Wrappers Won’t Fool Authorities
-
Olive Oil 'For Kids' Is Apparently A Thing
-
Store Enacts “Two Students At A Time” Limit To Curb Shoplifting
-
More Obnoxious: Agreeing to Membership Rules You Have No Intention of Following, Or Having Your Receipt Checked?
-
7 Things We Learned About The History Of The Doritos Locos Taco
I think my point about straight white suburban people of privilege needing a clue stick is pervasively clear.
There are plenty of ways of being funny about gay people other than by pointing guns at them.
Make Mr. T stop the guy on the street
Oops, end of comment follows re: plenty of other ways for this commercial to end up:
Have Mr. T stop the guy and thrust a Snicker into his hand. Or hell, into his mouth. Have the guy trip and fall from his crazy power-walk, end up looking at a powerful Mr. T going on about getting nuts in your Snickers. Have one of the Queer Eye guys lecture the guy (his style being lacking, due to his power-walk, and have him end up running instead.)
Anything. But pointing guns at gay guys? Nope, no funny in there.
@Paladin_11:
If not giving a shit if some Internet whiner is offended over a candy bar commercial makes me an insensitive clod, then by all means, bring on the branding iron.
I don’t know how some people find time to accomplish anything with all of the mean spirited confectionery adverts floating about the airwaves.
Male effeminacy is in our culture considered an indication of homosexuality. You know that. And hopefully everyone here knows of Alan Schindler, Matthew Shephard, Simmie Williams and others who were murdered because they didn’t measure up to their killers’ standards of masculinity. This commercial’s ‘humor’ rests on that premise that it’s okay to mock, even violently attack, people who are effeminate, who don’t measure up to your standard of masculinity.
Would you feel comfortable laughing at this commercial if Matthew Shephard’s mom were beside you?
give me a break. Its a speed walker – and the guy is walking as a normal speedwalker does. Its making fun of a sport – SPEEDWALKING not gay people, Get the fuck over it already.
@Paladin_11: Now having said all that Mars has shown that they can do this sort of commercial right. The footballer taking a dive and pretending to be hurt expresses it perfectly, without risking offense. Many thanks to the person who linked it.
Exactly. Telling that guy to man up wouldn’t carry any of the connotations that this ad does. Of course, most of the complaints would probably be about the ad showing someone playing soccer, which some people might find more offensive than preferring to have sex with other men…
1. There is nothing worse than “aggressive ignorance”. I feel sorry for you. It’s a dark and deep cave in which you live.
Look, people. There is a new and dexterous mental algebra going on that needs to stop, and I’m going to lay it out as clearly as possible. Those who don’t think that this commercial is in incredibly poor taste are constructing their arguments like this: “All that was shown was that he was speedwalking. It was never explicitly made clear that he was gay. Therefore, if you think that he’s supposed to represent a gay person, why it’s suddenly YOU who is the homophobe! Also, the logical underpinning of bad taste and promoting violence against groups who have historically been subject to hate crimes goes completely out the window because… uh, well, it’s a candy commercial, a magical zone in which cultural context doesn’t apply.”
2. To that second point, which still gives me migraines due to the abyssal stupidity at work: here’s an idea for a commercial in which someone chases an old woman down the street, stabs her to death, and takes a candy bar out of her purse, because he just “has” to have it. Maybe he kills some children too, to take theirs! Huh? Huh? Violence = funny! Is that in bad taste? Oh, well, “lighten up! It’s a CANDY commercial! You can do whatever you want, in a CANDY commercial! Kill some jews, lynch some blacks, bayonet some babies, rape some women! Lighten up, people! It’s A CANDY COMMERCIAL!!!!!LOLZ” end rant
(morons…)
3. Anyway, the main point. Now, imagine this scenario. Assess it the same way, and see if it works.
“In a commercial, a man wearing all black with curls coming out from under his hat is walking down the street. He has a big hawk-shaped nose, and he’s holding bags with $$$ all over them. He’s walking from his one job as a banker to his other job as a secret media manipulator.”
Did that remind you of any Jewish stereotypes? IT DID?! Why, you racist! I never SAID that the guy was Jewish, you just ASSUMED it, so CLEARLY you’re the one with the agenda. There is no way I could have possibly intended to plant that message into your head. I am completely absolved of all blame. Surely, surely, it is you who is at fault, for housing these stereotypes all completely within your own head, and getting your “panties in a twist”. People have stereotypes like that? I was completely unaware. As an ad writer, my job is to live in a cultural vacuum, completely oblivious to the tastes, desires and attitudes of the culture at large. Sometimes, my masters take me out of my sensory deprivation tank and ask me to create commercials, which I do out of whole cloth, fabricating entire scenarios completely out of the whimsy of my own head. I know nothing of your earth culture and history.
4. Thank you for self-selecting yourself OUT of the rational conversation. Those of you who have employed any of the following phrases may leave and shed your intellectual darkness elsewhere:
“lighten up”
“why do you care”
“PC police”
“it’s just a commercial”
“panties in a twist”
“getting offended over every little thing”
The rest of you, who desire rational conversation, and can bring up valid points without just parroting other people, who have something meaningful to contribute, please speak up.
@liquidhypnotic: Amen! You, sir, are made of epic win!
@liquidhypnotic:Jews are stereotyped as having big hawk shaped noses. Are you saying that speedwalkers are stereotyped as homosexual? How did you jump to that one?
In the UK, 2 people complained, none of the gay rights groups said a thing, because the connection isn’t there.
—-
I saw the advert on British TV. I thought it was funny, and effective, I’m not the only one – [pageoneq.com] . It follows the same kind of line that Yorkie’s very successful “Not for Girls” ad does, and one that McCoy’s is currently running (although the latter ad is pretty shit and unfunny).
I did not see any homosexual connotation until reading in the Metro today that it had been pulled due to complaints in the US where it had never been aired.
People got this, they saw that the joke was on the pointless waddling that is speedwalking; sexual orientation was irrelevant. Mr T and the A-Team entrance is such a caricature of “manliness” that the ad has to be taken in jest. The advert would have worked even had the victim been well built.
Can I still make fun of cup stacking? Am I still allowed to think Terry Tate ads funny? Or would I need to be re-educated?
I laughed pretty hard. Lighten up kids.
Thank you Mars! Your commercials kick as as much as your candy!
Hi, Early Twenties Guy here (I’ll be 22 in November):
I gotta say, this kind of “macho stereotyping” is not something that goes on in today’s schools. I’m a computer tech now, so you can probably imagine the kind of person I was in high school… and I was good friends with basically everyone, including the few gays and lesbians we had at our school.
The kind of discrimination being alleged here is just not an issue anymore, which is why we as a country (if not, then we as a generation) can laugh at something like this: because it’s funny.
I was much more offended by the blatant property damage and littering. Commercials like this will only encourage Snickers consumers to drive their vehicles through houses, and litter our streets with chocolate bars.
What in the world? This commercial has NOTHING to do with Homosexuality or homophobia. It is a “macho” type commercial, but I’ve known a few gay guys who are macho and would scoff at speedwalking themselves. It seems to me that people who think speedwalking signifies gayness are the ones perpetuating a stereotype, not this commercial.
@liquidhypnotic: Win!
This is exactly like something out of “Idiocracy,” which appears more prophetic with each passing year. This is totally Brawndo-like in its absurdity.
And yeah, the commercial is completely offensive to anyone who has ever been the target of hyper-masculine mouth-breathers. I’m not a gay guy, but having been a skinny little bookish kid growing up in the Football-and-Jesus capitol of the world (Clinton, MS) I can definitely relate to the experience of persecution. Chris Walters, I’m with you.
Seriously?
No where does the commercial say the guy speedwalking is gay. Speedwalking is lame. That’s all they were saying. Having said that, the commercial is hilarious and I really don’t see why everyone’s getting up in arms about this. I know gay guys that laughed uncontrollably at this commercial.
I dealt with a lot of my life being called “gay” or “faggot” when I was a teenager and I’m not even gay. I just wasn’t a “macho” guy like Mr. T. wants everyone to be. My mom had to talk me out of sliting my wrists one night because of the constant teasing. But guess what? I grew up and got over it. I’m still the same guy who couldn’t throw a punch if it said “Hawaiian” in front of it. I’ve never put anyone down for who they are or believed in.
But I still think this commercial is hilarious.
bahahaha! Best commercial I’ve seen in a long time, had to show it to everyone at work.
.
There’s nothing funny about pointing a gun at a sissy.
So long as sissies are STILL TODAY being murdered every year, there’s nothing Politically Incorrect about being disgusted by this ad.
That being said, I’m gonna go get me some nuts
.
He painted the PVC. There’s a precursor to this commercial online. Another poster here put up a link to one of these commercials a few days ago, they’ve been airing in Europe for a while. The other one is a soccer player faking injury and crying for the Ref while the others shake their head in disgust. Mr. T comes in in a tank, runs over two cars, smashes through the stone wall and steel gate around the field, and stops right before the guy. Then comes out the hatch in the top, beans the guy with a Snickers bar, and tells him to stop actin the foo or he’ll meet Mr. T’s friend PAIIIIIN.
There’s also a precursor to the gatling gun showing Mr. T building the gun and putting on his gold. Snickers has a website for all this.
Clearly Mars Inc didn’t learn from their 2007 Superbowl ad, which I did say at the time “What’s the big deal?”
I can see where the homophobic subtext can be picked up, but in all honesty, I just thought the commercial was stupid in general. Mars Inc needs to fire the advertising company that has come up with these commercials because I’m willing to bet that it’s the same company as before, and what company wants to do business with an advertising company that has landed them in hot water twice?
In the meantime, I’ll just vote with my wallet and not bother with buying Mars Inc products. Clearly I’m not their demographic.
@theblackdog:If you worry about whether or not the candybar you’re buying is right for your demographic, then the advertiser’s have clearly won.
@Hate_Brian_Club…
How did you know I was into that? You’ve seen my hanky code, haven’t you? I’m a cowboy from way back, and I’d be happy to rope you, tie you down and put my brand on you. Forget the insensitive clod thing, we’ll set up the cameras and make a sequel to “Brokeback Mountain” that will make even Heath Ledger sit up and take notice.
Oh, and when *I* give you my dark chocolate with nuts it will definitely taste great and be *more* filling! Don’t worry, I won’t skimp on the creamy filling…
Oh yeah, as I said, I wasn’t offended by the commercial because I could see it as a parody. Even though I think I’m better positioned than most to be offended by it if I were so inclined.
Shortly after making my last comment I re-read the comments code. Even though I’m mainly poking fun at myself it could be construed as an attack on “Hate_Brian_Club” instead of just the teasing I intended.
Hate_Brian_Club if you’re offended by my previous comments you have my sincere apology.
We now return you to our regular comments, already in progress.
This is a shame. The ad which I saw in the UK for the past few months was actually rather entertaining (a football, as in soccer, player takes a dive and fakes a knee injury, then T arrives in a tank to emplore him to find some testicles as per the other ads), so it’s a pity they just went for the cheap, crap, offensive approach here.
Apparently Mars has withdrawn the commercial due to adverse reaction. I find it hard to see anything funny about a gatling gun aimed at a human. Gay or straight doesn’t matter. Have you ever seen Mythbusters where they use one of those guns to shoot at things? Ever seen footage from the Vietnam war where AC-130 cargo aircraft had them on the side and would fly around and pulverize the ground? Not funny. We have become so culturally desensitized to violence that the image doesn’t bother anyone.
ahahahahahaha sounds like that mr bob Garfield is a lil touchy, me thinks he had a few to many swirlies in high school ….way to be a whiner …be a man and punch mr t in the face to prove your point … that’s a great commercial idea…i should be in marketing
This ad wasn’t that funny. I guess I got harassed too much in school – yeah, for being gay.
But what the ad is really about – Bullying sissies – has nothing to do with being gay.
That’s what the ad is condoning. Being a bully. Not gay-bashing, or violence, or whatever other stereotypes or racism that can be construed from it. It’s just the typical macho DB-ish attitude of picking on those that aren’t like you, or are weaker than you. And with so many impressionable children out there, it doesn’t set a good example.
And NO it’s not offensive, and it’s certainly not the big deal that everyone is making it out to be. Nobody should be getting upset about it, just chalk it up to a bad commercial and take it off the air.
@Captain_Collide:
Wow, you were able to be be sexist *and* homophobic in one comment. Great job!
Come on folks. Anyone who sees this as gay bashing is creating a problem where there isn’t one. Speed-walking looks weird. M’k? It looks totally ridiculous. If you want to say this is anti-speed-walking, fine. Any-gay? Umm…. NO.
I will be the first one to call out when someone is being homophobic or racist, but this is neither. Sure it makes fun of speed waling. Then again ALL humor makes fun of someone. Someone in the joke is an idiot. or a buffoon, or made to look silly. Unless you want to ban all humor and all jokes, then there will always be someone smarter then someone else, or someone stronger then someone else.
Good grief folks, get a grip.
@donkeyjote:
of course Mr. T never hits him with a snickers projectile. Mr. T learned to shoot during his days with the A-Team. Those guys never actually shot anybody they just shot in the general vicinity of the bad guys!
I think the real humor in this ad is simply in Mr. T’s presence in it and his general persona. I think Mr. T is hilarious regardless of what he’s doing.. “I need work Fool!”
@picardia: Thank you for that link. I just wrote to Snickers and told them what an awesome ad they did and how I am only going to buy snickers from now on. I hope Mr. T busts into Yoga class and bombasts some dude with Snickers in the next commercial.
If the ad claimed to feature a homosexual, and portrayed him as effeminate, or a “sissy”, the ad agency would be slammed for stereotyping. But now they feature an effeminate man, and everybody goes ahead and assumes he’s gay… and the ad agency is at fault?? This is like saying Gallagher is racist because he smashes watermelons… you making a stereotype connection doesn’t make somebody else a racist.
On a side note, I found this commercial far less offensive than the constant barrage of commercials telling me that men can’t cook, do the laundry, or perform any other task without starting a house fire.
It’s a pretty good commercial ad. Too bad the fags didn’t like it.
Everybody who says everybody needs to lighten up, need to lighten up.