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]
Everybody who says everybody needs to lighten up, need to lighten up.
]]>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.
]]>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!"
]]>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.
]]>Wow, you were able to be be sexist *and* homophobic in one comment. Great job!
]]>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.
]]>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.
]]>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.
]]>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.
]]>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.
]]>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 ;)
.
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.
]]>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.
]]>@liquidhypnotic: Win!
]]>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.
]]>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.
]]>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?
]]>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.
]]>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... ;)
]]>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.
]]>Would you feel comfortable laughing at this commercial if Matthew Shephard's mom were beside you?
]]>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.
]]>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.
]]>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
Does anyone else remember the soda (I think it was mountain dew) commercial that had two nerds making a video mocking Chuck Norris? He showed up, and they were so scared that they ran away, leaping out a of a high rise window into a dumpster? Why? because Church Norris was there to kick their ass, because that's what Chuck Norris does.
Where was the outrage over the violence against nerds? Where was the inquest into what Pepsi Co. was doing make a commercial that propagated violence against computer dorks?
Seriously folks, when we lose the ability to recognize something as ludicrous and meaningless (as both the Chuck Norris commercial and this one are) we need a reality check. Laugh or don't laugh, but don't attach your PC agenda to something that was never intended to be taken remotely seriously.
]]>Get over yourselves it's an f'ing commercial. Give me a break!
]]>I do think "code" for homosexuality and every other formerly acceptable but currently out of favor hatred exists. I think this commercial is a pretty mild example of that. I found it funny because it's more a parody than anything. If you're old enough to remember "The A-Team", the show that made Mr. T famous, you'd realize that shooting thousands of rounds at point blank range and *still* failing to hit your target was that show's stock in trade. Mr. T is playing the same character he's always played. This time it's Snickers that misses the target. After the Super Bowl commercial with the two guys in the garage who accidently kiss while eating a Snickers, you'd think they'd have learned their lesson.
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.
]]>I'm sorry guys, but this ad is absolutely hilarious, and has totally got me sold on Snickers. Don't get your panties in a bunch, eh? I know they will retract it because they have no, um, balls, but that's only because of the incredibly annoying high-pitched whinging coming from the mass hysteria-generators of the 'net.
And that's a shame.
]]>@Bix: The date-rapey bit is on their website, I agree that the commercials themselves aren't, but I stand by my date-rapey accusation as far as the website goes... And the bonus is that there is a (assumedly) gay guy in the interactive thing as well, and he also is a target of 'violence', they even named the guy Bruce...
[www.twix.com]
[happilybitter.wordpress.com]
It would have been funny if after being shot, the speedwalking man, who may be effeminate, or possible a bottom, or a settled gay husband, and who clearly is trying to get in the fat-burning zone by doing light cardio or is trying to get cardio while recovering from an injury (possible from a previous confrontation with a candy company), ate the gross candy bar, got out his "nuts", and then punched Mr. T in the face or in some other way got even despite the fact that he was in an unfair fight because he was provoked by a beefy ex-wrestler celebrity with a weapon that was in a convenient getaway vehicle.
]]>Upon video review, the commercial's not offensive, just dumb and unfunny. The absurdity of Mr. T crashing through a house doesn't really pay off in any way, shape or form. Then again, I don't really care if anyone thinks I'm manly enough or anything (since we're all weighing in, I'm straight) to meet their standards.
The ad where the two guys accidentally kissed was funny because of their reaction. I just saw them as insecure, not necessarily how people are supposed to act. There was just none of that in this ad.
Then again, the commercial's not going to make me any more or less likely to buy Snickers, just because I can't be bothered to care one way or another. That's where the ad fails: not eliciting any sort of passionate reaction.
]]>Oh, this commercial is the absolute worst - just terrible. Now excuse me while I change...I pissed my pants after I watched it. Honestly, it's a JOKE. I really didn't think of the speedwalking guy as gay. Gay-ish, maybe, but merely in the wussified sense of the word, not truly homosexual. Although he may be, not that there's anything wrong with that (of course).
]]>The keywords advertisements to the left (at the top) are hilarious because they tag on the words "effeminate men"
]]>Anyway, those commercials/depictions are irrelevant. Two wrongs don't make a right.
]]>there IS stereotyping and discrimination at play here, but methinks it's not in the first place most of us are looking...
]]>What a bunch of assholes.
]]>WHY is the speedwalker gay? I have plenty of gay friends, and none of them speedwalk. Besides, last time I checked, the definition of a homosexual is someone who has sex with the same gender individual as themselves. So, until I see this character having sex with another man, or talking about having sex with another man, or wearing a tee shirt that says "Yes, I'm gay! I have sex with men!" he's not gay. He's just a suburban yuppie speed walker.
Damn you all for stereotyping this poor character.
]]>Best. Commercial. Ever.
]]>The people complaining are the same people that are being made fun of in the commercial. it's a fucking commerciual grow some balls! "Ooohoo Milton, they are making fun of us. Boo hoo"
]]>White heterosexual males are not often the targets of hate crimes.
]]>LOL! Why not? It's already 10 or 15 years behind the times here anyway. They probably wouldn't notice the difference.
*grew up here, moved away, moved back and is desperately trying to get out*
]]>Oh yeah, the ones who use fundamentalist Christianity as their closet. Gotcha.
]]>That being said I'm not sure what conclusions are being drawn.
"Well, he's speedwalking so he must be a homo. Also, they are shooting candy at him. This is clearly meant to show how fun it would be to shoot bullets at them. All in all this commercial is supporting murdering gay people"
What?! I mean seriously, what is your life like that this is an issue. At worst its not funny, not a crime.
]]>@coolkiwilivin: I never considered it manly to be violent. It is unsexy and repulsive. OTOH, a man who shows kindness and confidence (you know, secure in themselves enough that they don't have to bring others down to make themselves feel better) is incredibly sexy.
]]>@DoktorGoku: I think I will buy Snickers based on this advertisement too, much like the oven I bought that said "fits 3 Jews" and the rope I bought that proclaimed it was now "perfect for blacks".
]]>Also, people who get offended at Mr. T firing candy-bar machine gun at a guy on a commercial must have perfect, problem-free lives, because I really can't think of anything more absurd to get offended about. It's simply incredible that people have to go out of their way to look for things to get upset about now.
I'm going to buy more Snickers now, actually. I've never bought Snickers before. Congratulations, those who complain too much.
]]>I get finding the Twix commercials in bad taste, but date rape? Really? That's something of a stretch even if I agree that they're sending bad messages.
]]>case in point: the series of videos "david blaine street magic" which a great deal of the humor was based upon the 2 men david blaine use his magic on being homosexual, or at least that was implied. Noone whined about it, they called it good humor.
Grow up Comsumerist, stop catering to the audience of people who were bullied and feel as if all commercials should feature nerds beating up bullies. Yes, I have been teased bullied whatever, who hasn't? But I have a sense of humor.
Get back to doing your job, telling the world about unjust companies and how to get your problems fixed. Thats what your for.
]]>All of you who are making comments about gay rights and such have null points. You are assuming this walker is gay and pigeon-holing him into being gay because of his choice of exercise. Bob Garfield's letter is pointless and should be thrown out for trying to incite drama and controversy. Better yet, he should be given a job at Faux News.
Personally, I think speed walking is retarded. Just run, or walk, not both.
]]>That being said, to say that this is offensive to gays somehow implies that we are effeminate speed-walkers who wear yellow shorts. The fact that gay groups are actually responding to and identifying with this is what bothers me.
As a real life non-effeminate and non-speed-walking gay guy, I can tell you all that I am not offended by this commercial in particular. Though it is utterly stupid, I can see how some people (young men especially) might find it amusing. More generally, I think most advertising is absurd and would take no special offense at this one over any other stupid ad.
Things have changed in advertising. Now it's all about creating the goofiest and most clever ad (think geckos and cave men). Snickers is just trying too hard here -- and it shows.
I haven't read through all the comments, but does anyone remember the Snickers Super Bowl ad of two guys accidentally kissing? Where were the gay "advocates" then, demanding that the commercial stay on the air?
And since when do gay guys care about Snickers? Do you have any idea how many calories are in those things?!
]]>@battra92: "I guess Snickers didn't get the memo that the only people you are allowed to ridicule, find humor in, caricature or otherwise make fun of are straight white Christian Republican alpha males."
You got it!
]]>And lighten up, will ya!
]]>When major corporate commercials look like they could have been used in the movie "Idiocracy" without any alteration, you gotta wonder where this country is heading.
]]>That would be a delicious disaster.
]]>If it were a coach firing snickers bars at the backs and rear ends of macho football players, it might be funny. This isn't, it's bigotry on par with rednecks doing drive by shootings on blacks. Or these morons:
In related news, the reich wing in the US are up in arms because the FCC overturned the fine against CBS for the "wardrobe malfunction".
Maybe the shooting in the Stinkers ad is suggesting of latent homosexuality in the right wingers.
]]>Basically they say, if you are a guy, don't have opinions or feelings, stuff it all deep inside and then go to Iraq (or the local High School or McDonald's or Post Office) and let your weapons express what the Mr. T macho-overloaded culture represses.
But I agree, Mr. T IS funny, if only for his ironic iconicness.
]]>I never thought gay when I saw this ad. I was thinking more that the guy powerwalking looked plain ridiculous. It's illustrating absurdity by being absurd.
]]>I'm writing to Mars and demanding that they cease showing that commercial and replace it with something that's actually funny. The American people have a right to good jokes.
]]>@ZackHoagie: The problem is that we know South Park has tounge firmly planted in cheek.
Um, you do realize that we're talking about Mister T here, right?
]]>Sorry folks, but the ad is funny. It's Mr. T for crying out loud! I am heading over to the vending machine immediately to purchase a Snickers bar.
]]>But what's up with the shooting? Only 'pussies' would attack other people (who reflect back to them their own insecurity) with a gun... too "hands off." Here's an idea for your next ad campaign...
Here's how "real men" attack other people they are afraid of:
[en.wikipedia.org]
"On June 7, 1998, Byrd, 49, accepted a ride from three drunk men named Shawn Allen Berry, Lawrence Russell Brewer, and John William King. He had already known one of them. Instead of taking him home, the three men beat Byrd behind a convenience store, chained him by the ankles to their pickup truck, stripped the man naked, and dragged him for three miles. Although Lawrence Russell Brewer claimed that Byrd's throat had been slashed before he was dragged, forensic evidence suggests that Byrd had been attempting to keep his head up, and an autopsy suggested that Byrd was alive for much of the dragging and died after his right arm and head were severed when his body hit a culvert. His body had caught a sewage drain on the side of the road resulting in Byrd's decapitation. [1]."
I can see the ad for 3 Musketeers now: "3 'he-men' grab a guy leaving a convenience store with an energy bar instead of a 3 Musketeers, beat him, chain him to a car, strip him naked, and drag him alive down the road to his death." Wow, that's comedy gold, Mars, we'd be laughing our asses off at your bold and inciteful method of selling your goodies to our kids.
]]>I've bought my last Snickers bar.
Jerks.
]]>it's not recognizable because it's what gay men look like; it's recognizable because it's what legions of media stereotypes of gay men from the dawn of cinema look like. Those of you who are trying to turn this around that way are being deliberately obtuse.
I'm a little annoyed that, aside from everything else, Snickers appears to have decided to alienate their female audience to some extent. I'm not saying every woman will hate this commercial, but I imagine a good number, when confronted with marginalizing stupidity, might be annoyed enough not to buy a candy that seems to have stopped targeting their demographic entirely.
And, damn, Snickers - that's a lot of PMS money to be lost. (Comment not intended to imply that all women with PMS crave chocolate - lord knows I do, though, and I'll be getting something else out of the candy machine when the craving hits.)
]]>My best friend is gay, yadda yadda disclaimers excuses etc., but I have to admit I LOL'ed at this ad. Anything with Mr. T is an automatic win.
]]>@failurate: The problem is that we know South Park has tounge firmly planted in cheek.
]]>What's next, will we be debating the merits of Eric Cartman's views on Jewish faith and culture?
]]>Ugh, didn't finish. But, anyway, REGARDLESS OF HOW SILLY IT LOOKS, he's minding his own damn business and doesn't need to get shot at by Macho Man Prototype to "get some nuts" because what he is doing isn't "normal".
Screw that!
]]>The people in this thread saying the man is gay aren't stereotyping him, they're pointing out that the commercial portrays a common stereotype. It is not the pot calling the kettle black
]]>@Captain_Collide: Clean out our vaginas? Definitely offencive right there. Not only saying that people who complain are women, but women are whiny bitches who just need to clean out our vags because there's no reason to say "this is offensive" regardless if you think the man is gay or just a speedwalker. He's trying to get some exercise, REGARDLESS OF HOW SILLY IT LOOKS
]]>Nothing in ads is accidental, or it's sure as hell not supposed to be. And this man is obviously intended to be a gay stereotype. Whether such stereotypes are accurate is another matter. If the advertisers didn't know they were employing an old stereotype, then they should be fired for stupidity.
]]>Also, part (if not most) of the problem is that MArs always puts out these crazy freaking ALPHA MALE FUCK WOMEN, QUEERS AND MAYBE MINORITES commercials. If this were an isolated incident, it would be easier to forgive.
]]>@forgottenpassword: haha...these Mr.T commercials are great. I hope snickers keeps making them. that soccer one is so true. now that i've seen these a few times, it reminds me of the office linebacker superbowl commercials a few years ago. terry tate was tackling women in those too. it'a amazing we didn't have people up in arms about violence against women. maybe...just maybe they understnad it was ONLY A FREAKIN COMMERCIAL!!!!!
]]>I found that one kinda clever. And viewed it as the smart guy manipulating the dumb jock. And making fun of the jock as being a homophobe.
That's how I took it.
]]>A huge number of commericals (and sitcoms) work on the assumption that regular straight guys are idiots, liars, and constantly need the supervision of better-knowing women. A commercial with someone telling a mincing guy to man up is a drop in the bucket compared to how regular men are portrayed.
Besides, any commercial with Mr. T is hilarious regardless of any other content.
]]>Odds are pretty good that the Mad Men working on the campaign are such milquetoasts
They are not, actually. Many of them are actually ex-frat boys who treat their positions in the advertising world as an excuse to continue their irresponsible, alcohol- and drug-abusing, misogynistic lifestyles. I've walked out of brainstorming sessions--where supposedly nothing is off-limits--after hearing one guy bray for an hour about an idea for creative for a print ad that was pretty much exactly what this ad is putting out.
Advertising is a form of media, and is thus very dangerous if viewed only through the prism of humor "Oh, lighten up, it's just a funny commercial." Creative professionals, brand management, and ad execs need to realize that pronto.
]]>I was made fun of and bullied in high school for not being masculine enough and you know where most of those people are now? The same place I left them, a small Midwestern town pulling down a slightly higher wage than when we were teenagers, married to fat wives. The universe has a way of working things out.
Making fun and teasing has a valuable place in society, lest we truly do become an entire country of whiners, cry-babies and wimps who can't handle a candy commercial without threatening violence and boycotts.
]]>@donkeyjote: Lets say I get a knife right now, and throw it at you. My intent is completely harmful, I want to kill you.
But, suddennly, the knife misses! You're not gonna go, "OH WELL IT MISSED NO HARM NO FOUL." You are gonna be pretty fucking pissed.
]]>I do remember what the Girl Scouts claim about their cookies:
[tinyurl.com]
And at some point in the past 4 years, Ben & Jerry's stopped getting their chocolate from the CMA (Chocolate Manufacturer's Association):
[tinyurl.com]
And then a quick google search brought up these:
[tinyurl.com]
[tinyurl.com]
And it's possible that like Ben & Jerry's, the CMA has changed their practices in the past 6-7 years. But about 2 years ago a friend's workplace was visited by a Mars Co. representative promoting dark chocolate M&M's and the anti-oxidants in dark chocolate and admitted that Mars can't guarantee the source of their chocolate because they buy from the CMA. And if Mars did what Ben & Jerry's did, which is pay more, they could guarantee that none of their chocolate came from slave labor.
]]>On the other hand, the "soccer" ad with Mr. T is very funny.
]]>See "20km walk Men" "20km race walk Women" and "50km walk Men"
So, yes it is an Olympic sport.
]]>Some hope for (Canadian) society, perhaps.
]]>Where I'm from, at the start of school last September (2007), a kid in grade 10 came to school on the first day wearing a pink shirt of some description. The school jocks mocked him pretty badly, calling him gay and threatening to beat him up if he wore a pink shirt again.
Word got out on facebook thanks to a couple of grade 12s who saw what happened and were pretty disgusted, and the next day a large chunk of the school population came to school wearing pink shirts.
The bullies were furious, to put it mildly. :D
Here is a link to the story:
[www.cbc.ca]
I found two other Mr T "get some nuts" commercials....
I found out these were shown in the UK.... no wonder I never saw them before.
]]>What's especially funny is that the people shrieking "OMFG he's effeminate not gay!" don't seem to think there is any issue with dissing men for being effeminate. Which means, "like women". Eeeeww, girls!
Glad to know Mars Inc doesn't want any money from pussy-bearers. Thanks for telling me to spend my cash elsewhere!
]]>How do you get from a blatently over the top Mister T shooting candy bars at someone to "You gonna die faggot"? Where at ALL in that commercial did the runner get branded as gay? Sexuality is NEVER mentioned in this commercial - unless *YOU* are the one stereoytping speedwalking with being gay.
You guys are seeing menace in your shadows over this one.
]]>@Genocyde:
Other commercials in this series? WHERE !?!? WHERE!!?!
I must see these!
I am hoping for one where mr T is shooting snickers bars at a guy metal detecting on a beach (as I am into metal detecting).
]]>Come on though guys, I think it's offensive that you would ASSUME the speedwalker is gay. I saw him and thought "okay, some uppity speedwalker dude is speewalki--HOLY SHIT IT'S T. TIME TO MAKE THIS SUCKA FLY."
]]>That said, labeling an effeminate man as a "disgrace to the man race" is beyond bullying between males. It illustrates a failure to understand the complexity & range of male (or really, human) potential. But it's very liberal & high brow of me to state that as I stand here on my soap box.
]]>Who is really the gay stereotype?
]]>Seriously now.
/end sarcasm
]]>And what we should really b/w/m about is the hidden/subconscious patriotic color choice of the cannon pvc. White, Red and blue. I didn't even know you could BUY red or blue pvc, unless you went out of your way to find it....
That, and Mr. T. is covered in Snickers bars, and even his gold T chain is a gold Snickers Logo.
]]>Really, I thought it was kind of funny. And I probably never would have seen the ad if not for this thread. Nor would I have my current craving for a Milky Way (snickers are good, but the peanuts are really too overpowering for texture and taste of the caramel and nougat.
]]>So what's the solution? No humor involving interaction with another human being, ever? SkokieGuy draws the line at perceived violence. Bob Garfield, using PC code language ("other"), would apparently draw the line at perceived classification.
I'd rather laugh, or not laugh, then move on to the next thing. Like other people have stated, I can save my righteous indignation for those more worthy of it.
]]>Mr. T. only does diplomacy at the end of a gun.
And if they took your idea, they would be ripping off Orbit gum commercials or any other *magic item = instabetter*.
Slapstick comedy needs to come back with a vengeance (Preferably with Mr. T riding shotgun, as he is now).
Look at how well "Live Free or Die Hard" did. Or "Shoot 'Em up". Violence sells baby.
]]>I didn't think he was gay. Hell, why aren't people saying that this was a reverse hate crime?
There are too many assumptions being taken. I'm not saying it's good to "gay-bash" or anything like that, but I have no idea how anyone could positively say that the speed walker was gay.
While the response to the ad is overboard, as usual, I do think the shooting of the Snickers at the speedwalker (rather than, say, offering the Snickers to the speedwalker, which thus transforms him into a Manly Man) is distasteful, since it suggest violence (even in humor form) is an acceptable practice of effecting change on others. I'm probably reading too much into it, too, but I think the message could have been easily conveyed in other ways. The overall premise is certainly amusing.
]]>and thems the people with the issue about stereotypes...
and well...
Aww screw this *Presses the button*
(When in doubt... Atomic Bomb...)
(To be really sure, you need to glass the area from high orbit)
]]>If you don't get the irony of shooting someone with a candy cannon to motivate masculinity, then clearly you need to rinse out your vagina and stop bitching.
Seriously, it's a humorous commercial you entitled whiny PC nutjobs. Grow up.
]]>WHAT?!
As a midwesterner.... I am greatly OFFENDED!
lol
@lawnmowerdeth: Just to play devil's advocate, why wasn't a woman used instead if it was an issue of speedwalking looking stupid? I certainly see a lot more female speedwalkers than men.
All that aside, speedwalking does look ridiculous. :)
]]>Also, does anyone else realize that EVERYBODY is less manly then MR. T? Even Chuck Norris (But only like by .000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000003%... )
]]>This commercial is just off, and in enough ways, that I think it's perfectly understandable that there are people who are offended. One thing is for sure, I haven't even seen the commercial, but just hearing about it certainly has NOT whet my appetite for a Snickers candy bar. In fact, from now on, Snickers bars will probably forever make me think of a jogger's sweaty gonads.
]]>@cordeliapotter: Wow. I've not heard that before. Do you have a reference / link for this?
]]>Since there is no evidence that the speedwalker WAS gay, let's leave that aspect, and focus on the idea that NOBODY is manly enough to withstand a Snickers pelting by Mr. T.
Would everyone get their panties unbunched if he were shooting at Chuck Norris who responded by kicking the full-sized bars into Snickers Minis? 'Cause I'm just saying, that would be an even funnier commercial.
And to the crowd who is trying to make the case that the walker was gay, that shows your homophobia. Many gay men are just like every other man. Real violence against homosexuals (or anybody else) is wrong. Mr. T. shooting Snickers at someone who is less manly than he is funny. I will be speaking to the Snickers people in a way they can undersand: I'm bying an @ss load of Snickers to shoot at speedwalkers and uptight PC police. Suckas!
]]>@Transuranic: um...wow. people really do read too much into things? Did i ever say i hate gays or anything like that? i'm actually for gay marriage and hate that MY church and religion is being a douchebag about gays. All i said was that the commercial is hilarious and i have no problem with it. For the record too, i read about this story a few days ago and found the video on youtube. i showed the video to my gf and 2 other guy friends and all laughed about it. I asked if they saw anything wrong with it and all looked at my puzzled because they couldn't find anything. it's funny.
]]>For those who miss your reference:
[www.penny-arcade.com]
I think the best incident to recall here happened when I was about 13. A neighboring school district had a gay band director (shocking! a band director, GAY!) and they fired him for being gay. Shortly thereafter, he died of a stroke in his early thirties. His partner said he died of a broken heart. When my classmates heard about his death, they laughed gleefully and made jokes about what was happening to him in hell. And oh yeah, these were both public school systems. I also had to put up with daily prayers broadcast over the loudspeaker and if I objected, I would be mercilessly beaten up by my classmates. I am not kidding or exaggerating.
I figure this idiotic ad was probably written by someone like the people I went to school with.
]]>John Gabriel's Greater Internet F***wad Theory. Let people be anonymous, give them a voice, and they'll act like complete d-bags.
Online games are the perfect place to see how abhorrently ignorant and racist and homophobic our youth can be.
We should do what we can to guide our youth away from such hate. We shouldn't condone their behavior through commercials that reaffirm their hateful beliefs.
]]>To the people who say that in America we don't have the right to NOT be offended, you're right! Commercials that make fun of the clueless (typically white) male are legion. There is a key difference. Most commercials that make fun of someone don't result in a message that its okay to hurt or be violent. (Does anyone want to go out and beat up middle aged married white men because their TV commercial wives are so much more clever?).
But gays are the victims of more than being the butt of jokes. We are frequent victims of violence and this commercial does imply that targeting less than manly men is an acceptable activity. It's a damn GUN that's being pointed at this fey speedwalker.
To claim that 'it's just a speedwalker' not code for gay is laughable. Could the contrast of the hypermacho Mr. T make this any more obvious? For the fully clueless, Snickers helpfully makes reference to 'manly men' making certain everyone understands the speedwalker isn't.
And what I find so funny is like all issues catering to homophobic attitude, there is a subtext of homosexuality. Snickers - Get Some Nuts! The nuts reference is obviously both to testicles and the nuts in Snickers. Seems to me, like no 'manly man' would even CONSIDER putting Snickers in their mouth, now that the double-entendre has been put out there.
]]>And while I can't prevent people from believing stereotypes, I do believe we should make a concerted effort to make it less and less comfortable for such ideas to be present or propagated. Why should we make it easier for homophobes to spread their fear mongering? Why should we make it easier for racists to spread their hate?
So, no. This isn't "just a joke." Because jokes about people or groups aren't "just jokes" to many people. They aren't "just jokes" to the people that believe them. They aren't "just jokes" to the children who are impressionable enough to believe what they're told.
Call me what you will. Overly politically correct? So be it. But I've seen enough hate and fear in children, teens, and adults to know that passively allowing or actively spreading such messages is not okay.
]]>@RabbitDinner: Exactly.
]]>Next target the stereotypical gay who overcompensates for his perceived lack of manliness by bodybuilding. First target of this campaign-Mr. T
]]>No, no, no. You just don't get it. It's OK to make fun of the typical white male, but don't you dare make a joke about anyone else!
I also always love how the people who say they are sticking up for homosexuality are the same ones who call any "sissy" or effeminate man being made fun of gay. People can make fun of the ridiculousness that is speedwalking without gaybashing...
]]>You've got to be similarly naive to think that if you're gay, and clearly being gay by holding your boyfriend's hand or kissing him in public, that if someone approaches you, you've got to be naive to think they're NOT there to beat you up. Oh, you let him take the first swing, of course; that's how you keep an assault charge from sticking.
OMG you guys, beating straight guys until their brains ooze out their ears is TOTALLY a joke! Get over it. GAWD, PC nazis. Jesus.
]]>This isn't attacking gays alone, it's attacking men who don't meet the standard of manliness. I am a self-proclaimed metro, so I suppose I should be shot as well
]]>As a gay man, I have no problem with depicting a "sweater-draped poodle walker saying 'ooooooo'", because when you heap all the stereotypes, be they gay men, black people or asians, it becomes so absurd it's funny; there are plenty of straight men who act flamboyant, other races like friend chicken, and there are plenty of white people who can't drive. But when you add violence to the mix, even "cartoon" violence by throwing candy bars, it crosses the line.
With this line of logic, it would be perfectly acceptable for the commercial to depict a black man eating fried chicken, then having a white pro wrestler come in and hang him from a tree using Twizzlers. Come on... it's only candy!!
]]>In the immortal words of Louis C.K. "I'm not laughing at him because he's gay, I'm laughing at him because he's fucking weird."
]]>@Streyeder: "Grow a pair"? Don't you mean get some nuts?
]]>Hey, wouldn't the commercial be even funnier and more ironic if he were shooting the Snickers bars at a woman, telling her to "get some nuts!" Hahahahahahaha!
I'm not a panty-wadder about commercials, but I do find the concept offensive. It isn't ironic, or even funny, if the target of the violence is expected. Anyone can shoot Snickers bars at a "gay man" and watch him do his hissy dance. How about shooting the nutty bars and insults at skinheads? How about shooting them at a truck full of confederate-flag waving Bubbas. You know -- men who really need nuts. THEN, I'd buy a Snickers bar.
]]>come to think of it, they probably already own the companies. nevermind. carry on.
(actually, no, really. count the amount of times older white guys are the goofs in commercials compared to other races/sexes/genders.)
]]>This commercial goes beyond stereotypical behaviour. It adds to the collective thought that it is ok to belittle those individuals you feel superior to.
This is the type of thing that builds to columbine or Virginia tech situation.
Imagine what happens when that speedwalking guy reaches his boiling point. He just can't take it anymore. He buys a gun- a real gun, not one that shoots snickers. Then you have a real problem.
]]>I think the people who believe that 'effeminate'='gay' have some issues to work out for themselves.
Mr.T is the Man.
]]>Plus, I doubt Mr. T would shoot at people of his own race.
@Platypus Man: Agreed!
No wonder comedy movies don't do as well as they used to. Everyone is so preoccupied with whether they should laugh at something risque or not.
]]>I wish people in this world would quit being such damned babies about everything. "Oh my God, he shot a snickers bar at a speedwalker. The world is coming to an end! Oh no!!"
Some of you need to grow a pair.
]]>I carry a baseball bat in my truck cause I figure eventually, I'm gonna be kissing some guy in a parking lot, just like the hip kids do, and some douchenozzle like Bravo369 is gonna come along, drunk and angry, and try to get up in my face, and I'm gonna have to beat the holy fuck out of him.
Really, you'll beat the "holy fuck" out of someone just for trying to get up in your face? Have fun in prison.
In the meantime I'll make sure to avoid you as I wouldn't want to run the risk of being perceived as getting up in your face.
I personally don't see anywhere in the ad where they say that the speedwalker is a gay man. You PC Nazis just assume that he is because of your own stereotypes.
D'oh! Did I just Godwin myself?
]]>good gods....
mr t was shooting snickers at a speedwalker, if anyone should speak up and gripe are speedwalkers...
I viewed the video, didnt think the guy as gay male, but a speedwalker, thats it.
this commercial makes fun of speedwalking, an unusual and "un-natural" form of movement for any animal...
i respect people that are gay, and believe they should be able to live their live as they wish, but not everything in this world is gaybashing. this commercial was simple speedwalking bashing, nothing else...
]]>Mars inc Sucks. The Twix commercials (and the website "game") they have thought up is pretty much more of the same as this Snickers commercial.... except it's more date-rapey : [happilybitter.wordpress.com]
]]>Everyone knows that real men eat meat...preferably raw meat that they recently killed themselves.
Only girly men eat candy.
This is why Mr. T (the worldwide exemplar of masculinity) found it them more appropriate as a projectile than as a food. I am sure that (shortly after collecting his paycheck) he went back to wrestling grizzly bears for their meat.
]]>Plus it's just a joke commercial. I mean, Mr. T is in the vehicle, not Hitler.
]]>As for "comic violence", the point isn't shooting candy bars; it's the target. If it were a bunch of guys in a pickup truck with a Confederate flag shooting Snickers bars at a black man, shouting "You a disgrace to your race!", would that be funny?
Oh. My bad. Most Consumerist readers probably would think so, too.
]]>@Chris Walters: Man, I'm not condoning the ad. I'm not saying that what it's saying is cool. I don't like it either, though I haven't shared your experiences. All I'm saying is that you shouldn't be offended by an ad. What you had to go through it terrible, but this is an ad. For candy. It's not saying that's it's ok to do this. It's an ad and is intended to be funny, whether or not you think it is. Anyone who thinks the ad is "justifying their attitudes and behaviors" probably shouldn't take their advice from... ads.
Some things are ok to get offended over, but this isn't a big deal. People are too sensitive. I'm sorry if you don't like what I have to say, but pick your battles. If you get offended by everything, you might just go crazy.
]]>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?Not really.
Second:
I know alot of gay/bi guys and women, and I pretty much assure you even they think speedwalking is pretty damn queer. (And even then, where did anyone get the idea that the guy was gay, and not just some metro fool?)
Third:
It's Mr. Fuckin' T, in a fucking pickup, driving through a house while standing in the bed of said pickup. God damn that made my sides hurt.
Finally:
Does noone get the IRONY of a supposed ""anti-gay"" commercial with a tagline of "Get Some Nuts"?! Cause that sounds like a gay meta-reference.
some people are too sensitive - maybe they need some nuts too.....
]]>Aren't various stereotypes of men mocked routinely in the sitcom universe still? From plumber's cracks to dumb jock to mechanic to nerdy guy, etc.
While I don't really like this, and I wouldn't choose this to advertise my product; comic violence is commonly used for fun in mass media and advertising. This isn't some guy getting stabbed by a bunch of street thugs.
]]>I ran a satirical newspaper in high school with one author who often bordered on the farcical side. His goal was generally to rile people up. It wasn't my type of humor, but I didn't want to step on his toes so I didn't. Incidentally, his pieces were always the most popular.
Anyway, he once submitted a question to our advice column (which were obviously always fake) with a thinly veiled name of a local varsity baseball player. Essentially it said something along the lines of "I like to kiss boys but I don't want people to make fun of me, what should I do?"
Against my better judgment, I ran it, fully expecting to be criticized for homophobic material. I figured most people would get a chuckle out of the sheer audacity of the remark then move on, while other, more senative, readers would be upset. I was prepared to take responsibility for my decision.
But the response was unfortunately quite the opposite of all that. The baseball player and his friends were super pissed that we had the audacity to call him gay. A small minority threw a borderline violent fit. They threatened the advice columnist and called her a "dyke" in retalliation on account of her dress tendencies.
Others either said they were over-reacting, some of their teammates even said we should have just used their names instead, as they wouldn't have been bothered. Faculty kept removing me from class to make sure nobody had confronted me.
In the end, since they overreacted so much, they weren't in any position to try to have us punished. The administrative decision was to have us all apologize to each other and move on, which is what we did.
There were a number of gay and lesbian students at the school, as well as those who defied typical gender roles. That none of these students ever had any problems (in high school at least) shows that, although some people were vehemently afraid to be labelled gay themselves, everyone was publicly tolerant. The reaction to our question (and really, the question itself), on the other hand, shows that homophobia is still strongly present.
Their general tolerance was clearly a learned bahavior. One commercial isn't going to change the world, but if this type of thing were common when my peers were younger, how might their tolerance have been affective? What if they had been lead to believe that this sort of behavior was funny?
]]>Ok I just saw it.... ANd I admit..... IT WAS HILARIOUS!!!
I did find it a little disconcerting how mr T has gotten meaner in his old age. lol!
THe first time I saw it.... I thought he called the guy "cracka" (but after multiple views... he was sayin "sucka").
]]>What makes a man? NUTS make the man. Well, according to mars, in order to distinguish Snickers, they have to ensure people know it has NUTS in it, and what better way to do that then remind them that NUTS is another way of saying TESTICLES. In this commercial we have the protypical neanderthal alpha male - Mr. T (where the "T" stands for "Testosterone") - shooting what can be assumed to be his manly chocolate spermatazoa at the lesser, effeminate balls-less modern man.
It's really quite fascinating. And dumb.
]]>eh...I think it's funny. I'm not a "manly man" but I'm secure in myself to laugh at a joke.
Commercials are less and less about products and more and more about being funny. (which is quite sad honestly)
Mr. T is the characture of a manly-man over-buff mean guy. They use his image to attack other men. It's funny. Laugh.
]]>This commercial is so funny. It reminds me of when one of my good friends was shot and killed on July 31, 1991 by a fagbasher who felt threatened that my friend wasn't masculine-looking enough.
Sure, it wasn't with a Snickers-loaded gun, but the sentiment is still there.
]]>Drive-by free-candy delivery ... what's not to like about that? ;-p
]]>Gays are "whiny" because we tend to, oh I don't know, get gunshots point blank in the face, like that 15 year old kid in Ventura, CA a couple months back.
I carry a baseball bat in my truck cause I figure eventually, I'm gonna be kissing some guy in a parking lot, just like the hip kids do, and some douchenozzle like Bravo369 is gonna come along, drunk and angry, and try to get up in my face, and I'm gonna have to beat the holy fuck out of him.
See ya in Hell, vanilla!
]]>I wonder what percentage of gay men are effeminate? The ad agency obviously thought the percentage to be so low that their ad wouldn't offend the mass of gay men (and lesbians) that are NOT effeminate. I wonder how they felt when their "all in good fun" little ad got them labeled as homophobes?
Shame on Snickers for funding this crap, not catching it, or not caring.
]]>It's a funny commercial, get over it.
]]>how seriously can you take him?
]]>Anyway, I have no problem with this ad, except that it's stupid. I mean, this company really wants you to associate the nuts in Snickers with balls? Really? Ew. That's the worst thing to happen to Snickers since it was used as the fake turd-in-a-pool in a million elementary school kids' pranks.
]]>Well, to me it sounds fantasticly funny! I want to see it!
Mr. T yelling at some poncey twit sounds hilarious!
]]>@Platypus Man: Yes, because if you care about one thing, you are INCAPABLE of caring about anything else. Except not.
You don't know crap about the priorities of anybody offended by this ad.
]]>Is there something wrong with Neons? I didn't get the memo.
]]>I think too many people have too much time on their hands and are looking for things to be offended about.
]]>I'm not really a "Consumerist reader" (I read a few of the other Gawkers and check in over here every once in a while when something looks interesting), but I'm 20, so I'll help.
I'm not exactly the most masculine guy in the world. And I'm fine with that. OK, I don't, like, power-walk in yellow shorts, but that's just not my style. Personally, I haven't ever really seen people being bullyed for not being "man" enough, but that could just be that my circle of friends doesn't care about that. I'm sure it probably does happen, but when I saw people in high school getting in fights, it wasn't related to this idea.
Personally, I don't like ads like this, ones that make fun of men who don't measure up to some sort of imaginary "manliness" standard, but I'm not offended and I don't really think it promotes gay-bashing or anything like that. If you like it, have a laugh; if you don't, just ignore it. It's a candy bar ad. Be offended by something that matters. If you get offended by Mr. T doing just about anything (especially shooting candy bars), you need to get your priorities in order.
]]>I thought the commercial was great. histerical. I'm sure you can take every commercial and say it makes fun of someone. You can find a commercial portraying a guy like he has an IQ of 5 and say that it's making fun or stereotyping retarded people. Should snickers redo the commercial and show a big beefy bodybuilder speedwalking? i think the same effect would come across and i would laugh histerically. everyone else...get over it. it's a commercial
]]>BTW, if you'd like to leave a message with Mars corporate, go here:
I don't really hold a favorable opinion on speedwalking thanks to that Malcolm in the Middle episode. Either walk normally, or RUN!
]]>The people who are whining about "political correctness" need a boot to the head. No, you are not creating a hip, daring response to overbearing PC when you're a bigoted asshole.
]]>Given that yesterday's church shooting appears to have been motivated by that church's stance in favor of gay rights (and, of course, by the shooter being absolutely insane), this ad's "joke" is as unfunny as it can get.
]]>At least the snickers weren't frozen like they were for me.
Seriously, though, how insecure do you have to be to hit someone with a snickers bar?
nah. I'll be skipping snickers for a while...
]]>