What About The Wimmin (Beer Drinkers)?

Posted: March 17, 2011 in Fag Up!, Identity, Masculinities, Uncategorized
Tags: ,

Over at his  HQ, Mark Simpson and others have been discussing how Beer Went Queer…

Our discussion focussed on beer advertising and how it is presented as a ‘manly’ beverage, even though, as the ads can’t help but refer to, we all know it is what men drink when they want ‘a break from being MEN’, when they want to let their hair (and maybe their trousers) down with their ‘buddies’. And as you can see beer ads are getting queerer by the day.

But I started wondering about beer advertising aimed at women. If sales are down, and gender roles are changing, surely some beer companies would target women consumers?
Well yes and no. This ad for that very fagly beer Miller Lite, features two women drinking, but, it is not what it appears at first:

Phew! I actually found that quite hot. But it is clear the ad is playing on the cliched male fantasy of blokes wanting to see girl on girl action, especially when they have had a few. And the reaction of the two women companions of the men having the ‘fantasy’ shows that the ad is very much aimed at men not women.  because we all know the ‘lesbian mud fight’ fantasy is a sign of ‘manliness’ don’t we boys?

But inspite of its pretentions, Miller Lite can’t resist queering its own manly fantasies of itself, and after the controversial ‘catfight’ ad (I think it was banned in some places or censored/edited), came this, rather more limp-wristed ‘dawg fight’ version. Handbags at the ready girls…

http://adland.tv/commercials/miller-lite-catfight-iii-dawgfight-2003-030-usa

The irony here being that it is only when women consumers are the target of a beer advert that men are allowed to be shown as unashamedly ‘gay’.

But the thing I get from all the adverts that involve a ‘fantasy’ scenario, or voyeurism, is that whoever is fantasising and whatever the gender identities of those they fantasise about, the queerness can’t be denied. As soon as people watch each other in a sexual way, especially with a companion, they are unable to do so completely ‘straight’ or completely ‘gay’. I think this commercial for Moosehead (‘Light’ of course) proves my point:

Enjoy your (bisexual) nature, beer drinkers. Cheers!

Comments
  1. Mark says:

    That ‘dawgfight’ is very lack-lustre and feeble. Perhaps because everyone knows it’s generally men that start wrestling one another, shirtless, after drinking beer not women. The catfight is kinda hot, though.

    Yes, it’s all very queer. And wittingly or not these ads only make things even queerer with their attempts to straighten out… queerness. Voeurism and troilism are perversions, after all, according to Mr Krafft-Ebing, who knew about these things.

    • Well actually quite a lot of ‘girl fights’ do go on after drinking – a friend of mine did a phd on the subject. I am pretty sure she studiously ignored the queer element.

      But you’re right men do it better, and more lovingly than women. I believed that catfight up until the point where they decided to ‘make out’.

      I had to look up ‘troilism’. You’re one of the few people who makes me look up words, and gets me into catfights…

  2. Mark says:

    TBH I’ve seen a few ‘catfights’ at closing time and, no, there’s nothing sexy about them – especially to the straight men trying to separate them. It also never looks like there’s any chance of a ‘no hard feelings’ handshake afterwards.

    It always makes me happy to hear I’ve made the younger generation turn to their Online Dictionary.

    • Women tend to take everything seriously and personally it’s very tiring.

      The worst fights I witnessed at school were between girls. You might not have enjoyed going to a mixed comp like mine! White middle class kids were automatically considered fags and snobby bitches. We had to learn to blend in.

  3. gs says:

    Can we PLEASE get back to the high-brow LBGT, femdom, whose-got-the-power sexuality, rather than this nescient ,cretinous heterosexuality?

    Good Lord girl, this is the 21st century, not the Pleistocene Era!

    Disclaimer: This comment is tongue-in-cheek!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  4. annifrangipani says:

    Hello Elly,
    I have followed the link you left on Sian’s blog to continue our discussion. I have looked over your blog and I cannot find any references on the first page, at least to where you describe yourself as a “victim” of feminists. I also don’t see where you write about feeling empathy for rapists, murderers and child abusers and those who would seek to minimise their actions. I’m sure you know better than I where you find these posts and links would be useful. Thanks.

    I have copied my posts from there, to here. I look forward to your replies:

    I think the question stands does it not? Your opponents, you say, are those who can excuse women being raped and murdered, so again I ask you to tell me how you feel empathy for these people.

    Saying Sian knows what you mean is hardly acceptable on a public post with millions of potential readers. I would have thought that you would want your meaning to be explicit where you include a link to your own website.

    Your last paragraph is a perfect example of the derailing Sian describes. People are capable of caring about more than one thing at a time, perhaps you are not but I know I can care deeply about world events and a global cultural femicide.

    You state that you are treated as an opponent of feminism. I’m afraid this statement appears irrelevant. Perhaps you could explain this further?

    • Hi
      I never said I supported people who rape or murder others. You came up with that idea all by yourself!
      I am in opposition to feminist dogma and because of this I get called names and blocked on blogs etc. Here’s a post that mentions this, including the way feminists call anyone who challenges them a ‘derailer’…

      http://quietgirlriot.wordpress.com/2011/02/09/misandry-the-acceptable-prejudice-an-essay-by-mark-simpson/

      • annifrangipani says:

        You said: “Sometimes it is worth trying some empathy for the people we consider to be our opponents rather than categorising them as bad people for disagreeing with our views.”

        Then you said: “I meant people who disagree with us not people who kill us.”

        This was in response to what Sian said: “One person with breathtaking ignorance and naivety argued that 1 in 4 women in the UK suffering domestic abuse was not, actually, that much, and that if 2 women a week are murdered, well, that’s ONLY 100 a year which again, apparently, isn’t THAT much (it’s actually 104 when you multiply 2×52). Quite how many women he thinks should die before this issue matches his definition of ‘enough’ I never managed to learn. ”

        If you think something is acceptable then you may as well be a perpetrator – what’s the difference? I’d be really grateful if you could answer this question, instead of telling me about other feminists blocking you or linking to articles which have to relevance to the question I am asking you.
        So again, I ask you to explain, on this specific point, to explain to me why and how you feel empathy for people who think that 104 women dying per year at the hands of a current or ex male partner is acceptable.

  5. sorry anni but I can’t be arsed. if you won’t read my posts I can’t be bothered to answer your questions.

  6. annifrangipani says:

    You have linked to a piece written my Mark Simpson, is that you?
    Secondly, I have asked you a specific question in relation to Sian’s post. You would not answer my questions there, linked to this blog, and I have continued the conversation.

    The post you linked me to above concerns itself with examining some old films, which feature male abusers, and making the case that they are misandrist for doing so. I really don’t see how that answers my question.

    “Men, say the authors, have become society’s official scapegoats and held responsible for all wickedness, including that done by women they have deluded or intimidated.” Fair enough, that’s Mark’s point of view. That still does not explain to me how you feel empathy for people who think 104 women per year dying at the hands of a current or ex male partner is acceptable.

    “This is why sexism is regarded as a one-way street and any men who complain otherwise are mocked for being stupid or wet or both” – Nope, this doesn’t explain it either.

    Unless you wish me to critique the entire post, I’d answer my question. If it’s how you feel, I really don’t see how it should be so difficult.

    • This one is by me and gives my approach to feminism.
      I do not condone non-consensual violence against anybody.

      http://quietgirlriot.wordpress.com/2011/03/09/every-day-is-womens-day/

      • annifrangipani says:

        I didn’t say you condone violence. You said you feel empathy for those that do. How and why can you do that? It’s really not a hard question!

        The post you have linked me to attempts to dismantle the gender pay gap evidence, lays out why you are not a feminist and disagree with feminism, states that you have been blocked online by several people and discusses your view of women’s “victim status” in relation to men.

        It STILL does not explain, as I have asked what feels like countless times, how and why you empathise with those who think it’s OK for 104 women to be murdered per year by an ex or current male partner. Do you think it’s some sort of misandrist conspiracy, and these statistics are false? See, I’m even providing answers for you now. You could have even pointed out that approximately 40 men die each year in the hands of a male or female partner. The perfect derailment tactic! But you haven’t. I’m on your blog, you’re on home territory and yet you continue to point me to other posts.

        So, I ask again, if this is how you feel, and what you believe, why is it such a difficult question for you to answer?

        Thanks!

  7. I think it is a good idea to try and feel empathy with everyone. doesn’t mean I condone their actions. I guess it is a bit Buddhist in its ideas. You know ‘love all the people’ that kind of thing. Hating people doesn’t really get us anywhere does it

    • annifrangipani says:

      There is a large gap between empathy and hatred though, isn’t there? You can condemn someone’s actions without hating them. What is it about finding the murders of 104 women per year acceptable that you can empathise with? Personally, I think these deaths are entirely avoidable, unnecessary and heartbreaking. I can’t imagine ever feeling that a murder is “ok” let alone 104. I can’t begin to imagine the standpoint of someone who thinks that it is ok, perhaps you could explain this further.

      It’s all very well to say you love “all the people” and it’s part of your religious belief, but if that is the case, why are you so vociferously anti-feminist? Why do you make no attempt to understand and empathise with their point of view? I’m afraid it makes little sense to me, and I’d be grateful if you could explain it. Perhaps this could form the basis of your next blog post? I think the intersection of religious belief and political standpoint is a fascinating one and would make a very interesting post, particularly from someone like yourself who must have said something quite strong to be banned from so many people’s websites. What kind of love for all people did you demonstrate for these bloggers to take such action.

      Look forward to hearing from you!

  8. annifrangipani says:

    The majority of your posts seem to be about male objectification and sex. You have illustrated this with pictures of a porngraphic nature. I do not want to look at pornographic pictures, so please link me to your posts about your religious beliefs and your political beliefs.

    Thanks

  9. elissa says:

    Quiet Girl is an academic romantic, so she leaks empathy, you say inappropriately. I think you’re trying far too hard to not understand, and I do empathize with that. As you almost said – there is a large gap between empathizing and condoning, that same gap between a romantic Buddhist and an irrational person whom is in need of some empathy.

    As to why people empathize with those that ruin and devastate the lives of others as well as their own? I don’t really know. I suspect it’s a form of altruism mixed in with high intelligence.

  10. I don’t identify as Buddhist but I do aspire to some of Buddhism’s principles and practices.

  11. marie says:

    I

    I am in opposition to feminist dogma and because of this I get called names and blocked on blogs etc. Here’s a post that mentions this, including the way feminists call anyone who challenges them a ‘derailer’…

    This is silly. You get banned from blogs for breaking their mod policy. You are not persecuted by dogmatic feminists.

    • hi marie this is a post about beer adverts. I got sidetracked into a discussion with someone about feminist blogs. I have decided not to continue that discussion just now but thanks for your comment.

  12. annifrangipani says:

    “sorry anni the porno is part of the deal.”

    Interesting stance for someone who is so empathetic. So much empathy for a person who chooses not to look at pictures of a man with his thumb inserted into his urethra. You know nothing about me, my background, or what I may have experienced. You have no idea what these images may trigger for me, yet you are described as someone who “leaks empathy”.

    On Sian’s original post, you suggested that she put “into perspective” feminist issues in light of the events in Japan, Bahrain and Libya. I’d like to ask you how a post about beer advertisments is in any way important. Why is it OK for you to say this to Sian, but not for me to say this to you?

    Thanks!

    • anni I am not going to sit here whilst you slag off my whole blog.

      I am not going to publish any more comments that aren’t about the posts they are underneath and that aren’t questioning my motives for writing.

      Best wishes

    • typhonblue says:

      You want to control the world with your emotional problems?

      What if it hurts my feelings to have to accommodate your feelings?

      • thats a very good point typhonblue.

        It sums up a lot of the problems with feminism!

        Women who go on about needing ‘trigger warnings’ on things that upset them do not realise that their views and the topics they choose to go on and on about are actually upsetting to others. They assume their perspective should be the one that is treated with most respect/care. I find the arrogance incredible!

  13. annifrangipani says:

    I was not slagging off your blog – I merely stated a truth.

    Why is it OK for you to post pornographic images that may cause hurt and harm to people who read your blog? As a Buddhist, what sort of karma do you feel this creates for yourself? I’m simply doing what you do on many other blogs – asking some difficult questions. Why aren’t you prepared to answer them?

    You said, on this very blog: “Another example of ‘feminism in action’ I have found especially in online discussions, is that when challenged, feminists just cannot engage in grown-up debate.” I don’t know what you believe in, but why is it OK for you sneer at people who block you, but then choose to block me yourself? How does that make you any different? And all I’m doing is asking you to link me to some past blog posts without having to look at pornography – that’s not such a big ask, is it?

    • yes it is. I like pornography I don;t need to apologise for it. I am not a Buddhist I just referred to BUddhism. Please leave me alone now thanks. I am not going to block you as you are right it will prove your point. But you will be talking to yourself from now on.

      Best wishes

  14. annifrangipani says:

    I’m sure @elissa and @typhonblue will along soon to explain your motives to me. I look forward to that.

    I have not asked you to apologise for liking pornograpy – I’ve asked you to leak some of that famous empathy my way so that I can read your posts.

    You did not say you were a Buddhist, but you did say this: “I don’t identify as Buddhist but I do aspire to some of Buddhism’s principles and practices.” – I’d’ve thought the concept of karma was pretty central – our actions in this life impact in the life we will be reborn into.

    So, if you choose not to respond to me, that’s fine. I’ll see you around the internet.

    • I dont believe in re-incarnation. I am not a Buddhist in a religious sense.

      if you want to read my posts just go to the subjects at the side and choose one. if its got porn in it soz. I am sure you will cope.

    • typhonblue says:

      A bully is a bully, annifrangipani, whether or not they use their fists or their feelings to control others.

      If you can’t handle reading QRG’s writing because she pairs it with soft-core cheesecake(hardly ‘porn’) then move along and find other things you can read.

      Don’t try to control her self-expression.

  15. annifrangipani says:

    Oh! I thought I was going to be talking to myself! Can’t let me have the last word, I guess. Nice empathetic approach there to the pornography, but no worries, you obviously don’t want me to read your posts.

    And after all this, I’m none the wiser as to how you feel empathy for those who excuse murderers and rapists, and you won’t even extend this to me to enable me to read your blog, which you say will give me the answers. It’s terribly paradoxical, don’t you think?

  16. annifrangipani says:

    Like I say, so empathetic.

    Anyhoodle, we’ll catch up soon, I’m sure. ;D

  17. annifrangipani says:

    typhon blue said:
    You want to control the world with your emotional problems? What if it hurts my feelings to have to accommodate your feelings?

    I think typhonblue needs to gain a sense of perspective, much like you advised Sian on her post on her blog. I hardly think requesting a couple of links from your blog is seeking to control the world! How does requesting a couple of links hurt typhonblue’s feelings? This isn’t his/her blog, and in fact, this conversation has nothing to do with him/her. Unless that is a sockpuppet account?

    QRG said:

    thats a very good point typhonblue.

    It sums up a lot of the problems with feminism!

    Women who go on about needing ‘trigger warnings’ on things that upset them do not realise that their views and the topics they choose to go on and on about are actually upsetting to others. They assume their perspective should be the one that is treated with most respect/care. I find the arrogance incredible!

    How is empathy upsetting? I really don’t understand why you’d find something you have advocated upsetting! I have not said that my perspective should be treated with the “most” respect, simply that you respect my wishes in order for me to do as you have asked – read your blog to understand how you feel empathy for those who do not think that 104 women being murdered per year by an ex or current partner.

    Finally, it appears to me that you have been deleting posts on this blog – exactly what you have condemned other writers for doing. Why do you think it’s OK to be a hypocrite?

  18. annifrangipani says:

    That’s good to know.

    So, any answers for me then?

  19. Well that’s certainly a change from the St. Pauli girl.

  20. Elise says:

    Lol comments! I thought this was a post on beer adverts. To which I intended to say: all the beer-drinking young women I know drink pints of the good stuff, not this “Lite” swill. I would love to see advertising reflect women’s actual beer-drinking habits, but of course it would undermine the entire principle of the beer ad, which still seems to be living in the Dark Ages when it was a male bonding beverage. But then, now with the internet, I no longer watch TV or read print magazines so if they did update beer ads I wouldn’t know.

    Hmmm… here in Canada, anyway, or my tiny corner of it, women’s drinking habits seems to be a class/age thing. Very young women (under 30) are into girly-drink “shots,” which they enjoy on girls’ nights out, which may or may absolutely not involve picking up men. Pints are favoured by university students and more often consumed at mixed-gender social (not sexual) occasions. Some women bestride both worlds. Such are my highly anecdotal, statistics-free sociological observations on the subject.

    • Lol comments indeed!

      Hi Elise. Yes I don’t think beer ads will aver target ‘real women’ (or men for that matter) but only the macho fantasy in which Real Men drink Manly Beer and ladies have mud wrestling fights!

      Age is a big issue in people’s drinking habits. I am too embarrassed to say what I drank when I was a teenager!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s