" And the publicity officer of the NSW Teachers Federation says she wants to live in a world without men? And she gets to keep her job?"

The NSW Teachers Federation's appointment of a misandrist as publicity officer, is a smack in the face for half its pupils -- namely boys -- and can hardly be regarded as being consistent with the process of educating young males to be respectful to women.

The first two examples – the ‘get your hand of it’ campaign and the ‘don’t be a tosser’ campaign are not meant to belittle men and make them look stupid, they are meant to make men feel guilty.

Talking on your phone whilst driving and not putting your litter in the bin is equated to enjoying sexual pleasure on your own. The inference is that you should be equally ashamed of both behaviours. By projecting their own negative attitude to their own bodies onto all men these advertising companies and those who approve such campaigns are trying to induce guilt in men in order to make them change. Why not simply present good arguments as to why these behaviours are detrimental to society?

Men should stand up and refuse to be manipulated in this way. They should complain to these government agencies because they are wasting taxpayer funds trying to manipulate them rather than reason with them. Give a man a good reason to do something and he will likely oblige but if you are trying to manipulate him then it says more about your attitudes to human relationships than it does about anything else. When you try and maintain your attitudes at the expense of the taxpayer then you should be made to answer.

These campaigns have supposedly been very ‘successful’ but what value is there in manipulating and bullying people into change? Advertising companies who behave like this lack all credibility.

And here I am thinking that all forms of mass
media, from television soap operas to the
lyrics of popular songs still tend to emphasize
fairly tradional gender stereotypes.

Do media images matter? I'm not sure how seriously
anyone takes the images we see on our TV screens.
However, if we're going to talk about gender media images
we need to look at how both males
and females are portrayed.

To me, it is quite remarkable
how little the gender stereotypes have
changed in advertising over the past quarter century.

Women are typically portrayed
either as sex objects, in an attempt to market
various products to men, or as domesticated
housewives, in order to market home-maintenance
produtcs to women.

Market research has shown that one of the most
effective ways for advertisers to reach a male
audience is to associate a product, however
remotely, with a seductive or smiling female.

The sexuality of women is thus exploited by
having glamorous models being sent into
raptures by the odour of a particular after-shave.

Advertising directed at women, on the other hand, shows
females delighted beyond measure at the discovery of
a new instant soup, or thrilled into ecstasy by the
blinding whiteness of their wash.

In fact, the vast majority of TV ads that use women models
are for kitchen or bathroom products.

Men usually are the voice of authority on 80 percent of TV
commercials, including those directed at women. Yet
a barrage of advertisements still portray females as
simple-minded creatures, bickering endlessly over
which toothpaste or fabric softener is better.

There is some justified criticism of the NSW Teacher's Federation publicist here. I too wonder why she is considered fit for the job. Roughly half of all students are male, and in a world of enforced equity, roughly half of her union should be too.

Further, in comparing this article to the twin on the "conversation" I notice that the reference to this person is omitted, or hidden behind a paywall for "the Australian". Why has the author not attributed the quote properly and directly to the person in either case? I can well imagine editorial pressure omitted the quote at the "conversation", but do not think GY would object to a properly referenced quote however clearly it revealed the prejudices of the person quoted.

Rusty.

Suse,
Show us a youtube video of a recent Australian TV advert that you think depicts it's female subjects as "airhead bimbos".
Pretty much all advertising is directed at women because they typically run the household, make something like 60% of the financial decisisions and do most of the shopping, so it would make no sense for companies to demean their target audience.
The typical advertisement goes something like "Smart women will buy this car because it's got five star safety features" or "An attentive mother will use this brand of disinfectant around the house, it's all positive reinforcement.
There are some ads which try to make mundane products trendy, tampon commercials for instance but the worst you could say is that they're frivolous, silliness is hardly demeaning.

I agree with suseonline, it's a very silly article. If men want to be represented in a better way, maybe they should start to change their behaviour.