New evidence of the "Double Standard"?

[Dawn D.]

Has anyone else seen the Folgers coffee commercial that shows a GG getting out of bed in the morning saying right off the bat that, 'she sleeps in her husbands underware'. Then it goes on about coffee.

I usually don't try to compare the supposed double standard of GG's wearing "male clothes", however, I just cannot get over this one! The first time I saw this, I asked my wife what she thought of it. She hadn't even noticed it! So, later on it came on the tube again and this time she saw it. Again, I asked her what she thought. She said, "so what?". I asked, How would it be perceived if that were a guy waking up saying "I sleep in my wifes neglige". I think there would be a huge ferver of media hype and adverse reaction from the intolerant among us. Her response was " yes, I agree. But, what do you do about it?" I am at a loss. Maybe we start a letter writing campaign to Folgers asking for equal time.........like that would ever work!

To some level though, I think it does go to show that there is somewhat of a "Double Starndard on an acceptable version of crossdresssing and the stereotypical non-acceptable variety.

What do think?



Dawn

[BarbaraTalbot]

The point to women wearing a man's dress shirt and little else or boxers or a burlap sack is about how a truly beautiful woman can pull of anything. Look great first thing in the morning, no make-up, etc.

It's a matter of showing them "dressed down" not "dressed up in men's clothes".

Hard not to take it personally as a CD but it really isn't about us. Its frustrating how hard we have to work to look good even in drag, when they can model in drab and look hot.

[Tamara Croft]

It's just underwear, who cares? and why is it such a double standard? You know what really gets on my nerves, is MTF's scream for acceptance, but then you complain about women wearing some male items... the only double standard I see here is you not being accepting of a woman wearing male underwear... How can you ask for acceptance, but then complain about this?

[Christine Andrews]

I am inclined to agree that there is a double standard and there is certainly plenty of evidence to that effect, but at the end of the day I believe that the double standard is to a large degree self-imposed - it isn't illegal after all to wear clothes of the opposite sex otherwise we'd potentially all be jail birds right now.

Whilst I probably won't see the advert in question I have to agree with BarbaraTalbot in the nature of the advert. To attack the advert for presenting a form of crossdressing (identify according to taste or opinion) is like criticising yourself.

We all have the same rights to decide what we wear, it's just a question of your own comfort zone and desire to just be yourself and forget about the media which perpetuates sterotypes, norms, ideals and comfort zones to manipulate it's demographic and make money.

Best Regards
Kirsty

[Deborah Jane]

How about this for an idea???.....Women wear what they want!!...Men wear what they want!!...Society just has to put up with it!!!....I,ve had enough of being told what i can and can,t wear!!!

[Dixie]

[Ema1234 GG]

Because for the majority of women (CDers and Transmen not included) when we choose to wear a male item of clothing it has absoloutely nothing to do with the way the clothes make us feel, or some desire to emulate a man.

I'd say it's pretty much a certain that we are wearing them for comfort, male and "unisex" clothing as a general rule is a hell of a lot more comfortable than what is stereotypically perceived as female clothing.

It's not a double standard, we are just choosing to wear what is comfortable. I can assure you that any CD out there that tells me a mini skirt and heels is more comfortable than jeans and trainers is lying! It's just a fact of life, masculine clothing is more comfortable and far less restrictive.

I have no problem with anyone wearing anything they want to, it appears that the only people who ever really pick up on this supposed double standard is the CDs who want to be able to wear female clothes, but then complain about women wearing male clothes.

[Dawn D.]

Tamara! Just exactly which part of my original post did you perceive as me NOT accepting women wearing men's underware? If it is there then maybe I should rephrase the comment. However that was not my intent.

Let me be clear about this,I do not care what any person wants to wear. The intent of this thread was just to offer a glimpse at what is interpreted by me as something that could and would be a double standard if the roles were reversed. You cannot actually believe that IF they were, society as we know it would not be abuzz about such a provocative sight?

I think I should have made it more clear in the original post that this is mostly for 'tongue in cheek' humor more that it is for raising a stir.

However,

How can you ask for acceptance, but then complain about this?

To answer your question, I can ask for acceptance, and I can complain about this. Precisely because it is true as viewed in our current civilization!




Dawn

[Ema1234 GG]

Ok so if you honestly and truely don't have an issue with it, why make the post in a negative sense?

Instead you could talk about how fantastic it is that it's socially acceptable for a woman to be able to wear male clothing and why we think it isn't for a man. And why a woman wearing male clothing is seen as an advertising tool but it's unlikely that a man wearing female clothing would be used to advertise the same product.

As a side point though, in terms of advertising it's a far higher ratio of female models used to advertise products compared to male models. I guess we're just the more attractive sex lol!

[Dawn D.]

Ema1234:

Wow, these are not the reponses that I that I really thouhgt I get on this issue. It seems to really strike a nerve with some GG's that when we (CD's) see something and 'read into it'.

Because for the majority of women (CDers and Transmen not included) when we choose to wear a male item of clothing it has absoloutely nothing to do with the way the clothes make us feel, or some desire to emulate a man.

Quite wrong I think. In the aforementioned commercial, to me it was completely obvious that it was all about how it made herfeel. That was the message being sent. It then went on to show how good she felt after a cup 'o joe! Again, put a man in that position and that same commercial get's laughed off the air!



Dawn

[Ema1234 GG]

I'm sorry but I'm a woman and you're not. Don't try and tell me how wearing male clothing makes me feel.

And surely the advert is talking about how the coffee makes her feel, not the clothing. Are you sure you aren't just reading into this way too much?

[Dawn D.]

I have never said that I am a woman, nor have Ioffered an opinion on what makes you feel good!

And, YES, the intent of this commercial was in my opinion, equating how SHE felt sleeping in her husbands underware and how good that morning coffee makes her feel. Sorry, but that is the power of advertising.

Look, I did not come in here to start an argument with the GG's. However, I not going to let you bully me over either. Excuse me if my original post seemed negative to YOU. I do not see it as negative. It was just a thought of what a role reversal in that situation would have resulted in, in our society!

And, yes, I think it is AWESOME that a GG can and does openly wear male clothes whenever they feel the need and/or strike a whim! Just wish it were as simple an issue for us CD's.



Dawn.

[Sharon]

You can wear whatever you want -- who's stopping you?

Meanwhile, this forum is not meant to be a conversation between two members. I suggest you take it to private message from here on.

[crunchysoda]

The OT did not seem "tongue in cheek" to me. It's hard to get emotion accross online for sure.

I have to agree w/Barbara T, Ema, and Tamara.

Im not upset or angry either.

Shoot Im sitting here reading the forum, watching a movie, trying to figure out what Im going to do w/my life, doing dishes and chores all at the same time. Im talented like that.

Ive been a member here for about a month and Ive seen a few thread about the "double standard."

I just dont see how a woman in a commercial wearing a pair of boxers is the same thing as a man wearing a negligee. I havent seen the commercial, but Id be surprised if the "feelings" (ie they "feel" comfortable/casual)behind her wearing the boxers were the same as when most men wear women's lingerie.

Again not upset, or anything like that, just saying.

[Tree GG]

Let's see, women make up over 50% of population. Men make up a little less than 50%. Who usually fixes the coffee at home? MTF CDs are approximately 7-14% of male population which would be roughly 3.5-7% of total population.

I believe Folgers really wouldn't want to spend alot of ad $ on that size market. Not a profitable business decision.

Sorry.

[Ruth]

Well, the heat generated by this thread is evidence that there is some kind of issue simmering here. I get what the OP meant by double standards. It's quite a subtle thing, but then good advertising is like that. It tends to pick up the attitudes, desires and aspirations of the culture and feed them back (with of course a product placement).
So that woman in her man's underwear was not going to be a turn-off to either the female or male viewers of the ad. But we expect, with some justification, that if the roles were reversed a lot of both female and male viewers would have been uneasy.
And we're not talking about right or wrong, or what you or I might think, but about the great coffee-drinking masses out there, who have predictable attitudes to CDing.

[Kate Simmons]

Hi Dawn. I know what the intention of your original post was. The commercial does sound rather innoculous to me however. When you think about it though it can be taken as sort of a compliment to us because gals are quick to know what is comfortable and so a lot of them choose guy underwear(even if we, because of who we are don't necessarily agree with that). In any case, I could care less if someone wears a bunny suit to bed, whatever works for you, right? Yeah, society has a long way to go until they do a TG commercial that is halfway serious and until they have the guts to show things in a more matter of fact positive way with something of this nature, I'd rather they didn't.

[Dawn D.]

Ruth, you win the prize! You got my point. Thank you! It was about nothing more nor nothing less than what you have pointed out.




Dawn

Salandra:

Yeah, we wouldn't want to lose our mystique. Would we? lol.




Dawn

[RobertaFermina]

If women dress or behave like men, they are still available to have babies. The race will continue.

If men dress or act like women, they may not be available and hard enough to defend the "realm." The race may not continue.

This is a simple explanation of the society's (such as it presently is) terror of "girly men".

I think it is valid because I think the part of the mind where these knee-jerk reactions form is a simple place.

Thank goodness that we have minds that can expand and take into account that we are no longer living in the face of violent intertribal warefare or violent predatory animals. We can check and moderate ancient programs...become modern, or practice freedoms made sensible within our present environment.

It is no longer necessary for all or many men to be intense, reactive reservoirs of testosterone or muscle bound killers in order for our "tribes" to survive and flourish.

On the other hand, we may slip back into such times (global warming, and sociopathic politicians being one source of regressive impulse) and we need such "stupid" mentalities in the gene pool as insurance against potential future environments.

I say GET OVER IT, such cro-magnon logic and reactionary memes will persist. We may get them to moderate, yet they will always gall us if we take it personal.

Roberta

[kay2]

Thank you Dawn for pointing out the ad. Also, thank you Ruth for the simple clear comment. We all, men and women, face daily small indignities for the ways we were born, or the ways we choose to be. There are many double standards in our society, and the ad highlights one of them. It is not that the ad presents any view on men wearing clothing that is traditionally for women. It simply presents the 'cute' idea of a woman liking to wear her husband's clothing. It is us, on this forum, that of course appreciate that the reverse is not considered 'cute' - it is for many a cause for being ostracized.

Personally, I don't think of myself as a CD at all. A few times I've been asked if something I was wearing was "women's clothing". My answer is, "No, this is my own."

[Jamie001]

Dawn,

There is something that you can do about it!! You can do what I do. I have a fem highlighted hairstyle with bangs and I always wear open toe women's sandals 24/7/365 to show off my professionally pedicured red toenails. The girls at work say that my toes are "hooker red". I am very proud of my fem hairstyle and nails. You can do that same thing. Get out there and proudly show the world fem characteristics when in male mode. That is the only way that we can fight-back. What do you think?

Jamie

Has anyone else seen the Folgers coffee commercial that shows a GG getting out of bed in the morning saying right off the bat that, 'she sleeps in her husbands underware'. Then it goes on about coffee.

I usually don't try to compare the supposed double standard of GG's wearing "male clothes", however, I just cannot get over this one! The first time I saw this, I asked my wife what she thought of it. She hadn't even noticed it! So, later on it came on the tube again and this time she saw it. Again, I asked her what she thought. She said, "so what?". I asked, How would it be perceived if that were a guy waking up saying "I sleep in my wifes neglige". I think there would be a huge ferver of media hype and adverse reaction from the intolerant among us. Her response was " yes, I agree. But, what do you do about it?" I am at a loss. Maybe we start a letter writing campaign to Folgers asking for equal time.........like that would ever work!

To some level though, I think it does go to show that there is somewhat of a "Double Starndard on an acceptable version of crossdresssing and the stereotypical non-acceptable variety.

What do think?



Dawn

I have no problem with women wearing *any* item of men's clothing. I have the problem with society crying FOUL whenever a male puts on ANY article of women's clothing. The double standard is the problem!!

It's just underwear, who cares? and why is it such a double standard? You know what really gets on my nerves, is MTF's scream for acceptance, but then you complain about women wearing some male items... the only double standard I see here is you not being accepting of a woman wearing male underwear... How can you ask for acceptance, but then complain about this?

I believe if the roles had been reversed in the commercial and the male put on a pair of panties, a lot of members of society would have "freaked-out" (especially the religious right). This is a good example of the double standard. I will state again that I support the right for women to wear any article of clothing, however the same right needs to be extended to men. If I were to wear a skirt to work, I would be fired, however women wear suits and ties to work and there is no problem. This is the issue. It is the societal repercussions because by law a male can wear anything that he wants as long as it is not "indecent", however can he expect to still have a job the next day? Also, in most states there are laws to protect gay people but no laws to protect CDs/Transgendered. Unfortunately, males wearing female clothing is still viewed by the majority of society as "mental leprosy".

Well, the heat generated by this thread is evidence that there is some kind of issue simmering here. I get what the OP meant by double standards. It's quite a subtle thing, but then good advertising is like that. It tends to pick up the attitudes, desires and aspirations of the culture and feed them back (with of course a product placement).
So that woman in her man's underwear was not going to be a turn-off to either the female or male viewers of the ad. But we expect, with some justification, that if the roles were reversed a lot of both female and male viewers would have been uneasy.
And we're not talking about right or wrong, or what you or I might think, but about the great coffee-drinking masses out there, who have predictable attitudes to CDing.

[Eugenie]

It's just underwear, who cares? and why is it such a double standard? You know what really gets on my nerves, is MTF's scream for acceptance, but then you complain about women wearing some male items... the only double standard I see here is you not being accepting of a woman wearing male underwear... How can you ask for acceptance, but then complain about this?

I think that there was some misunderstanding on the initial post intent.

No one is complaining because women wear male pajamas; this wasn't the point that was made. On the contrary, it is perfectly OK for a woman to wear men pajamas. I see no problem with it and I don't think anybody here think it is a problem nor complains about it.

Actually nobody in the general public even see anything wrong with a woman wearing men's pajamas on a TV commercial aired at a time of the day when children are watching TV. Most people don’t even notice…

The problem is that if, in a commercial, one was to portray a man wearing a lacy woman night gown, and then there would be an outburst of complaints from all sorts of "well thinking" people. "How dare you... What??? Showing an X-dresser at a time children may be watching?"

That's where the double standard is: It is alright to see a woman wearing men's underwear on a TV commercial but it isn't alright to see the contrary...

Actually, just to be fair, there are other commercials where some actions are well accepted if they are made by a man and not by a woman...

For me these are cases of discrimination.

Eugenie

[loki_uk]

It's just underwear, who cares? and why is it such a double standard? You know what really gets on my nerves, is MTF's scream for acceptance, but then you complain about women wearing some male items... the only double standard I see here is you not being accepting of a woman wearing male underwear... How can you ask for acceptance, but then complain about this?

True but when you see adverts for 'boy cut jeans' or 'boy shorts' for women could you think of the reverse and advertising for 'girl cut jeans' and 'girl knickers' for blokes

Still no double standard ?

[Jamie001]

Agreed. When we see advertisments for "Girls Knickers for Blokes" or "Girls Jeans for Blokes" then we will know that there is no double standard. Anyone want to make a bet with me as to when this will happen? I will give you 10 to 1 odds. Hmmm, no takers?

True but when you see adverts for 'boy cut jeans' or 'boy shorts' for women could you think of the reverse and advertising for 'girl cut jeans' and 'girl knickers' for blokes

Still no double standard ?

[jennifer41356]

I havnt seen the ad , but based on the history of advertising in the States it was more a message of a woman isnt a complete person unless she has a amna or lives a man life, so i would take take the ad as more of another dig at being female. She has to haves his clothes on to feel good about herself, which is complete BS