Both Aani B. and Sarah F. sent in a link to a commercial for the new diet Pepsi (Pepsi Max, of course) being aimed at men.
Also don’t miss this commercial (embedding disabled) in which they describe the ingredients of Pepsi Max as the crushed bones of a Viking, the spit of a rapid Wolverine, pepper spray, and scorpion venom. The can? Made from the hull of a nuclear submarine. The crushing of cans on heads ensues.
Over at I Blame the Patriarchy, a reader named Kate sent in a snapshot of some advertising for the product at the intersection of 6th and Anza in San Francisco:
Slogans:
“The first diet cola for men.”
“Save the calories for bacon.”
“0 calories. Great taste. Welded together.”
“No gut. All glory.”
This is, of course, all in jest. Yet is still re-affirms the idea that being this way is the epitome of manhood, if taken to a ridiculous extreme. Eh, I’ll just let Twisty say it. As usual, she says it better than I:
What’s the big whoop? Well, you can’t have a “soda for men” unless “men” are considered a class unto themselves, defined in terms of the bacon-eating, welding, glorious nukular submarine-squashing aspirations that separate them from dainty vulnerable “women.” These ads are jokey, depicting average-looking dudes, but they tacitly allude to the noxious he-man/fragile damsel dichotomy that’s been chapping actual women’s hides lo these many millennia.
It also, of course, points to the fact that dieting really has been for women all along (see posts here and here for examples). In fact, it denies that diet-soda-for-men is about dieting at all: note the slogan “save the calories for bacon” and the name, Pepsi Max, which implies adding something to the beverage as opposed to taking something out.
See other examples of marketing for diet products aimed at men: Nutrisystem (“get ‘er done!”) and Weight Watchers.
Comments 28
Jess — May 13, 2009
Yep, once again, the only time men are not considered default is when we're dealing with womanly things like dieting.
Matthew Yglesias » Endgame — May 13, 2009
[...] — Personally, I’m going to stick with Diet Coke. [...]
stand — May 13, 2009
I'm holding out on dieting until I get yogurt for men.
Seriously though, why is yogurt marketed exclusively to women? In the US anyways. Isn't that weird?
Craig — May 13, 2009
Some days there's just no winning, is there? Either "men are the default," which is evil, or a product is marketed specifically to men, which is also evil...did I get that? I just thought the ads were mildly funny, although I'm still a Coke Zero and assam tea kind of guy. Can I drink those without perpetuating the patriarchy?
Nat — May 13, 2009
I hate to rain on Twisty's parade, but the point of the ads is that guys are pretty much incompetent doofuses. They might as well have had the 3 Stooges in there, and 'stooge' is not exactly complimentary. It actually tacitly alludes to the doofus guy/competent woman dichotomy. Yeah, we seem to be able to embrace our inner stooge and Pepsi is using it as a marketing hook. Big whoop indeed. All this gender based resentment can cut both ways. Some of us find it annoying that businesses such as Hooters are premised on taking our money because we have a penis.
Allan — May 13, 2009
The target audience of these ads are bacon-loving, car-fixing men, probably age 25-40. The ads do not say that every single member of the male species has these qualities--it only assumes that some of them do (which is true, as much as some might hate that fact). This is the reality of marketing: demographics.
I do think that Lisa's over-sensitivity to this kind of thing is adorably feminine, though.
Ellen — May 13, 2009
Nat and Craig seem to have a bit of a chip on their shoulder. Nobody is pissed off. Nobody mentioned anything bad about men. There is no gender-based resentment. And in fact, most of the people here probably find it annoying that businesses such as Hooters are premised on taking your money because you have a penis. Yes, you are correct, the reinforcement of stereotypical gender roles does cut both ways and hurt both genders. And this commercial is a good example of that. Don't you find it interesting that obesity is worse for men than women, but women are the ones doing all of the dieting and that dieting is still too prissy for men? I would say that is a good example of stereotypical gender roles hurting both men and women.
Many of us also just happen to be fascinated with the gendering of food, which is what this is all about. Are we allowed to wonder how steak and bacon became masculine and how diet coke and salad became feminine? Why does that have to be taken as an indictment against men?
Larry Geater — May 14, 2009
Stand
All they would have to do to market yogurt to men is increase the size of the containers. Those little plastic containers contain just enough to make me mad. No to mention that they are designed with the top smaller than the bottom a poor design if ever there was one.
Tom — May 14, 2009
First: Jesus Christ. It's just a soda commercial.
Second: in comments, you're transparently trying to have it both ways: backing off what was clearly an attack on Pepsi's marketing in favor of claiming that this is all just a high-minded discussion of gendered societal attitudes toward food. If anything it seems to me that the marketing of diet soda to men should be taken as a positive thing: unless you reject the notion of body consciousness entirely, what's wrong with telling men that they can fret about caloric intake without being emasculated? If anything, this moronic ad campaign strikes a blow for neurotic equality!
I respect your apparent position that all gendered social conventions are inherently problematic, even though I disagree with it. But it would be nice to see a more thoughtful analysis. Are men entitled to adopt gender roles if they so choose, or does doing so necessarily affect women negatively? Is Pepsi committing a transgression by invoking these stereotypes at all, or is their parodying of them and/or employment of them to de-gender a stereotypically female class of products actually progressive?
I don't know, but it's clear you haven't thought about it for even an instant. Instead you saw something that reminded you that our society contains gender differences and immediately recoiled, arching an eyebrow and descending into smug superiority. It's off-putting.
And no, I've got nothing to do with Pepsi and have no particular affection for their products or these commercials. FULL DISCLOSURE: when I was younger I did sometimes eat at Taco Bell.
Nat — May 14, 2009
The chip on my shoulder is merely a reaction to analysis along the lines of 'they tacitly allude to the noxious he-man/fragile damsel dichotomy'. Perhaps that I am missing some snark, but I think that is a snark-free statement. And it completely misses the point. Twisty seemed to be looking for a tussle instead of seeing the ad through the eyes of a guy.
On reviewing what I wrote earlier, the tone would seem to indicate that I did not like the video when in fact I loved it.
The point is: we love our Stooges and can celebrate our own inner stooge. I found the video above hilarious. But it was not, in any way, an allusion to a noxious he-man/fragile damsel dichotomy. My first reaction was 'homage to the original Howard brothers'. Try making the argument that Moe, Larry and Curly are part of the he-man/fragile damsel dichotomy in society and see how far you get.
Do you really think we are so stupid as to find a can made from the hull of a nuclear submarine to be a carefully crafted appeal to our inner he-man?
I have no problem that a diet drink ad campaign is targeting guys. I guess guys don't drink enough diet soft drink to Pepsi's way of thinking. They did it in a way that I found charming and inoffensive, despite its depiction of guys as modern day stooges. Make that 'because of its depiction of guys as modern day stooges'.
Anyway, whatever chip that might have been showing was in response to what I found to be an analysis that was completely wrong.
Jenna — May 14, 2009
Nat wrote: "Twisty seemed to be looking for a tussle instead of seeing the ad through the eyes of a guy."
The fact that you can state this without understanding the overwhelming irony therein is evidence that you and your dudely co-bros (Tom, Craig, Allen) don't know what the hell you are talking about.
Of course the patriarchy cuts both ways. If you bothered to read Twisty's introductory material, you'd understand that her blog is for "advance patriarcy blamers" only, and is written from a female, lesbian perspective. I.E. it don't concentrate on PHMT. There are a bunch of places where you can go to learn about how PHMT, how the commericals represented in this post HMT, and how that is degrading, limiting, and damaging to both sexes.
And, Tom, dear. In answer to your question (because it might help you and your bros understand): " Are men entitled to adopt gender roles if they so choose, or does doing so necessarily affect women negatively?"
Gender roles positited as sex-related are inherently negative and damaging to both sexes. Full stop.
Seriously, we need like a sociology 101 blog or something that we can connect people like this to.
Tom — May 14, 2009
I appreciate being given an answer. I don't appreciate the sexist condescension in your reply. ("Dudely co-bros"? Really?)
Well, enjoy your private party, I guess. I know I wasn't invited, so I suppose I can't complain about being asked to leave. I will say that it strikes me as strange to make these sorts of glancing observations -- ones that presume so much that no one who couldn't (or wouldn't) make them on their own is able or allowed to engage with them. What's the point?
But hey, it's a big internet, do what you want.
Jenna — May 14, 2009
You can engage in them, Tom. And you were't asked to leave. I asked you to do a minimum of thinking and educating yourself before shooting off at the mouth. Would you come onto a blog dedicated to physics and criticize a post with words that indicated that you know nothing about physics and believe in Invisible Gnomes ?
Matt K — May 14, 2009
I will say that I have noticed a bit of a problem on SocImages, and this post illustrates it well. While particular blogs might be for "advanced patriarchy blamers" and thus have no obligation to speak to those who might disagree, this blog carries no such statement. This is, from my understanding, a pretty introductory sociology blog. If so, I think everyone would do well to remember that.
Of course, there are always going to be people who are just trolling, but I think everyone has to take into account that the audience of a blog like this compared to a blog like Twisty's is going to be different.
Tom — May 14, 2009
I think the comparison to physics is illustrative, but not in the way you think. The idea that a collection of (admittedly thoroughly-considered) normative judgments can be compared to the process of scientific inquiry strongly implies to me that we'll never find ourselves speaking the same language. I seriously doubt that the current state of the art in gender theory will prove to be as timeless and immutable as, say, results from CERN.
If you'd bothered to read my comment, I think you would have seen that I merely asked a question; my sin was implying that it could be considered unsettled. And if the resulting "bro" designation wasn't a clear indication that I'm not welcome here, I don't know what would be.
Nevertheless! I apologize for the intrusion. It doesn't seem that you operate under conversational terms that I would enjoy, but if you'd prefer an echo chamber I genuinely think that's your right; I don't mean to troll.
Lisa Wade, PhD — May 14, 2009
Matt K. and commenters:
In the "about" section of the blog, we in fact state the following under the subheading "Our Audience":
"We assume that you, our audience, are sociologically-inclined folks. So we do not typically include a lengthy sociological interpretation of the images."
Just FYI. :)
gc — May 14, 2009
It strikes me that there is already a diet cola for men - Coke Zero. Surely there is a reason that Coke came out with another no-calorie cola, but dressed in black? I'm a sociology instructor and ask my classes whether they drink the sugarfree Coke for guys or for girls, and most of them know exactly what I'm talking about.
Matt K — May 14, 2009
Okay, thanks lisa. Hadn't checked that out in the past. Still, my feelings remain. I'm inclined to agree with a lot of your analysis and that of blogs you link to (and I am a sociological type), but it seems like there is a kind of disconnect between some commenters here and I'm not sure it can always be boiled down to "MRA types" or "trolling."
But then, when I have brought this up in the past I have been told that I shouldn't be concerned/it isn't anyone's responsibility to educate anyone else, so maybe I am just overoptimistic and can't identify trolling when I see it.
Ellen — May 14, 2009
gc, I also wondered about Pepsi saying they had the first diet soda for men. Maybe Coke was too subtle and didn't come right out and say it was for men.
This is an interesting conversation. People in sociology, or those who just happen to have a sociological imagination, like to analyze media messages for the representation and perpetuation of gender, race, and class stereotypes. And that is what I thought this blog was devoted to. Yet almost every post has commenters not only defending the status quo but insinuating that we are all ridiculously bitter feminists for even noticing these things. And many of them are quite rude and condescending. It's unfortunate.
Allan — May 15, 2009
RE: "dudely co-bros"
How presumptuous! As it happens, I am a transgendered mulatto Muslim lesbian with only one arm. But I'll forgive you, because we all make assumptions.
[Full disclosure: I really don't have a problem with any of you people's theories, and I actually think it is wonderful that, as Ellen puts it, "Many of us also just happen to be fascinated with the gendering of food." I can certainly empathize with that kind of curiosity. It's just that you take yourself so damn seriously. You think this is the same as physics?!? Really??
Anyway, what I'm really saying is, I'd love to go out for a drinks with all of you. How's Tuesday night?]
Matt K — May 15, 2009
Allan,
If you get into sociology, history of science, or similar fields, it becomes pretty clear that "science" (in terms of the 'hard' sciences) do not operate in the ways we generally think they do all of the time. These studies also show us that there is really no such thing as "objective" research.
In short, the divide between physical and social sciences is probably not as wide as you might think. There's a few writers I could suggest on the topic -- Kuhn is a classic and Gould has some interesting essays that approach these kinds of topics at times.
Will — May 16, 2009
Tom: I don't know if you're still following this thread, but I wanted to make sure to respond to your statement: "First: Jesus Christ. It’s just a soda commercial."
Actually, it's not, and that's part of the problem. If you consider the ad in isolation, which you are doing, then yes, it's just a really cute silly little thing. But you have to keep in mind that this is only one of thousands of similar messages that we are all bombarded with constantly, all day, every day. It's constant gender and race messages that are damaging to pretty much everyone in the society.
So please, don't be put off by what you perceive as the condescending tone of some of the commenters, and follow the blog for a while. It's really incredible how many examples of the exact same message there are in our everyday life. It's not, as you say, that the OP "saw something that reminded you that our society contains gender differences" - it's that it's pretty difficult sometimes to find something that doesn't.
Eve — May 16, 2009
I would like to see an ad aimed at men urging them to be "mind stickers," like the Tab ads from the 1970s...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDBJ2ktSZpI
Dieting double talk « Feminocracy — May 19, 2009
[...] See also: Pepsi Max the first diet cola for men [...]
Because Sassy Patterns And Floral Prints Make Men’s Eyeballs Bleed… » Sociological Images — September 11, 2009
[...] in gendered products: tv dinners, uniforms, candy bars, ear plugs ‘n stuff, deodorant, Pepsi, and mosquito repellent. Leave a Comment Tags: gender, history, marketing, nation: [...]
Gendered Diet/Nutrition Marketing » Sociological Images — April 15, 2010
[...] posts: marketing Pepsi Max to men, men don’t diet — they get ‘er done!, German ads for Men’s Health, eat [...]
Gendered Cheese! | Dead Wild Roses — May 25, 2013
[...] or natural, but because we constantly get reminded that women should be on diets and dieting is a feminine [...]
vedant — March 19, 2019
In this game i am feel bored because here in this game so more things available for us and we can enjoy bejeweled 3 free this game by the help of this link.