insideMAN

This year’s Super Bowl adverts are the most dad positive ever

by Leave a Comment

America’s 49th Super Bowl, to be held this weekend, will bombard over 100 million televisions viewers with positive messages about fatherhood.

Super Bowl Sunday consistently produces the largest TV audience of the year in America and the competition amongst advertisers to create the most memorable commercial has become part of the annual tradition.

This year, for the first time, advertisers are not just fighting to create the best ad, but also to create the most father-friendly campaign. For an insight into the rapidly changing nature of advertising to dads in America. According to Jack Neff of Ad Age, adverts have often ignored dads or portrayed them as “a dolt, but not at this year’s Super Bowl.

During Super Bowl XLIX (that’s 49 if you don’t read Roman numerals), at least three major advertisers will run adverts promoting positive portrayals of fatherhood. They are:

Nissan #WithDad Campaign

Nissan’s #WithDad campaign features a series of seven teaser videos from popular YouTube broadcasters ahead of its main advert which will be revealed during the game. The teasers include this “crazy plastic ball prank” from Roman Antwood:

http://youtu.be/8yEgN3yj6xY

Nissan says: “We recognise the difficult task of balancing work and family life. That’s why of #WithDad campaign brings this very real struggle to life. #WithDad is a celebration of and inspiration for dads who find innovative and exciting ways to make life better for their kids and families.”

Toyota #OneBoldChoice Campaign

Toyota’s “One Bold Choice Leads to Another” campaign will feature both famous dads and everyday fathers who they say have made “bold, lasting contributions to the their families”. This trailer for the #OneBoldChoice campaign, called “To Be A Dad”, stars a number of American football players:

http://youtu.be/PZ-Yiuc9sOQ

Dove Men+Care #RealStrength

Dove’s #RealStrength advert shows kids of all ages calling on their father in a montage of emotional moments that capture some of the key stages n the fatherhood journey:

Dove says: “Ninety per cent of men around the world say that their caring side is part of their masculinity and strength. Let’s acknowledge the caring side of men and celebrate their #RealStrength as a true sign of masculinity.”

—Photo: Flickr/Jeepers Media

In the run up to launch of the film Down Dog on 14 February, insideMAN is running a series of articles about fatherhood and we’d love you to get involved. You can join the conversation on twitter by using the hashtag #MenBehavingDADly; leave a comment in the section below or email us with your thoughts and ideas for articles to insideMANeditor@gmail.com.

For more information about the film see www.downdogfilm.com

See also:

Crap dad cartoon: sexist or funny?

by 7 Comments

There’s a brilliant short cartoon that’s been doing the rounds on social media and is stirring up a big debate about the way dads are portrayed in popular culture. The one minute animation—“I’ll get the ice-creams”—has been broadcast by the BBC who describe it as follows:

“A man is left to look after his kids while his wife goes to fetch some ice creams. Result = chaos.”

As I watched it for the first time I was at first delighted by the beautifully timed slapstick of the piece, which showed a hapless parent struggling to prevent two young children from hilarious pratfalls. As I watched with glee, my inner gender warrior also asking:”Is that a man?”; “Is it a dad?”; “Is it a generic androgynous parent struggling with kids or is it another sexist portrayal of a useless dad?.”

And then the pay-off arrived, as the competent wife and mum returns to discover the chaos that (according to stereotype) is bound to ensue when you leave children to be cared for by a man.

So then the question arose in me, is this funny or is this sexist? I took to social media to find out how people were responding and here’s a selection of what people said. Firstly some men and women seemed to relate to the comedy in the cartoon:

Arthur Cruz: “God I can imagine that being me when I become a dad xD.”

Irene Adler: “This is not only funny but very accurate.”

Martina Ni Riain Downey: “This is what most women imagine will happen if they leave dad alone with the kids for five minutes.”

David King Wonder: “Kids with dad alone is never a good idea… LOL. I HOPE THEY STILL ALIVE.”

Glenda Carr: “I agree David, many times I left the girls home with their dad for a few hours and got back & my clean home looked like a tornado hit, I was like WTF happened in here?! Lolol.”

Tara Kennedy: “I agree with David men find it a LOT harder than women to care for children bless them, oh well.”

Taking a stand for dads

Then I started to see something interesting happen as men stepped forward and challenged the stereotype that dads are helpless with kids:

Rob Anthony: “I take care of all three of mine from morning till evening before my day begins. Ya’ll must be some sorry a$$ people to believe that.”

Graham Johnston: “You guys need better partners.”

David J Brown: “Good to see gender stereotyping & sexism is alive and well.”

Al Moanin Koasohr Eperiam: “Believe it or not there are a lot of men out there that knows how to take care of children better than the moms.”

Mums supporting dads 

And some mums waded in on the side of dads:

Renee Neri: “I hate going to the playground and my husband is actually MUCH better than me playing with them in the playground, am tired of videos making fun of dads, they are great and constantly trying to help….we need to stop putting dads down.”

Jessica Nitschke: “How sad that women don’t choose to have children with men they believe are capable of taking care of their children properly  I am blessed to be able to leave & know 100% that our children will be taken care of, the house will be in order & that I don’t have to worry! Thank God I made a smart informed decision!”

Sense of humour bypass?

Just as I was feeling justified in my belief that this cartoon is a bit sexist against men, I spotted another group of people commenting who made me wonder if I was having a sense of humour bypass:

Kelly Jo: “Can’t you just laugh? Maybe your day would be brighter.”

Metasymplocos: “Damn it’s an ANIMATION! stop trying to put your real life issues in it! Gees!” I enjoyed it!

I remembered that before my inner gender warrior kicked in, I was enjoying the skillfully crafted comedy in the film. Why, oh why, oh why can I not just laugh at funny stuff? I guess it’s because of the double standards. I guess it’s because jokes that stereotype men are tolerated in ways that jokes stereotyping women aren’t.

Maybe if I felt free to laugh at both men and women then  I wouldn’t be so critical. And  then I saw this comment and it made me feel like some kind of balance had been restored:

OhFishyFish: “Bet it took her so long because she had to park the car. :p”

Humour is often about context (you had to be there!). I don’t personally find jokes about women drivers funny, but as a riposte to a sexist joke about men, it was witty put down that speaks a thousand words about the sexist double standards that are reflected in the humour we will and won’t laugh at.

So what do you think? Is this cartoon sexist or funny?

—Photo:flickr/Fabio Di Lupo

By Glen Poole 

In the run up to the launch of a new film on Fatherhood called DOWN DOG, insideMAN will be publishing a series of articles about fatherhood and we’d love you to get involved. You can join the conversation on twitter by using the hashtag #MenBehavingDADly; leave a comment in the section below or email us with your thoughts and ideas for articles to insideMANeditor@gmail.com.  

Down Dog is released in selected cinemas on 14 February 2015. For more information see www.downdogfilm.com

If you liked this article and want to read more, follow us on Twitter @insideMANmag and Facebook.

Does BBC’s Boy in The Dress drama signal the liberation or the emasculation of boys?

by 33 Comments

Watching straight men in frocks in the name of entertainment is a great British tradition, but the BBC’s Christmas comedy, The Boy in the Dress, is a thoroughly modern entertainment which marks a new phase in our cultural conversation about masculinity, says Glen Poole.

The British love laughing at men in frocks.

Take the Christmas pantomime, where fairy tales are brought to provincial theatres by casts of cross-dressing “celebrities”, who subvert gender norms by casting men as pantomime dames and women as the principal boys.

When Sir Ian McKellan, the actor who is known around the world as Gandolf and Magneto, received rave reviews for Widow Twankey in Alladdin in 2004, he joined a long line of male actors who have thrown on a frock to give us all a topsy-turvy titter that’s as traditional as the Christmas turkey.

So at first glance, there was nothing remotely revolutionary about the BBC presenting it’s star-studded Christmas comedy—The Boy in the Dress—as prime time family viewing on Boxing Day.

Is the BBC promoting cross-dressing for boys?

And yet I suspected there may be something more radical being expressed in David Walliams’ frothy, cock-in-a-frock-com and my suspicions were confirmed when I saw a comment by one of my my socially conservative Christian friends on Facebook.

“I’ve seen enough,” he declared in his status update. “Now we have the BBC using prime time to promote cross dressing for kids. For pity’s sake!”

So for those who think The Boy in The Dress was just another slice of traditional, cross-dressing, Christmas fun I say: “Oh no it wasn’t!” Because there was something far more radical happening in terms of how we think about manhood in the 21st Century.

The key difference is this. In pantomime, men pretend to play female characters for laughs. It’s subversive because only women are allowed to wear dresses in public without transgressing the cultural gender norms that we collectively and unconsciously police.

We all police what men and boys can wear

In The Boy in The Dress, the main character is an ordinary boy who plays football and seems to be attracted to girls, but also happens to love dresses. He fulfils his dream of wearing a dress by creating a female alter ego—because pretending to be female is the only way it is culturally permissible for men and boys to wear dresses in public, without being policed by the rest of us.

When his pretence is discovered, he is expelled from school and (spoiler alert) is sidelined from a cup final match, right up to the dramatic climax when the entire team rebels and comes out to play the victorious second half with every player wearing a very camp dress.

It’s a brotherly show of masculine solidarity that’s not quite “I’m Spartacus”, more “I’m in a party dress!”

So why does this very silly comedy—conceived by Britain’s campest straight comedian—qualify as a revolutionary piece of “gendertainment”?

Well look at how far we’ve travelled. When I was a boy in the Seventies and eighties I captained my school football team and dressed up as one of the Nolan Sisters in front of 3,000 people as part of the cast of the Blackpool scout gang show.

Cross dressing isn’t just for girls

One of my favourite films was Gregory’s Girl, where a beautiful, blonde Scottish lass, who is brilliant at football, pretends to be a boy so she can play on the school team.

And one of my favourite comedy sketches was the Two Ronnies’ “The Worm That Turned“, a mini sitcom set in a dystopian future where women ruled and men were subjugated under the rule of a matriarchal dictatorship headed by another blond bombshell, Diana Dors.

There’s a great speech in which Dors’, the commander of the state police, reveals how the key to women’s rise power, was forcing men to wear dresses and take on the domestic duties:

“Trousers have always been the symbol of the male overlord,” declares Dors’ character in the opening scene. “Our master stroke was to insist on the change over in traditional dress. Once the men had to wear the frocks they were subjugated. As soon as we took their trousers away, they were putty in our hands.”

The cultural belief, reflected in these comedies, created in the early years of Thatchers’ first government, was that entering the masculine realm of trousers, football and work, was the road to empowerment for women, while entering the feminine realm of dresses, emotions and domesticity, would be emasculating for men.

Experiencing the feminine realm can liberate men

It’s now so normative for women to live their lives in both these “masculine” and “feminine” realms, that principal boys have all but disappeared from mainstream pantomimes. For female actors, subversion is no longer dressing up as a boy to play the male lead, it’s having Jack in the Beanstalk rewritten so that the main character is a girl.

Men have yet to go on an equal and parallel journey into the feminine realm. While pretty much everyone in Britain thinks it’s normal for women to wear trousers, play sport and create whatever life-work balance they choose; men wearing dresses, sharing their emotional experiences and putting home life ahead of career are still not considered to be mainstream expressions of masculinity.

There are people who fear that giving everyone equal access to the masculine and feminine realms, will breed a generation of girls who are butch or laddish and boys who are effeminate or gay. And yet there is a great deal for both women and men to gain from experiencing aspects of life that were traditionally restricted to one gender or another.

What is worth celebrating about The Boy in the Dress is that unlike The Worm That Turned thirty-odd years ago, it doesn’t present the feminine realm as a space that will emasculate men and boys, it presents it as a place that can liberate us by allowing us to express our masculinity however we want to.

Does this mean all men and boys should start wearing dresses? No! But this very camp, very British, very silly slice of “gendertainment” does present the opportunity to ask ourselves, what opportunities are men and boys missing out on by our continued failure to make the “feminine” experience of life equally available to all human beings.

 —Picture Credit: BBC

Article by Glen Poole author of the book Equality For Men

If you liked this article and want to read more, follow us on Twitter @insideMANmag and Facebook

Also on insideMAN:

Is this homeless charity appeal perpetuating the objectification of women and the invisibility of male victims?

by 6 Comments

A Christmas campaign for a youth homeless charity ignores male rough sleepers and glamourises homeless women writes Glen Poole.

A strange thing happened to me this week. The charity Centrepoint started pushing what I can only describe as “rough sleeper porn” at me via facebook.

It began quite abruptly with this image of a dead woman bearing her sole, presumably designed to attract any necrophiliacs who also happen to have a foot fetish.

ImageGen.ashx

Next up was the lovely Gemma with her big Disney-esque eyes and luscious lips, looking more like a grunge glamour shoot than a realistic portrayal of a young homeless woman.

Picture 27

All that was missing a Sun-style caption saying “how’d you like to take this tramp home for a spot of rough sleeping fellas?”

http://youtu.be/WCT47ZUQMIQ?t=21s

Next up was the very sexy Sally who spent last Christmas without a roof over her head and to prove that a girl can look both hot AND homeless, Centrepoint shared a sultry picture showing Sally begging for it on the streets of London:

This year Centrepoint is pleased to show us that Sally scrubs up well and will be spending Christmas at their place. You can almost hear them gloating “I bet you’d love to pull this cracker wouldn’t you lads”?

And just when I was about to complain about the lack of men in the Christmas campaign, up  popped a new image to prove me wrong. First there was Emma rolling her “come and give me a bed for the night” eyes at me:

Secondly there was a man hanging out with Emma. This shouldn’t be surprising as around nine out of ten rough sleepers are male. But this wasn’t a homeless man, no this was a graffiti version of a man who seemed to personify pure evil—everything that horny homeless girls like Emma, Gemma, Lucy and Sally need protecing from.

Next up in this sidewalk cat walk was the teenager Lianne whose step dad made her do things she didn’t want to do.

ImageGen.ashx

Her step dad appeared to be the same evil figure who was haunting Emma—why are men such bastards? Why can’t we leave sexy homeless girls alone?

Picture 26

Poor Lianne told me that she was homeless at 17 and there were lots of scary people about.

Picture 25

Look closely at the images on the video and you’ll be left in no doubt that all of these scary people were men:

http://youtu.be/97mf2-5olMo

If you look in more detail at the Centrepoint website you’ll find they do actually help young homeless people who are both female AND male—and no doubt they do some great work for their clients.

But why are they using such sexy, sexist advertising to try and get people to give them money at Christmas—does pushing rough sleeper porn raise more pounds than telling the truth?

The truth is nine out of ten rough sleepers are male and men are nine times more likely to die homeless than women. So why are homeless men so invisible in Centrepoint’s Christmas campaign?

It seems like a ruthless way to treat the roofless.

Is it because we’re collectively more tolerant of men being harmed?

Is it because we’re all more likely to help and protect women?

Is the reason Centrepoint are raising money by objectifying homeless women and making homeless men invisible, the same reason more men are homeless in the first place?

Men are invisible, disposable, unworthy of our help. There’s no point putting men at the front of your fundraising appeal because men make terrible victims.

Much better to use female victims to promote your cause, even if they represent a tiny minority of the problem you’re trying to solve. And if your female victims look fit, well that’s great news because you can pimp them in your advertising campaign and watch the charitable donations roll in like tips at a Vegas titty bar.

Article by Glen Poole author of the book Equality For Men

If you liked this article and want to read more, follow us on Twitter @insideMANmag and Facebook

Also on insideMAN:

Why men should complain to the BBC about Domestic Violence documentary

by 19 Comments

The BBC’s Panorama programme completely misrepresented the reality of Domestic Violence  and men should speak out and complain, says Nick Langford.

This week the BBC broadcast a Panorama programme purporting to cover the issue of domestic violence (DV).  I have made a complaint to the BBC about this programme and would encourage you to do likewise: a larger number of complaints will make it more likely they will be taken seriously.  This is why I have complained.

Panorama claims to feature “investigative reports on a wide variety of subjects”, it is the BBC’s flagship current affairs programme and has been broadcast since 1953.  It has made some remarkable programmes including Martin Bashir’s 1995 interview with Princess Diana and the 2006 exposure of the Vatican’s suppression of child sexual abuse scandals.

Last night’s programme involved no journalism, investigative or otherwise, despite being produced and directed by award-winning journalist Joe Plomin.  It said nothing new about DV, despite professing to present a “real understanding of what it is” and presented no solutions, coping strategies or general advice to victims.  It was a 30-minute state-sponsored fund-raising propaganda video for the feminist lobby group Women’s Aid which is currently running a campaign to criminalise “coercive control”.

Panorama depicted DV as perpetrated only by men with women as victims, and children as incidental victims.  Women were presented fleetingly as perpetrators only in same-sex relationships and there was no mention at all that men could be victims or that fathers might sometimes need to protect their children from DV.

Panorama entirely misrepresented the reality of DV.  Perhaps the best source of accurate data is the Partner Abuse State of Knowledge Project (PASK) which reports that 28.3% of women are perpetrators and 21.6% of men; over a lifetime 23% of women and 19.3% of men will be victims, meaning that men represent 45.6% of victims.  Any male victim of DV watching would have felt, yet again, that he was invisible and irrelevant; that his license fee was being used to promote a disgraceful lie.

The only DV support organisation referenced was Women’s Aid, of which Julie Walters, the narrator, is a patron.  There was no mention of any other women’s organisations, and certainly none of support groups for men.

I feel particularly aggrieved for the very brave women featured.  No doubt they felt that allowing the cameras to intrude into their lives, recording their horrific injuries, would raise the profile of DV and help other victims come forward and escape abuse, but I believe they have merely been exposed to further exploitation and victimisation by the BBC.

Sandra Horley, chief executive of Women’s Aid’s sister group, Refuge, famously said, “If we put across this idea that the abuse of men is as great as the abuse of women, then it could seriously affect our funding”.

Domestic violence is big business, attracting a great deal of funding, chiefly from our taxes.  The victim of DV is a cash-cow, and if anyone were seriously committed to ending DV they would stop misrepresenting it as a gendered issue, come clean about the reality and seek to understand why some people abuse intimate partners and how they might be helped to stop.

—Picture credit: Flickr/Steven Depolo

You can buy Nick Langford’s new book, An Exercise in Absolute Futility: Whatever happened to family justice? from Amazon. Nick has also co-authored a handy guide to family law in the UK, with his wife Ruth, which is also available on Amazon.

If you liked this article and want to read more, follow us on Twitter @insideMANmag and Facebook

The views expressed in this article are not necessarily the views of the insideMAN editorial team. Whether you agree with the views expressed in this article or not we invite you to to join the conversation about men, masculinity and manhood. Our only request is that you express yourself in a way that ensures everyone’s voice can be heard.

Who’s the one man in TV ads British men aspire to be like…..?

by 1 Comment

Seven out of ten men think we’re stereotyped in the media and yet half of us still aspire to be like one particular man from the world of TV adverts. Can you guess who that man is?

As part of its first national audit of masculinity published on International Men’s Day last week, the male suicide prevention charity CALM asked men which male character from TV advertising they most relate to and aspire to—and the result may surprise you.

WAS IT THE LYNX MAN?

No, apparently most British men don’t buy the idea that wearing an overpowering deodorant will cause millions of scantily-clad women to come charging towards you. Only 7% of men said they relate to the man in the Lynx ad and only 4% aspire to be that man.

WHAT ABOUT THE FAT BLOKE WHO CAN’T PLAY FOOTBALL?

No, only 8% of men relate to the fat bloke in The Sun’s fantasy football adverts and just 5% aspire to be like him!

HOW ABOUT THIS GUCCI SEX SYMBOL?

Would you be surprised to know that only 11% of men relate to this impossibly handsome man, though nearly one in five (19%) aspire to be like him.

IS DIY DAVE MORE OF A ROLE MODEL? 

More men (17%) could relate to the ordinary bloke in the B&Q advert though only 7% aspire to be like him.

WHO WANTS TO BE LIKE PAUL? 

http://youtu.be/VZlZ_6l8ul4

Yes apparently men want to be like the  overweight, beardy dad Paul Knowles who loves doing things for his family and puts “more effort into [their] holiday than most do at work. A total of 45% of men say they can relate to Paul and 51% say they aspire to be like him. As the advert says, “Paul, in our eyes, you’re already a winner”.

—Photo Credits: The Sun, B&Q and Gucci

Article by Glen Poole author of the book Equality For Men

If you liked this article and want to read more, follow us on Twitter @insideMANmag and Facebook

See also:

 

 

 

 

Men’s charity reacts angrily to health campaign’s “nauseating” attack on masculinity

by 5 Comments

A leading charity campaigner has called for a men’s health campaign, which shows a young man coughing up his testicles, to be banned. Read what Sam Thomas has to say about the “derogatory” #beatballs campaign. 

—This is article #38 in our series of #100Voices4Men and boys 

A new charity campaign video shows a young man vomiting his testicles onto a table in a pub in front of his blokey mates.

According to the #beatballs campaign, there are 180,000 men and boys with eating disorders in the UK, but only a quarter get help because they let their “balls get in the way of talking about it”.

Advocates for men with eating disorders have called for the video to be withdrawn and crticised the charity behind the campaign, Beat, for putting its brand before the voices of male sufferers.

Sam Thomas, the UK’s highest profile advocate for men with eating disorders has reacted angrily to the video. The founder and director for the charity Men Get Eating Disorders to told supporters:

“We need to stop this atrocious video before it causes real and very serious damage. I will not stand for it and nor will I tolerate this ignorance against male eating disorders or masculinity. Beat have clearly lost their way on this one, prioritising the ‘brand’ over the cause and people affected.

“Men Get Eating Disorders Too would like to make it publicly clear that we have no role to play in beat‘s ‘shock’ new video to be launched tomorrow to ‘raise awareness’ of men’s eating disorders.

“In our view, the video is gross content where a guy ‘coughs up’ his testicles in the pub with his mates. We’d advise that anyone who watches the clip that it is graphic viewing.”

UPDATE: FOLLOWING PRESSURE FROM CAMPAIGNERS, BEAT HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN THE VIDEO AND POSTPONED THE LAUNCH OF ITS #BEATBALLS CAMPAIGN. SEE GLEN POOLE’S ARTICLE AT TELEGRAPH MEN FOR MORE ON THIS STORY. 

http://youtu.be/P1szrQi9kwY

“MGEDT has responded to Beat saying the video is distasteful, nauseating and provoking merely for the pure sake of it. We, as a charity, continue to eradicate the stigma [in a way] that is dignified and respectful putting the voices of men first opposed to the brand. This viral campaign that simply aims to ‘seek attention’ and undermines the seriousness of men’s eating disorders and falls nothing short of desperate and reckless.

“We’ll be updating on the social networks in due course with next steps as we plan to take action to see this unhelpful and derogatory video removed from YouTube.”

—Picture credit: Flickr/Steve Boneham

To find out more about Sam Thomas’s work helping men with eating disorders visit Men Get Eating Disorders Too website.

You can find all of the #100Voices4Men articles that will be published in the run up to International Men’s Day 2014 by clicking on this link—#100Voices4Men—and follow the discussion on twitter by searching for #100Voices4Men.

The views expressed in these articles are not the views of insideMAN editorial team. Whether you agree with the views expressed in this article or not we invite you to take take part in this important discussion, our only request is that you express yourself in a way that ensures everyone’s voice can be heard.

You can join the #100Voices4Men discussion by commenting below; by following us on Twitter @insideMANmag and Facebook or by emailing insideMANeditor@gmail.com. 

Nine out of 10 people pictured in charity posters are women

by 6 Comments

Is charity for girls? Glen Poole’s snap survey of charity fundraising posters suggests that we don’t care as much about men and boys. 
Last night I was on a train from London St Pancras to Brighton and decided to pass the time by taking a snap survey of the gender balance in the charity posters in the four carriages. This is what I discovered:
  • There were 8 different charities advertised
  • There were 11 different charity posters on display
  • There were a total of  19 charity posters
  • There were 10 women, 4 girls and 2 men pictured in the posters
  • Put another way, 9 out of 10 people pictured were women girls
  • Where the charities referred to the gender of people they were trying to help, 12 out of 15 (80%) were female
  • Where charities pictured the people they wanted to help, 100% were women and girls
  • 100% of children referenced were girls (no boys were mentioned)
  • Parents were referenced 9  times and 78% (or 7 out of 9) were mums
  • Nine people pictured were fundraisers, again 78% (or 7 out of 9) were women

Is charity just for girls?

So what does this tell us about public attitudes towards men, women, boys and girls? Big charities aren’t stupid. They know what sells. The top 1,000 charities in the UK raise £11.5 billion every year in voluntary donations. Charity is big, BIG business and big business knows that all of us, men and women, are collectively more tolerant of the harm that happens to men and boys. If you want to raise money, you’ve more chance of doing it if you tell people women and girls are suffering.

And what message does this send to men and boys? That we are less valued by society, that we are not cared for as much as women, that we are not as vulnerable, that we don’t need the help of others, that we are tough and strong and should “man up” and get on with our lives and not expect help when we face problems in life. Is it any wonder that men are less likely to access help and support when they need it, when the constant message that we give to men and boys collectively is that we don’t need and don’t deserve help and support from others?

I’m not going to pretend that this was a thorough, scientific survey but it has long been my experience  that charities favour women and girls in their advertising and this quick count confirmed that suspicion. Here’s a bit more information on some of the posters that were on display:

Combat Stress: Pictures the mother of a veteran impacted by combat stress, because it’s easier to sympathize with a soldier’s mum, that a big, strong male soldier.

Concern: asked us to stop hunger for children like Halime, who they made clear is a girl! Because starving boys can save themselves.

Macmillan: showed cancer sufferer Colleen and her friends raising money and encouraged others to do the same.

Breast Cancer Campaign: showed three women and a token bloke raising money for a female cancer.

 

Breakthrough Breast Cancer: ran a poster about a mothers’ day card that was never sent because mum died of breast cancer.

 

The National Brain Appeal: used gender neutral stick people to promote its Pyjama Party fundraiser.

The Alzheimer’s Society: used a word based poster to tell a fictional story of a man visiting his daughter and not remembering which stop to get off on the tube:

The RLSB: pictured a blind baby girl, Emma, and her mum and focussed on the feelings that mums feel when their baby girls are diagnosed with blindness.

 

 

 

 

Tell us what you think. Do you think men and boys are invisible in charity campaigns and does it matter? And next time you on a train, tube or bus, why not do a quick count yourself and tell us what you discover. 

If you liked this article and want to read more, follow us on Twitter @insideMANmag and Facebook

Article by Glen Poole author of the book Equality For Men