by Contessa Gayles
I came across a few items within the last week that explore stereotypical gender-based roles as it pertains to domesticity. Betty Friedan’s bored suburban housewife comes to mind as a reference point here, so I thought it might make for an interesting blog post for the class.
There are a few new Tide commercials starring men as the stay-at-home parent, or “Dad Mom” as they call it. A guy who has a “unique mixture of masculinity and nurturing,” who can do the laundry, fold a frilly girl dress and braid his daughter’s hair, while maintaining the “brute strength of dad.”
I also read this first-person narrative on Slate by a man who is not a stay-at-home-dad, but a “stay-at-home-dude.” He chooses to be a full-time homemaker, while his wife is the sole breadwinner with a full-time career. He expresses the difficulties people have accepting his chosen path when he reveals that he and his wife don’t have kids and aren’t planning on having any.
NSOS 3800A Foundations of Gender Studies 
I’m not sure if I’m posting this correctly nor if my following tangents are relevant to what everyone else considered when watching the videos and reading the article Contessa posted:
James Jesperson-
Being in both cultural studies and gender studies courses, I’ve found it to be a little difficult when drawing the line between commercials that are displaying “racism” or “sexism” and those commercials that are simply attracting the obvious target for the product; i.e. targeting women in commercials that market things like diamonds or targeting men in commercials regarding something like non-scent deodorant. I am in no way saying that these generalizations are completely accurate, nor is it right to make these kinds of stereotypes, but, regardless, it is a better marketing strategy to target the kinds of people in the commercials that are more likely to buy into the product than it is to be fully conscious of offending a group of people. As a student at a liberal arts college, I can personally say that I would find more attraction to and respect in a commercial that doesn’t succumb to the typical “white, stay-at-home wife cooking dinner for her white, misogynistic, incapable husband” type of setting or stereotypes. As we learned in “White Privilege” by Peggy Macintosh, this kind of recognition wouldn’t be as common within our country as a whole as it would be within our class; therefore, it is arguably a better strategy for businesses to continue targeting the kinds of people and subjects that have worked for them.
I greatly appreciate these Tide commercials, not only because they simply show a masculine man redefining what it means to be a homemaker and stay-at-home parent, but because it reflects the progression of our society. If this same kind of commercial was on national television just 25 years ago, the response would be overwhelmingly different. If the logic of big businesses like Tide only targeting their consumers holds with this commercial, then our society is slowly, but surely heading in the direction of gender equality and recognition of existent sexism and racism.
Just a few random thoughts I had while watching the videos and reading the article..
Thanks for sharing, Contessa! I think these Tide commercials reveal a lot about the fact that the way our society views gender roles really hasn’t changed that much since Betty Friedan’s time. Ads like this are often used as examples of progress in gender equality, but I think their true purpose is really only to produce some kind of shock/humor in viewers (look how funny and cute! stay-at-home dads!) or appeal to stay-at-home mom consumers.
I have mixed feelings about the article. On one hand, I feel bad that traditional gender roles limit more couples from this kind of lifestyle and put a negative stigma around it. On the other hand, there is a certain class privilege that surrounds couples who are actually able to rely on only one partner’s salary. So, in a sense, I kind of feel like there are more important issues to worry about.
Sorry, I forgot to mention- I feel that the Tide commercials aren’t very progressive because the men still have to find a way to “justify” their stay-at-home-dad lifestyle with traditionally masculine behavior. (i.e.: “Now I’m going to go do some pull-ups and crunches!”) Tide is putting on a feminist front, but not actually being very feminist. I’ve often heard critiques of this marketing strategy as “exploiting feminism” and I have very mixed feelings about it. Exploiting feminism to sell products is certainly a bad thing if it secretly reinforces traditional gender roles, but it’s kind of reassuring at the same time. We know that feminism, or at least the idea of “girl power” has the ability to sell products and that in itself is a mark of progress. Hey, at least exploiting feminism is better than exploiting women…
Thanks for sharing Contessa,
I agree with Ann in that gender roles in advertising have changed very little.
I’m not sure I where I stand on the topic of the ‘stay at home dude’. It’s totally my own opinion but I feel that any relationship where only one person provides financially is off balance. It doesn’t matter which party is providing that support. I feel there will always be a negative stigma from society if one party is simply choosing to stay home not because they need to take care of children or are actively perusing another career/interest that isn’t yet financially successful, but simply because they choose to.Very few people can really afford that luxury of not needing to work, and I feel as though women who stay at home and don’t have children also receive similar negative stigma. I’m also curious to see what happens over time. Maybe this man will get that same trapped and unfulfilled feeling much like the housewife of the 50’s before too long. I’m not sure any person can be reliant on someone else for money and not feel trapped in one way or another.
Thinking as advertisers do, one might also imagine that the demographic as to who *buys* the detergent is changing faster than the demographic of who does the laundry. It would be interesting to look into the question of whether the act of shopping — which has moved on line for many people — is as likely to be done by men as women (we know that women, even those who work, are far more likely to be doing housework.) Therefore, does Tide need a snappy, funny ad that draws men’s attention?
Another thought might be: does housework become masculinized when it is perceived as skillful and cool? Friedan is somewhat dismissive of elaborate housekeeping chores, in part because they are so highly gendered female.
The Tide commercials have that odor of offensiveness that wafts by before you can quite catch it.
“DadMom” seems to be justifying to the viewer that what he is doing is super cool – and it ends up having the opposite effect. If he was completely comfortable with his lot in life, he would not need to do the push ups.
And “Stay-at-home Dude” mentions that his skill set has a shelf life…this indicates that he realizes he can’t stay at home forever (no matter what he professes). It would be very interesting to read an article from him a year from now.
I agree with Ann that the gender roles in advertising have barley shifted from where they used to be.
And, I think “Stay-at home-Dude” reinforces this notion (although I don’t think that was his intention).
Also, for some reason I began wondering if Betty Friedan had a maid or nanny who did all the elaborate housekeeping chores before she had her awakening…and it turns out she did have a maid for the full 19 years that she was married to Carl Friedan…during which time she was writing “Feminine Mystique,” I found this interesting…