I was puttering around in my local Target yesterday and I noticed something in the clothing department. In the name of diversity and body positivity, both the mannequins and the pictures of smiling models covered the full gamut of body types: thin, fat, big, tall, short, you name it.
But that was only in the women's clothing section. In the men's section it was still 2010: the body types ranged from 32-inch waists to 34-inch waists and there was nobody with a BMI over 25. Everyone was slim, fit, and muscular.
Comments?
Maybe not in store, but have you looked at their website lately?
Beer goggles are one-size fits all.
I think it's a few things. First our culture doesn't focus on men's bodies the same way it does women. Second, women's clothing trends to be a bit more form fitting for all body types. Third, men don't buy as much clothes so there is less incentive to spend extra marketing money. And fourth, a lot of men don't care as much so there aren't as many marginal sales.
That said, the double standard is bad. Our culture has a lot of attitudes towards both genders that are harmful. Feminism actually did a lot to explore this but unfortunately it hasn't broken through regarding men. Even when men's movements start by focusing on real issues they tend to quickly shift towards protecting men's privileges more than they do critiquing actual problems. Which leads to actual, in this case small, disparities persisting because the attempts to preserve privilege quickly overwhelm any efforts to actually identify and fix problems. Not sure how to avoid this dynamic to focus on the actual issues rather than privileges.
Sort of. A LOT of advertising muscle has been going into the effort to turn men into women. That is, to feel endless pressure to look a certain way so they can sell them useless products.
For example, those huge pickup trucks.
Nobody should touch this post. This is a blatant "see libs, you too are hypocrites" post meant to burnish Kevin's penchant for "Dems are going too far to the left, leaving moderates with no choice but to embrace Republicanism" arguments. The proper initial venue for bringing up a store's advertising policy is with the store itself, not as a topic for discussion on allegedly a serious news blog. I am aware of exactly zero people other than Kevin discussing this alleged injustice online, so handing a new piece of kindling to the right-wing mob to toss onto the culture war bonfire that threatens to consume our country isn't very helpful.
The most likely reason for the discrepancy is that the head of women's clothing at Target is concerned about body shaming, and the head of men's clothing at Target just hasn't thought at all about it... hence two different approaches to advertising. Nothing particularly nefarious about this: two different executives in the same company often have very different approaches to everything (as employees will tell you in the wake of Covid). It's a shame maybe that the head of men's clothing isn't up-to-date on woke trends, and/or the head of women's clothing is possibly too up-to-date on woke trends... but it's not like Target's men's section is turning into an Abercrombie and Fitch anytime soon.
It's an interesting socio-cultural issue.
Kevin, more posts like this, please.
Left the burner on, did ya?
??
This is an interesting socio-cultural issue that deserves greater attention.
I would contend that even if the advertising managers were all woke as heck, their customer surveys and the feedback from any experiments -- note how Cracker Barrel got slammed for hurting men's self-image of themselves for being meat-eaters -- would show that men are simply not ready to actually see themselves as they are.
The psychological and social constraints placed very deeply in women's life experiences in many cultures, forces women to confront and adjust to the reality of their own bodies.
The life experience of men, especially in the more conservative regions of Europe and North America, allows them to have a much different attitudes towards the realities of their bodies. In many cases they are able to see some impossible ideal when they look at their own appearance. only a small minority of men would be able to look at posters featuring men's actual physiques without having some degree of negative reaction, and among the Christian nationalsts and New Fascists, that reaction may be extreme.
Check my screen name for my book length website, I would say the varying life experiences of men and women in nearly all known world cultures, produces completely different psychological, philosophical, political and economic attitudes and psycho-social-cultural structures between the two (most commonly recognized) genders.
Personally I find the topic interesting. Our culture's framing of masculinity is very toxic, not only in encouraging toxic behaviors but in discouraging men from expressing themselves in certain ways. There's plenty of discussion on this within a feminist framework but none of these discussions have broken through without being coopted by MRA types seeking to reinforce toxic male behavior rather than trying to expand men's acceptable choices.
I think these issues are mostly trivial compared to the toxicity of male stereotypes in our culture but I do think there's an interesting discussion to be had here about why, to the extent we have a conversation about this at all, it's about MRA types trying to preserve male privilege rather than about men who feel alienated by the MRA version of masculinity and might actually care about issues like this.
I don't know where Kevin was trying to go with this but why not try to steer it in a constructive direction instead?
agree. there is certainly an issue with objectification of women's bodies being far more extensive and damaging, but there is still space for a conversation of masculinity and body standards and stereotypes of men, and how they can be damaging both for men and for men's treatment of women.
Yup.
Men are supposed to suck it up/in…
If there's one thing progressives have learned, nobody hands you equality.
If Kevin wants equal Mannequin representation, he'll have to fight for it, just like women did.
The patriarchy never bothered to look at itself, because, well, it's a patriarchy and it remains resistant to the mirror.
Market pressures have long created weird disparities in men’s and women’s clothing.
I mean, no pockets in most women’s pants and shorts is simply unthinkable in the menswear category.
Men are simply under less body scrutiny, so there’s much less of a pressure to combat it.
I say this as a fat guy: who wants to shop surrounded by mannequins as tubby as I am? That would depress the hell out of me.
I think you're onto something there. It seems to me I've read on more than one occasion that men tend to overestimate their looks and sex appeal, and women do just the opposite (or at least fret more). So, it wouldn't shock me that retailers have found overly perfect female mannequins risk eliciting negative emotions from woman shoppers (bad for sales) whereas for men it's just the opposite: they're perfectly ready to buy the notion they look as good as the mannequin with the 32 inch waste and six pack.
There you go. Women want an idea how an item will actually look on whatever body type they are. Men want to be deceived about how good they will look or want to be told that it doesn’t matter.
Hey, I have six-pack abs.
I just keep them well insulated.
Excellent comment!
I have six-pack abs, six pack a day . . .
I swear the comment section here confuses toxic masculinity with just plain toxicity.
Kevin,
The reason there is no body positivity for men is that there is no movement for body positivity for men. Like any journey, if the bus doesn't leave the station, there is no progress. One of the things that fuels progress for movements like body positivity is sympathy. There is a lot of sympathy out there for women (and other minorities). There is no sympathy for men. Even other men don't feel sympathy for men. I would say *especially* men don't feel sympathy for other men. So if you wish you didn't have to feel so bad about being out of shape, well suck it up buttercup, or at least that's the expectation I experience where I live.
You nailed it.
Other commenters hit on related themes-men haven't thought about it, less cultural scrutiny on men's bodies.
I see Kevin's question as an inquiry, an honest question, seeking information, and not as the airing of a grievance, but so often when the historically dominant folk (white men in most cases) wonder about why womengaysblacksmuslimsinterracialfamilies etc etc are "getting" something, like a history month or an academic department dedicated to the study of them or representation in commercials for expensive stuff, it is because they feat they are being displaced as the center of the culture, which they are. And as the center of the culture, it never occurred to them that it takes active advocacy to stay there.
I have definitely met men that are sympathetic to these issues and related ones. Not a lot and only in very liberal spaces but they definitely exist. I have read a few MRA things as well and they talk about these issues a bit, though there are things they focus on a lot more.
Problem as I see it is that this is a relatively small group and not a priority for anyone. The super liberal guys recognize there are far bigger issues they care about so while they will talk about it amongst themselves they don't organize around it preferring to spend their time on other issues.
The MRA types meanwhile will talk about it a bit, but they will divide into focusing on incel type griping about entitlement to sex or into the married MRA type about complaining about how the women in their lives makes them participate in maintaining the household rather than letting them hang out with their friends or play video games all the time when they aren't working.
These two groups might each separately identify some of the same issues but they both prioritize other things and disagree on too many other things for their to be a movement. But there are plenty of guys who recognize and talk about this stuff, just not in any organized movement.
I'm just going to point out, having attended college in the mid 80's and haven taken a Women's Studies course (back before it was Womyn's Studies or Gender studies), feminist activists and cultural critics have been talking about this for a very very long time and it was decades and decades before "plus sized" models and manquins were to be found anywhere outside of stores and commercials specifically targeting "plus sized" women.
I don't want to jump all over Kevin but ok, he just noticed this, and I am guessing that he did not take a Women's Studies course in the mid 80s and therefore may not know that it was decades and decades of activism that led to what was in Target yesterday.
OK, the more I think about this, the more "why can't we have...." just pisses me off. It completely ignores the fact that the group that you now think has something that you don't have has actually done a lot of work to get that thing, and you have.....not. You just get out of bed and boom, you are the center of the culture. Or at least you were for a really, really long time.
You know, we always say, when some straight or white or male people whine "why is there no straight pride parade? Why is there no Men's History Month? Why is there not a White Studies major", we always say "Because all parades/months/academic disciplines are straight/male/white yada yada yada". Well, we should stop saying this.
The real answer is "Get off your privileged ass and MAKE one!"
On the same note, it's interesting that for about the past 10 years or so, pretty much 100% of young male actors at every level must be absolutely shredded with about 0% body fat. The female actors are generally thin but otherwise have pretty ordinary looking bodies. I think this is a phenomenon our culture has not at all started to reckon with. Maybe no one cares, but it's undeniable.
"pretty ordinary looking bodies"
Yeah, I'm a healthy, fit 56 year old woman and none of the female actors look anything like I ever looked.
You have a point on the shredded guys, but you are pretty wrong on the "ordinary" women.
Ordinary looking compared to the dudes. I'm speaking of younger actors. There are loads of thin young women out there, just as there are loads of thin men. Whether you think thin young people are the majority or not is a different question. But shredded 0% body fat dudes are rare indeed.
Obviously actors represent somewhat of an ideal in our society, not dissimilar to top athletes. People like to look at attractive people, so it makes sense that actors are going to generally be pleasing to the eye. But what's gone on recently with young male actors (actually middle-aged actors as well) physiques is pretty nuts.
I think of the scene in Crazy Stupid Love (2011) where Ryan Gosling takes off his shirt and Emma Stone gasps and asks if he had himself photoshopped because the dude is straight ripped. And this was 12 years ago. The trend has only intensified since then.
I'm enjoying the many issues that folks here are bringing up.
Just as an aside, do we really WANT men to be as obsessed with, and easily offended regarding their looks as women are supposed to be? Do we want men to run off in tears (or more likely, whip out a gun) if someone mentions they seem to have gained a little weight? Suppose another guy wears the same T-shirt? Should they have it out? Or just laugh?
Women's appearance issues seem unhealthy, even pathological, and have soured life for many a female-type person. Why should anyone wish it upon men, too?
Men can't get away with blaming all their problems on "culture".
In particular if a man says the reason no-one will date him is his body, he will be laughed at, not praised and asked to form a support group.
This may or may not be fair (the extent to which height determines an initial date is well known: https://www.reddit.com/r/OkCupid/comments/6da9xh/girls_are_really_into_height/ ) but it's reality.
We know the actual numbers: Most women rate most men as substantially less attractive than average.
https://www.reddit.com/r/OkCupid/comments/5i6m5y/women_have_unrealistic_views_of_how_men_look/
Whereas most men are much more balanced in their views. And most women refuse to believe this.
There may be a culture out there that's obsessed with female body shaming, but it appears to be primarily a female-on-female (Mean Girls) and gay-on-female (fashion industry) phenomenon.
Both the above points are well known (though plenty of people refuse to admit them).
I'm going to throw out a synthesis of both points that is, I think, less well-known.
Question: should a man shave or not?
Or even more divisively: should a man shave his chest or not?
I think most men, in their early teens, see enough versions of this, and gather enough responses, to learn a VERY important point: whatever you do, you will appeal more to 20% of the girls, you'll appeal less to 20% of the girls, and it won't matter to the other 60%. And so it goes with most body modification.
Boys learn NOT that they can modify their body to please girls but that obsessing about it is pointless because whatever they do will attract about as many as it repels, with most being unaffected.
The SAME is true for girls -- but girls don't learn that lesson. They live in some fantasy world where there's some imaginary body type that every man is just powerless to resist. It DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY.
Most men have no "type". Priyanka Chopra, Chloe Moretz, Amber Heard, Sarah Rue, Judy Greer, Zendaya, Kate Upton. All gorgeous, all very different bodies. (AND for all I know, all very different personalities, some of which I would like, some of which I would hate.)
Saying men don't want to date you because of your body is a way of deflecting that men probably don't want to date you for some other reason.
Most women are utterly delusional about how desirable they are (source:
https://www.amazon.com/Marry-Him-Case-Settling-Enough/dp/045123216X )
But no-one wants to admit that perhaps the reason the doctor doesn't see you as wife material is because you're borderline alcoholic? Perhaps the reason the CEO didn't ask you on a second date is because you're not especially smart or interesting? Much easier to just insist that they both rejected you because your tits are too small/big.
How much followup did you do to check on that hypothesis? Because I strongly suspect that you'll find Mrs Doctor is, in fact, not an alcoholic, Mrs CEO is in fact an engineer, and both may well have the exact same tit size as you.
TL;DR:
Boys don't obsess over changing their bodies because they have a REALISTIC view of how little it matters. (The part that probably matters is height, and that can't be changed.)
Girls do obsess over changing their bodies because they have an UNREALISTIC view of how much it matters. (Face probably matters, rather more so than body; but even there women appear mostly delusional about how they should change it. Believe me, very few men care much about your lips or even your nose.)
Women don't yell at men about their bodies on the street. Women who are angry with a male public commenter don't post hundreds of notes about the flaws of his body and how awful they are.
There's an asymmetry. Women are expected to use their appearance as their currency, often because so many other outlets have been traditionally barred. It's still burned into the culture.
Women have learned to speak up a little about how things in society treat them badly and complain. Men don't complain; that would be unmasculine. Instead they tend to vote Republican.
Also, yeah, with men, its a little more okay to not be physically attractive (certainly worse for women in that regard), and so guys get less angry about it. But try being a guy with low earning potential. They tend to get the treatment overweight women get on the dating market.
But try being a guy with low earning potential. They tend to get the treatment overweight women get on the dating market.
This brings to mind a recent Washington Post dating feature piece (a lot of newspapers have them these days). The male in the article was being slammed in the comments section because he had dared reveal the fact that he preferred "thin" women. But if you've ever glanced at dating profiles online before, you'll conclude that women are just as likely to offer up physical attribute preferences as men are, only sub in "tall" for "thin." If anything, I strongly suspect there are at least as many dudes who prefer large women as gals who will date short guys.
We're much more imprisoned by aeons of natural selection than we're comfortable admitting: I doubt homo sapiens is different from parakeets or walruses in this regard.
In a world where...Kevin James is plowing Erinn Hayes & Leah Remini, men don't need body positivity.
Because there is no discrimination.
But that's just because all the writers are even dorkier than Kevin James...
I mean, sure, there's not much discrimination or body-shaming faced by the .00001% of the male population that makes it big in Hollywood!
I'm pretty sure mannequins don't have a BMI. Try pinching their jelly roll.
It may not be reflected in mannequins, but you've heard of "Dad Bods," right?
It was all the rage a few years back...
Men just don't really care about being body positive, or, if they do, they do something about it.
I think it's probably because clothes shopping is more closely associated with women than men.
I don't go clothes shopping much, but I do get clothes catalogs in the mail now and then, and I definitely noticed that they started including female plus-sized models much more in the past few years. And that makes a lot of sense, because lots of women are plus-sized and they want to have some idea of what the clothes will look like on them. I have to think that the clothing companies got a lot of feedback about the lack of plus-sized female models and changed their advertising accordingly.
I imagine that the same thing will eventually happen with the male clothing market, but just more slowly because men as a group don't feel a big affinity with clothes shopping. We'll get there in a few years, probably.