Dad's in Charge in New TV Ads
They say sex sells in advertising, but apparently, Daddy changing a diaper can also lead to big bucks.
Fathers are watching the little tykes without Mom around in ads for carpeting, department stores, nasal spray, wireless technology, cereal and other products — a move that experts say reflects the modern family.
Or what gender-neutralized, social-engineering experts would LOVE to see more of, which is...little tykes without Mom around...that is their vision of a 'brave new world' order...
Although on the surface harmless, in fact, these ads are part of the larger campaign to disenfranchise mothers in our society. They are an attempt to paint mothers as expendable, out busy shopping or working and not paying attention to our children. As any working mother knows this is a lie. Actually when mothers run these errands, usually we must DRAG OUR CHILDREN along with us. This is the reason many checkout counters sell little products like candy, small toys and other items attractive to children. Since mothers usually have our kids with us as we shop, frequently we pick up some little item for them on the way out of the store.
These ads are just another of the continuing attempts by men in their never-ending campaign to be "IN CHARGE" of everything again (as the title of the article clearly demonstrates) and another example of the male-directed media smear campaigns denigrating women in their role as mothers.
Women must begin to boycott the sponsors of these ads and not buy their products.
Any company that attempts to use our children as the latest fashion accessories for men to strut around with, or to try to get our children to sell products (like men having children around is sexy, sex sells, now our kids will be used like women have been for years to sell consumer goods to men), or to spread propaganda against women in their role as mothers (like the movie Spanglish, which I discussed after its opening), or by attempting to airbrush mothers out of their childrens' lives, any company attempting to do any of these things needs to be boycotted by women.
Then maybe these a@@holes will wake up.
Last month, The Advertising Council and The National Fatherhood Initiative announced they were launching their latest public service announcements encouraging more fatherly involvement with the kids.
The new PSAs, airing soon with actor Tom Selleck (search) doing the voiceover, conclude with the tagline, "It takes a man to be a dad." One features a father dancing with his daughter in the living room and, according to the Advertising Council's Conlon, tries to speak "directly to fathers of the importance of being engaged in their children's lives."
And while fatherhood activists are grumbling about some of the ads they see as daddy mockery, they're also taking note of what they call "father-friendly" commercials.
Yes, it figures...fatherhood activists never-happy, always greedy and grasping, looking for more, in spite of the fact that these ads (which are springing up like poisonous mushrooms everywhere) are clearly just another result of the strong-arm tactics of fathers rights advocates and their simpering, brain-addled pawns.
Yet they still aren't satisfied, still grumbling, still want more...
Don't get me wrong, I love many of these ads...the fathers and children are adorable...I wish one of them had been my father...really...AND I adore Tom Selleck...who wouldn't want him as their dad...Sadly however, we must deal not with the fatherhood 'masks' that the ads portray but with the real-life monsters that are the fathers in our lives...
For instance, the men who urge women to get an abortion until the date of delivery and then spend the rest of the next 18 years dragging them in and out of court to get custody of said children, usually to avoid paying child support.
Actually like what happened with that Bridget Marks situation which many New Yorkers are familiar with.
Well God only knows where her poor little girls will wind up before that one's over...
God only knows...
The recreational sperm donors or 'prodigal fathers' as fatherhood activists and their simpering, brian-addled pawns like to call them...who disappear for years and then get a wild hair up their a@@ and suddenly decide they want to be a father. Turning you and your childrens' lives upside down, NO MATTER THE AGE OF YOUR CHILDREN, with the full support of the state btw, is no problem for them...none whatsoever.
And last but not least, the fathers who eventually DO manage to wrestle custody of a mothers' children from her and then spend most of that child's life busily turning said child against their own mother. A child's mother, the MOST obvious, natural and best guardian of a child being alienated from them...which most likely means that after emancipation, that child won't have ONE person who is in their corner 100% no matter what they do...not one...and for what...for financial gain on the part of men, no other reason, to allow men to avoid paying child support, that's the bottom line here and to help a group of gender-neutralized, social engineering experts experiment with dumping our kids into all kinds of weird custody arrangements. Using our children like a group of little guinea pigs with no idea whatsoever of the final result, no idea.
AND by the way, these alienating custodial fathers is no small group of 'outside of the mainstream' fathers here...but a good portion of them. Richard (died by his own hand) Gardner, their PAS expert (I say theirs since I wouldn't have believed Richard Gardner if he told me the sky was blue, yet he's THEIR EXPERT so I'll use him here) Gardner noted back in the 90s that one-half of his clientele were alienating FATHERS, 50% and considering how few fathers have custody, 50% is a pretty high number...so let's face it, these alienating monsters are a very representational group of fathers overall here.
We have to deal with the real historic fathers, not the 'fatherhood masks' like that wonderful Tom Selleck or the great dad featured in the carpet commercial...from Augustus (murderer of his OWN daughter, granddaughter and great granddaughter) to Ray Carruth (murdered pregnant mother in an attempt to kill their child, so he could avoid paying child support) and finally the 50% of Richard Gardner's caseload for alienating parents, which is made up of custodial fathers.
THIS is the enduring historical legacy, that women as mothers must wrestle with in our everyday lives. THESE are the monsters behind the fatherhood mask that these ads promote. THIS is the history of motherhood and REALITY still for many mothers today as that very siginficant article in the Washington Post demonstrated. The percentage of pregnant women who get murdered by their child's fathers, so these monsters can avoid paying child support, is roughly about 20% and that's just the numbers from ONE SMALL STATE, Maryland.
We probably should DEMAND that these studies be replicated nationwide so we can see what the real numbers are...but of course, even as we speak, fatherhood activists and their simpering, brain-addled pawns are attempting to sweep the study under the rug so as to obscure the facts of it.
Thus it's important for mothers to NOT let propaganda obscure facts, as IF WE FORGET our history we are dooming, not just ourselves to repeat it, but all the generations of women who follow after us, some our own daughters...ALL OF THEM..
Actually it wouldn't be too strong to say we were dooming ALL women worldwide to repeating this terrible and bloody mother/child history as women in western society are the ONLY women with the the civil and legal rights to speak out against these monstrous attempts to separate mothers and children from one another.