Offender: New TV comedy "Work It"

Media Outlet: Premiered on ABC, 1/3/12

The Offense: Two out-of-work men dress up as women to get jobs selling pharmaceuticals. The first episode included lines such as: "Women are taking over the workforce. Soon they'll start getting rid of men. They'll just keep a few of us around as sex slaves . . . Not the kind of sex you like . . . Just kissing and cuddling and listening," and "When women take over, they'll make pride illegal."

NOW's Analysis: As one might expect from such an outdated and convoluted concept, "Work It" relies heavily on the presumption that viewers will crack up at the mere sight of two men dressed as women. The script is obsessed with ticking off every supposed difference between the sexes.

For instance, women eat itty-bitty lunches, while men crave giant subs. Men sit around and pound beers at pubs, while women drink cocktails and dance at clubs. And, of course: Men just don't get women, even their long-suffering wives. They need to literally walk in women's shoes to empathize with the other half of the population.

The stereotypical female characters in the office include the blonde princess, the driven bitch, and a slight variation on the Manic Pixie Dream Girl (this version's on hand to help the lead male character, Lee, become a better man and woman).

Other clichés are trotted out, too, like straight men's fascination with lesbians and this classic: "I'm Puerto Rican, I'd be great at selling drugs." Even book clubs where women read about coming of age (and dying) in Rwanda are played for laughs. Aren't women and their interests just silly?

"Work It" might be easy to write off, if it weren't so offensive. The plot is kick-started when Lee runs into a prescription drug saleswoman in his doctor's office, and she tells him: "We're kind of just looking for girls . . . we've had some guys, but the doctors seem to want to nail them less." And Lee's wife has to remind him to "stop comparing prostate exams to the pinball scene in 'The Accused'" -- no matter how old the reference, is gang rape ever good fodder for a joke?

Set aside for the moment that the characters repeatedly refer to adult women as "girls." And the ridiculously mocking way Lee's friend, Angel, walks in heels and a skirt. Even worse than these superficial offenses, the show has a nonchalant attitude toward inappropriate sexual remarks and attitudes. At his interview, Angel tells the female boss: "Your ass looks tight in those pants" (is this ok because he's presumed to be a woman?). Afterward, Angel tells Lee he was fighting an erection during the interview.

Perhaps the most insulting thread in the premise is how Lee gets hired. Vanessa, the boss, expresses surprise that Lee researched the company before his interview and actually understands its products. She confides: "Most of the girls who interview here think clinical trials are the things Lindsay Lohan keeps having to go to." Lee replies: "I'm not your ordinary girl."

So, ordinary "girls" are dumb and don't know how to prep for interviews? But a man (especially one with experience selling macho cars) knows how to impress the boss? Were any women writers or producers present when this exchange was waved through?

This kind of sexist buffoonery is juvenile even in beer commercials. Thirty minutes of it is just pathetic.

Take Action: Tell ABC what you think about the outdated and offensive stereotypes of women and men in "Work It." Update: ABC canceled "Work It" after two episodes, but it's still ok to contact the network and tell them why shows like this are a big mistake!

Lisa Bennett, NOW Communications Director, January 9, 2012

More offenders in : Objectification of Women, Television, Harassment, Intimidation, Media Hall of Shame

Rank this item with our Misogyny Meter: Currently 2.81/5 1 2 3 4 5 i

Spread the word:

Offender: Editor Tina Brown

Media Outlet: Newsweek magazine

The Offense: Newsweek Editor-In-Chief Tina Brown imagines what Princess Diana's life would have been like if she were alive today. This fantasy life includes several wealthy husbands, a popular Facebook page and botox injections. The magazine cover features a composite photo of an updated Diana walking with Kate Middleton.

NOW's Analysis: In an attempt to pay tribute to Princess Diana in celebration of what would have been her 50th birthday, Brown's imagination lingers on the typical subjects associated with women -- their appearance, sex appeal and relationship status. Emphasizing her "big blue eyes" and "radiant blondeness," Brown makes Princess Diana out to be a leading character in a romance novel rather than a leading figure in philanthropy. Brown even works in a reference to the "striding sexuality" of Diana's mother.

The first portion of Brown's cover story is dedicated to assuring readers that Diana would have used Botox, conjuring up her fashion preferences and envisioning a glamorized marital lifestyle, including two ex-husbands "on both sides of the Atlantic." From marriage to a "super-rich hedge fund guy" to succumbing to her "weakness for men in uniform," Brown's recreation of Diana's life is infected with a shallow, sexist point-of-view.

Instead of focusing on Diana's longtime charitable passions, Brown provides fictional insight into her struggles of sharing the limelight with Kate and possible competitiveness with other beautiful, high-profile women. Even when Brown does get around to speculating on Diana's prospects as a humanitarian leader, she can't resist suggesting that the Princess Diana Foundation would be funded by "a steady pipeline of adoring billionaire ex-boyfriends."

Perhaps the most despicable aspect of the publication's tribute is the digitally-aged cover image of Diana walking alongside the daughter-in-law she will never meet. It is sensational to imagine what Diana's life would be like today, complete with "10 million followers on Twitter," but it is truly perverse to digitally dress, enhance and groom an image of a deceased figure.

Cover picture aside, why is it that Tina Brown, an award-winning media icon, cannot move past the continuous practice of objectifying women? Especially with a woman as prominent, respected and accomplished in the international community as Princess Diana, one would assume there would be more to discuss than her body image and romantic romps. How does that saying go? Sex speaks louder than words…

Take Action: Tell Newsweek what you think about its "Diana at 50" cover story.

Marisella Rodriguez, Communications Intern, July 1, 2011

More offenders in : Objectification of Women, Print Publications

Rank this item with our Misogyny Meter: Currently 2.14/5 1 2 3 4 5 i

Spread the word:

Offender: Super Bowl Ads

Media Outlet: FOX, 2/6/11

The Offense: The usual parade of sexist commercials, including objectified women, buffoonish men and cartoonish violence.

NOW's Analysis: Thanks to everybody who sent in suggestions for good and bad ads from this year's Super Bowl. First, the good news. A decent number of funny, non-offensive ads popped up this year.

Here are the ones you (and NOW) liked best:
- Bridgestone: Reply all email
- Budweiser: Singing in wild west saloon
- CarMax: Kid in a candy store, etc
- Chevrolet: Truck helps save Tommy
- Doritos: Grandpa comes back to life
- Kia: Epic forces battle for car
- Volkswagen: Young Darth Vader and beetle running through jungle

We have to note that even the "good" ads feature far more men than women, and the genders are often split into stereotyped roles. But that's nothing compared to the bad ads, and there were a bunch of them this year.

Here's what made yours and our worst list:
- Cars.com: Apparently even talking cars like to objectify the lone female car in their group
- Chevrolet: First the car company features two male narrators who talk about how "hot" the woman in their commercial should be (she likes to drive fast and she's a sweet schoolteacher, get it?), then they build another ad around the groundbreaking notion that old people don't hear very well
- GoDaddy.com: Dwelling at the bottom of the barrel as always, this advertiser promises female nudity online and pokes fun at the unsexiness of 77-year-old cosmetic surgery enthusiast Joan Rivers in two typically sleazy ads
- Groupon: An ad that appears to be a moving plea to help those struggling in Tibet segues into a cynical pitch to save you money on dinner out
- HomeAway.com: Ok, so the "test baby" that hits the wall face-first is not real, but it still makes you wonder why someone thought this was funny
- Mini Cooper: A male contestant plays "Cram it in the Boot" -- which we're pretty sure is a tacky allusion to a sexual act
- Pepsi Max: The soda company's "first date" ad relies on the supposed differences in how women and men think about each other, but the "love hurts" one is the real offender -- it manages to promote negative stereotypes of both women (angry, no-fun shrews) and men (hapless, junk food eaters) and it ends with an innocent woman getting hit in the head with a soda and falling on the ground while the couple at fault runs away
- Skechers: Kim Kardashian shows off her body in an ad filled with sexual double entendres
- Snickers: Roseanne Barr is the women who gets knocked to the ground this time, and we're supposed to be tickled because she's just so whiny
- Stella Artois: Could this be the stupidest ad of the night? Women swoon (and cry!) over a torchy male singer who, in fact, is singing to the beer he loves
- Teleflora: In just a few simple words, this ad may have entered the pantheon of bad ads -- Faith Hill, who surely has something better to do than this ad, encourages a youngish man to "write what's in his heart" on the card that accompanies the flowers he's sending to his girlfriend, so he says "Dear Kim, Your rack is unreal" -- ugh

So, what have we learned from the Super Bowl ads? Same old, same old: Being sexy is job one for women. Men get really excited over beer, junk food and sexy women. Hot women are often not too bright. Women who don't fit the "hot" ideal are usually annoying, emasculating or the loving mother in the background. Oh, and people getting hit and falling down is hilarious!

And the number one lesson? Advertising agencies employ mostly 13-year-old boys in their creative departments.

Take Action: You can write to any one of these advertisers and give them a piece of your mind. We recommend Pepsi or Teleflora.

Lisa Bennett, NOW Communications Director, February 7, 2011

More offenders in : Advertising, Objectification of Women, Television, Sexist Piggery, Ageism, Media Hall of Shame

Rank this item with our Misogyny Meter: Currently 1.94/5 1 2 3 4 5 i

Spread the word: