+221
Cereal brands are sexist, there are no female mascots. amirite?
by Anonymous12 years ago
I really can't tell if this is serious or not.
by Anonymous12 years ago
If a cereal has a male as a mascot, it will appeal to both sexes, whereas a female character would only be interesting to other females. It's about money.
by Anonymous12 years ago
So are college mascots
by Anonymous12 years ago
They only do it because men are supperior to women
by Anonymous12 years ago
The Beatles are sexist. There are no female Beatles. The Chinese are racist. There are no black Chinese people. Heterosexuality is sexist. It only allows you to have sex with the opposite gender.
by Anonymous12 years ago
The Beatles are a small group of people who just happen to all be male. If they found a woman who was good enough to become a Beatle, she probably would be one.
There could be black people who are Chinese citizens, and even if there aren't, I don't think there's a law against it (if there is, then they really are racist).
Being attracted to a certain feature (e.g. gender) is not considered discrimination.
The people who make the cereal brand mascots are more common, and they are inventing fictional characters who could easily be either gender. Also, they have direct control over every attribute of the character, and their objective has nothing to do with sex.
by Anonymous12 years ago
Just like you said the Beatles happen to be male, so do cereal mascots. Making a character female for no reason other than would be mindlessly pandering to feminists making something out of nothing.
by Anonymous12 years ago
It doesn't make any difference whether the mascot or Beatle is male or female. The difference is the Beatles couldn't control the gender of their members. If the only good musicians they found were guys, it wouldn't be practical to ask one of them to have a sex change. The cereal companies can do whatever they want, so it's a bit odd that there isn't a single female mascot. They wouldn't be making the characters female just to make sure nobody calls them sexist. When you only have 2 options and one is not necessarily superior, you would expect each option to be selected at least once.
by Anonymous12 years ago
Talent had absolutely nothing to do with being a Beatle. If you owned an instrument, you were in. And if both options are truly equal, than it makes absolutely no difference not to try both. We as a people have a pretty firm understanding of what females are. No trial and error necessary.
by Anonymous12 years ago
I didn't say anything about trial and error. I'm just saying if they believed men and women really were equal, the gender of the mascots would be somewhat random, in which case at least ONE would be female.
As for the Beatles, if the only requirement was haing an instrument, then it couldn't possibly have anything to do with gender, so it is not sexist.
by Anonymous12 years ago
If they TRULY believed genders were equal, they wouldn't go out of their way to make female mascots. Sometimes, that's just how things go. And that was sort of my point. I'm comparing complaining about the Beatles being sexist to complaining that cereal companies are sexist. Both kind of ridiculous.
by Anonymous12 years ago
Why would people have to "go out of their way" to make female mascots? Creating a mascot is equally difficult whether the mascot is male or female.
It seems like you think male mascots are somehow far better, and the only reason anyone in their right mind would make a female mascot is to make sure people don't call them sexist.
by Anonymous12 years ago
Because, as it fell, people just happened to invision them as male. Completely random, in the same way that man is the default name for our species. Eg. "mankind". To change even a minute detail would be going out of their way to appease feminists, and in turn, be sexist, in implying that women actually need a cereal mascot for equality.
by Anonymous12 years ago
According to your logic, all the main characters in TV shows and books and movies and everything should be male, because that is the default. The reason they aren't has nothing to do with sexism. Even back when sexism was commonly accepted, there were still females in fiction stories.
There is no reason for any of them to be female, but there is no reason for ALL of them to be male either. The difference is, the former is much more probable, unless you have some sort of prejudice.
by Anonymous12 years ago
No no no no no. I try not to insult people online, but that was one of the stupidest things I've ever read. the only reason I'm even saying that is because you're claiming it's MY logic. No, most female characters on TV DO in fact, have reason to be female. Maybe they fall in love with a guy, or promote lesbian rights, or maybe the entire show is supposed to appeal to females. But the most likely is that since each cereal mascot lives in a realm of their own, the sexes of others don't affect them. It's possible for them all to be male because each is a separate world. Since in TV and cinema many characters exist in the same realm, it would take away all realism. Think about that as much as you can before telling me it doesn't make sense, because I do have a good point. I just can't think of a way to put it in words.
And just so you know, not EVERY mascot is thought up by the same person. You don't need a reason for a gender. As I said, male is the default. Not by prejudice, by chance.
by Anonymous12 years ago
That's my point. You don't need a reason for a gender. If there is no reason for it to be male or female, it should be a bit more random. I'm not saying it's 50-50, because you're right, male is the default, but the chances of all the mascots being male by chance are still microscopic, assuming there are no other factors. I'm well aware that not every mascot is thought up by the same person; in fact, most of them are meant to compete against each other. I don't think a female mascot would appeal to kids any less than a male mascot, but I don't know yet because no one has tried it. They've tried tigers, toucans, vampires, leprechauns, and bees. Why is it that no one has ever tried a female character?
Yes, in fiction stories, many characters exist in a realm, so there must be some females, but the main characters don't have to be female. They could easily be all male, and just have women for romantic interests and less important roles. Most of the main characters are male, but there are still some that are female.
By the way, if you don't want to insult people on the internet, then don't.
by Anonymous12 years ago
If you don't need a reason for a gender, it doesn't need to be 50/50. I'm saying that the reason there's a word for coincidence is because sometimes they do happen. But maybe that's it. Maybe they're unwilling to try something not commercially proven. We know guys can sell cereal, but no one wants to be the guinea pig that tries and potentially fails with a female mascot. And I'm not saying that a female would fail, but what if it did? That would hurt feminism more than no mascot at all.
Fictional stories need people of both genders to appeal to both genders, because it will be more popular if people can relate to characters. People don't need to relate to cereal mascots.
The point I'm trying to make it that despite the fact that I really don't want to, trying to one up me, or show off a mistake I didn't make is one of the few things annoying enough for me to break that rule.
by Anonymous12 years ago
You're right, it doesn't need to be random, but the alternative is everyone just agrees that the mascot HAS to be male, end of story. That sounds pretty sexist. Anyway, who decided to be the guinea pig that tried and could have potentially failed with a mascot that's a tiger or a vampire? (This was before Twilight, so people were still afraid of vampires) As for the feminism bit, I'm trying to say that the cereal companies do not come up with their methods of appealing to children based on how feminists would think about it.
You're right about movies needing to appeal to both genders, but most movies and books have one main character, who is usually male. In fact, some stories have practically no women at all (e.g. The Lord of the Rings) and are still very successful. However, there are still some female stars (Dora the Explorer, Katniss Everdeen, Samus Aran, etc), and they have been quite successful. It's a bit odd that there are NO female characters on cereal boxes.
by Anonymous12 years ago
No one agreed on that. All we know is that male mascots bring in money. Any good advertiser knows that the perfect mascot has to be completely different, yet entirely the same. You can change things like species, but you need a constant. Something proven to work in case the vampire thing fails. While they could make the constant something other than sex, it seems a bit late to change. Is there another constant you could go to? The real question is, who's responsibility is it to make a female? Maybe every cereal company in the world agrees with you, but no one has any good female ideas. And a lot of fictional media has almost no male characters in it, but most anything with relative female characters is pretty recent media. Sexism and racism don't just disappear over night, and while women were legally equal when most of them came out, anyone raised on the idea that women are second class would have a hard time adjusting. What if suddenly you were told apes had rights equal to yours? As well intentioned as your are, you'd never get completely used to it. And no, I'm not saying women are comparable to apes in any sensible persons mind. I'm just trying to help you see it from diffe...
by Anonymous12 years ago
I wasn't going to acuse you of comparing women to apes; I clearly see your point, but I don't think the cereal companies were that old (That being said, I wasn't alive when these cereals were invented). I don't think there needs to be a constant for all cereal mascots; they could probably make a female character if they wanted.
I think people in the children's cereal business DO agree with me like you said, and they wouldn't mind coming up with a female character, but this isn't the kind of post that you're supposed to think about really hard.
by Anonymous12 years ago
Just making sure. And I know you don't; most rational people don't. But businesses work on studies, not rationality.
by Anonymous12 years ago
True, but I still consider the Trix rabbit to be a total bitch.
by Anonymous12 years ago
that makes this picture a little awkward: http://www.thesneeze.com/art/loose_art/crunch1.jpg
by Anonymous12 years ago
that must mean we have to sue them
by Anonymous12 years ago
No popular brands, but I recall seeing a barbie cereal quite a few times.
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago