JOSH CHAFETZ WRITES that he doesn’t see my point in this post, where the following passage from an article on sexism in TV ads drew my criticism:

The trade group does cite some ads for portraying women in a positive light. For example, MasterCard will be praised tonight for a commercial in which a woman opens a jar of pickles after her weakling husband fails the test.

I wrote: “Women as sex objects: bad and demeaning. Men as weaklings: good, and progressive.” Josh actually thinks that’s right, and observes:

So ads that reinforce the stereotypes are bad in a way that ads which undercut those stereotypes are not. That is, show a woman as a sex object and you’re playing to the idea that all women are sex objects. Show a woman as stronger than a man, and you’re cutting against the idea that all women are weaker than men. The former message is socially bad; the latter is socially good.

I guess that Josh must not watch much TV. Because if he did, he’d see that the stereotypical male in commercials, in sitcoms, and most other places, is weak, foolish, etc. Women — at least when contrasted with the males — are almost always strong and sensible. While such a role-reversal might have been pioneering, oh, 40 years ago, now it is the stereotype. This is something I’ve noted before.