Ah, Ladies Night at the local pub. A time to go out with a bunch of friends, order half price dinners shared five or six ways, and indulge in cheap alcohol. I would never have survived my first few years of teaching without it.
Apparently, though, the concept of discounted cover charges and two-for-the-price-of-one drinks designated solely for women on a specific night didn’t sit well with “self-proclaimed ‘Men’s Rights’ lawyer” Den Hollander.
Hollander claimed that the idea of “Ladies Night” was unconstitutional and blamed this alleged gender inequality on a very common whipping boy girl: feminism.
Hollander insisted that because nightclubs are licensed by the state, the special deals required them to adhere to the equal protection clause of the Constitution. Without court intervention, Hollander claimed “none other than what’s left of the Wall Street moguls” will be able to afford to attend nightclubs.
Manhattan’s Second Court of Appeals rejected Hollander’s claim, so “Ladies Nights” are safe … for now.
Outcries of sexism in advertising is not a new thing. In fact, companies from McDonald’s to Hardee’s have taken heat for playing to very specific target audiences. Perhaps the most egregious offender in terms of sexist ads, however, is the beer industry.
The poster campaign features three bare-naked woman covering their cleavage with beer mugs – with the brews’ colours fitting the colour of their hair.
Caroline Kröpfl, a spokeswoman for the Hirter Bier brewery based in the Carinthian town of Micheldorf, claimed: “The poster shows three self-confident beer drinkers.”
Yes, I bet they were confident. I don’t know, maybe it’s me, but I’ve certainly never hung around naked drinking beer with a bunch of girlfriends. Well, not that I remember, anyway (I have a tattoo I don’t remember getting, either, though).
At any rate, that visual image wouldn’t shout out “confident” to me. It would instead scream “DRUNK”. Although maybe that’s the point, and “self-confident beer drinkers” is just more PC than referring to them as a bunch of …
So you think women don’t know good beer? You’re wrong! The Wall Street Journal is reporting that women make better beer tasters than men, as they are more adept at recognizing complex chemicals that affect flavor. This skill is considered extremely important, not only in order to discover the desirable flavors, but also to discern which unwanted chemicals make the beer “skunky.” While some people (mostly male) have disputed women’s palate prowess, I tend to agree with this logic.
In addition to the science that shows women may have a biological edge when it comes to tasting, it has been suggested by many (including some professional female tasters) that women are also socialized to do more complex tasks related to smell, taste and pattern recognition (the world’s top female taster, Joanna Wasilewska of Poland, claims that a lifetime of memorizing perfumes gives her an edge). One of the top male tasters (who listened to women’s advice to improve his own abilities) put it this way: “sometimes guys will see red or brown and women will see shades in it.” As a man who tends to like beer and will drink just about anything that doesn’t taste like dishwater (and yes, there is such a beer), this makes perfect sense. One of the drinks that I cannot stand (wine) is often preferred by (and heavily marketed towards) women over beer, precisely because it has a more nuanced blend of flavors. One “amateur” drinker agrees with this sentiment: “I think we have a better sense of what tastes better in all aspects, food, clothes, beer.” According to one blogger, this may be why Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper chose to receive a case of notoriously awful Molson Canadian from Obama after he won a bet that the Canadian hockey team would beat the USA in the Olympics (for the record, Obama picked bilgewater Bud Light for the “beer summit” after the Henry Louis Gates arrest).
So what do you all think? Are women really the better tasters? They may as well be. They kind of invented it, so they must know what they’re talking about, right?
Two Dutch women accused of “masterminding” a recent ambush marketing campaign at the World Cup have had charges against them dropped. Barbara Castelein and Mirte Nieuwpoort were arrested after showing up with 34 other women at last week’s Netherlands vs. Denmark match wearing bright orange minidresses (orange is the Dutch color) paid for by brewing giant Bavaria. Castelein and Nieuwpoort were sent to South Africa to distribute the dresses and free tickets to blonde women (mostly from the Dutch-descended Afrikaner community) willing to wear them to the game. While it is understandable that FIFA (soccer’s worldwide governing organization) would be angry that Bavaria was trying to snag free publicity through its stunt, why the punishment for the women involved with this was so stiff is somewhat of a head-scratcher.
FIFA and the government of South Africa made it clear that ambush marketing would not be tolerated and would be treated as a crime (FIFA has to date filed over 2,500 lawsuits, dating from well before this World Cup). This is of course to protect the billions of dollars that official sponsors (in this case Budweiser) have invested in order to have sole advertising rights at the games. However, the harsh treatment of the women involved has made FIFA and Budweiser look rather petty and reinforced the view that the old boys’ club in charge of soccer is autocratic, sexist and driven solely by money.