Does this happen every generation? Or is something actually different?

[whatistrue]

Two people can look at the same evidence and come to different conclusions. That is apparently the case here.

I have seen numerous ads depicting wives being “physically disciplined” by husbands for such egregious offenses as choosing the wrong coffee, or burning the roast, or not performing the proper cleansing routine being advertised. I remember seeing many of these ads while growing up and didn’t think a lot about them at the time because it was “normal” to most people I knew. It was so pervasive an attitude that no one questioned it as far as I was aware. This was the reason I used that specific word. Now I look back and cringe at my own attitudes of that time, even though I was barely 10 by the end of the decade.

One final note - I wasn’t trying to “make a case”, I was simply expressing my take on what I saw both then and more recently in compilations of old advertising. No scholarly paper or declaration of absolute truth, just a random Internet person sounding off about something that struck a nerve with me.

 

[vz71]

I have seen numerous ads depicting wives being “physically disciplined” by husbands for such egregious offenses as choosing the wrong coffee, or burning the roast, or not performing the proper cleansing routine being advertised.

Why not post them?
You could easily make the point by finding numerous examples in comparison to the number of ads that were out there.

Wife beating is a serious thing. The picture of it is ugly and unsettling. The idea that it was rampant in advertising is grotesque.
I need evidence.

 

[vz71]

He posted a load upstream. A link to about 30.

No.
What was posted illustrated sexism. Not wife beating.

 

[Aquinas11]

Does it always feel like this? In every generation?

Bishop Barron made good point along these lines - never in human history have we had huge portions (20%, 30%, etc) of atheists. That is a first.

 

[vz71]

Many of them poked fun at hitting your wife.

No…
Two of them did. And of those, one was a joke and the other was truly an oddball.
Out of the purported 30, that is hardly what one would call rampant.

To call something wife beating that really is not does a disservice to not only those that have really suffered through it, but also the culture the advertisements came from.

 

[whatistrue]

You could easily make the point

Again, not really trying to make a point or prove anything.

I need evidence.

I saw that evidence was provided. If that is insufficient, so be it. It is not hard to find examples of incredibly sexist ads depicting or implying violence towards women even in current advertising. I cannot spend any more time on this. I found many with a quick Google search, and cracked.com has published articles several times with examples.

 

[pnewton]

Domestic abuse is not “a joke”

It was used as a joke. That is factual. Domestic abuse is not a joke. That too is factual. Even then, there was enough logic to understand what was intended as literal and what was parody, satire, or humor. I hate to think logic has departed from the next generation. Sensibilities and what is appropriate is cultural. Even today some ads cross the line of what is appropriate, and others which are not seen as inappropriate may be seen as inappropriate in a few generations.

The past cannot be judged by standards of today.

 

[pnewton]

CAF members often argue that morality is not relative though.

No question there. However, what is called domestic abuse is relative, and cultural. Domestic abuse is such a broad term it should not be lumped together. What was initially mentioned was wife-beating, something that would always have been wrong. Mostly these ads were misogynistic and demeaning to women. There was on with a black eye, but that was both men and women (“I would rather fight than switch”) As to whether it is a sin to make a joke about it, I do not know. I do not think the Church has ever said anything about that. Humor can normalize behavior, or rob power from it.

I still think we are arguing the past from the future. There is no surprise that we become more civilized, at least for now. So it should be rather expected that which is in the past will seem dated, or even offensive if aired today. Remember “Song of the South?” But as I said before, this was just a small portion of advertising. It only stands out because it was unique. It makes the internet memes, unlike most car ads, food ads, etc. There are a lot of reasons for generational resentment, but ads would not make my top ten.

 

[vz71]

Again, not really trying to make a point or prove anything.

Yet you phrased as a fact, not an opinion.

I saw that evidence was provided. If that is insufficient, so be it

You saw what you wanted.
I see no evidence of “rampant wife beating” in the provided link.

 

[whatistrue]

Do you have a point other than saying I am wrong over and over? Is there something you want from me?

 

[JoeShlabotnik]

We have always had problems and division in our world.
Because of the internet, we are just more exposed to this, that, and the other thing.

 

[vz71]

Do you have a point other than saying I am wrong over and over?

I simply do not believe it is right to make claims about a previous generation that are simply untrue.
If it is just an opinion, that is fine.
I have no problem with opinions being expressed.

But this was not posited as such.
It was posited as factual when it was not.

Can we just stop talking about this please?

Sure.

Domestic abuse was normalised in previous media, including adverts.

Really?
We just went several rounds about an opinion being put forth falsely as a fact. You want everyone to move on…but first you have to put in a falsehood.

Ok…where are your facts to back this claim?
I think you need to provide some kind of source for this.

 

[whatistrue]

It was posited as factual when it was not.

It was assumed it was intended as a factual statement. You inferred what I did not imply. As for the rest, evidence has been provided that is sufficient to show that the basic statements are reasonable. This is not a scholarly publication but a place for exchanges of views. Your behavior here is beginning to look to me (opinion) like sealioning.

 

[vz71]

It was assumed it was intended as a factual statement. You inferred what I did not imply.

Well…
Let’s look at it.

It was rampant in advertising until at least the 60s.

Doesn’t appear to be an opinion.
In fact, nowhere in the statement does it imply opinion.
It does however appear as someone trying to state a fact.

You may claim you were expressing an opinion. No one can or will say otherwise. You are the only one that actually knows what you were thinking.

But I do not believe, as you seem to impy here, that the fault is mine in believing you were trying to express fact.

 

[Chistian-ity]

I’m not an old man. But if my memory serves correctly even hundred of years back people were seeing the modern time as corrupted and revering a simpler, better time. This is what started renaissance thinking if I remember correctly

 

[vz71]

But if my memory serves correctly even hundred of years back people were seeing the modern time as corrupted and revering a simpler, better time.

It seems every generation thinks they are somehow worse then the last. Agreed.

But given that we do not make a public spectacle of murder, I do not believe we are as bad as ancient Rome.

 

[whatistrue]

(At the risk of offending by making an incorrect personal assumption)

Yes, Ma’am.

 

[Sarcelle]

wife beating was rampant in advertising until the 60’s.

Probably wasn’t rampant in advertising but surely it was much more acceptable back then? Was there any outcry against those ads in the 60s? I doubt it.
Try doing an ad featuring wife beating now and see how far that will get you.

 

[catholic03]

I think that the major difference between our generation and previous ones is that the dictatorship of relativism is upon us. In previous generations, terrible wars and political instability rocked the world. Now it is the dictatorship of relativism.

The great problem of the last approx. 100 years is that relativism denies objective Truth - “Nothing is for certain…etc”. Previous centuries had relativism but not nearly on the level that we have it today.

The Church is perfect and the home of all that is holy. The world is sinful, all goodness comes from the Church.

I too have worries about our world. In 70 years, when I am in my late 80s (if I live that long), I fear that the Church will be the only institution that keeps the world together.

I trust in Our Lord Jesus Christ, in my bishop, and in our beloved Holy Father, and all of his successors who will occupy the Chair of Peter in my lifetime.