It also says women can't change tires. And we all know that is BS.

I do agree that this ad plays on the fears of women being alone at night (the dark alley, the scary music, etc). As you say, there is no explicit mention of rape, but there definitely is a suggestion of "badness" being a woman and alone at night with "no man around."

It's most blatant in saying that the flat "needs a man." Women can change tires, in heels and otherwise!

Honestly, I don't see how it could be implying that she might be raped "when there's no man around".

It seems to be implying that a woman who is stranded at night is helpless without a man and ought to be afraid, which is bad enough, but I think you have to be reading an awful lot into it to see even an implicit threat of rape with "no man around".

I'm more irked by the fact that it comes right out and says that only men can change tires. Gag!

I don't understand the purpose of digging up old sexist advertising. What are you trying to accomplish here?

If there is no man around, wouldn't she be pretty safe from rape? He's not going to be able to rape her from afar.

Anyway, it certainly is a vile ad, veiled threat or no. I mean, as a man I might want Goodyears to avoid having a flat while driving by a creepy horror film set as much as a woman would.

Yeah, "no man around" would have to mean no rapist, but then it would've been totally blatant to say "the wrong man comes to help." "No man" preserves a shred of deniablilty.

Quick! Everyone to the nearest time machine! We can't let them get away with this!

Rape? No. Sexism? Yes. Long ago? Certainly. Still prevalent? Perhaps.

It would have been more helpful to put more context. Why did this particular ad come to your attention and in what way does it speak to the present?

My outrage also bends the space-time continuum, so the truth can be revealed: Mad Men is a documentary, filmed in real-time in the early 60s, and broadcast here today.

What's with the snark on this thread? It is useful and interesting to have a sense of the history of this kind of material.

As to how it's relevant to the present, I think it serves as an example of the progress that's been made. Sure there's still sexism in advertising, but there's a clear contrast between the way things are now and the way they were then.

Just a thought...

What's with the snark on this thread? It is useful and interesting to have a sense of the history of this kind of material.

I love the vintage sexism segment! They are too funny.

When I change tires, I just need a jack, wrench, spare tire, and a flashlight. I am trying to figure out how I would use a penis...

I also love the vintage sexism ads. It makes me sad to think my grandmother/mother saw these kinds of things as normal.
And I don't think it's a stretch to say that there's a rape threat in that ad. Women are told over and over and over and over again that if they go out at night alone, they WILL GET RAPED.
As someone who has been raped, my mind does immediately go there. But remember, most research points to 1-in-4 to 1-in-5 women being raped in their lifetime (and that number is probably low), so to about 1/4 of the female population, this kind of thing is probably triggering. I think most people who haven't experienced sexual violence don't realize that.

As to how it's relevant to the present, I think it serves as an example of the progress that's been made. Sure there's still sexism in advertising, but there's a clear contrast between the way things are now and the way they were then.

That's a good thought, Lottie. I usually just ignore the vintage sexism posts, because i just don't get why we need to dig up more things to be annoyed with/upset about. Perhaps if they were presented with a little more context and a note about how things have/have not changed since would make things a little clearer.

Assuming that that is the reason this stuff gets posted. I would really like Jessica to weigh in here with her reasons for posting these things.

That "give her a second chance" line at the end sounds like it's implying rape or even murder to me.

this kind of thing is probably triggering. I think most people who haven't experienced sexual violence don't realize that.

That "give her a second chance" line at the end sounds like it's implying rape or even murder to me.

Just different perspectives, I guess.

Good grief! Sorry for all the typos. I was rushing there...

Is it just me, or does this guy right off the bat sound like he wants to fuck the tire? With the "This flat tire needs a may-un," I mean.

As for whether the ad implies the danger of being attacked, come on. It's got twenty seconds of following her shaky progress down a dark, empty road, glancing around nervously, coat clutched tightly at her throat, the Bongos of Unknown Horrors tap-tap-tapping away. That's not an accident. And I think some of y'all are taking the "no man around" line a bit too literally.

And I think some of y'all are taking the "no man around" line a bit too literally.

Is it just me, or does this guy right off the bat sound like he wants to fuck the tire? With the "This flat tire needs a may-un," I mean.

Perspective.

Hence "I think," hon.

No hard feeling, sweetums.

Just chatting...

But remember, most research points to 1-in-4 to 1-in-5 women being raped in their lifetime (and that number is probably low), so to about 1/4 of the female population, this kind of thing is probably triggering. I think most people who haven't experienced sexual violence don't realize that.

It seems to dismiss people who have experienced sexual violence but in a setting so completely different that this particular kind of thing doesn't immediately trigger thoughts of rape. Or perhaps people who have experienced sexual violence in a similar setting, but still don't see this ad as implying anything about rape.

I'm not saying that you intended to dismiss anyone with different experiences or perspectives. I just have to get these things out of my head and on the page or they'll bug me all night.

Regardless, I truly do understand how it could be triggering and I do not wish to undermine that in any way. Just wanted to share a few more thoughts.

Was anyone else struck by the implication at the end of the ad that only men can buy tires? (Give "her" a second chance.) So really, this was an ad aimed at men (as we heard in the very beginning "this tire needs a man") to make them feel guilty for not being the provider of good tires for their women - aka protecting them, as a "man" should.

This is a great example of how many small things are assumed in our culture, or were, that put people into categories - women as helpless, men as protectors. As to the argument some made that obviously "when there is no man around" the woman is not in danger of rape - I think you have to understand the intended audience. Of course no men think of themselves as rapists, they are protectors of women from the menacing other. But Goodyear says if men don't buy their women this tire, they are no better than rapists because they are leaving their woman vulnerable. No man can zoom in after she makes that phone call in time to save her. (Also, was anyone else interested to see the ad didn't say "buy your wife this tire" but just "her" so it could be applied to any woman a potiential tire-buyer might possess - say a daughter?)

Very good and interesting points, KTB. I hadn't considered it from that perspective.

"This flat tire needs a man." Aside from laughter, my first thought was, how about someone to design tires that don't go flat so drivers don't need to worry about any piece of debris or trash like bottles and cans, stranding them? [When I was a teen, my father warned me to always avoid objects like dead toads on the road, because he knew of people deliberately rigging them with nails, etc. to puncture tires.] Solid rubber tires, hard shells, and other tire designs I have read about have been judged unfavorably. I see cars abandoned on the roadside (sex of driver unknown) fairly often, as well as cars stopped to help stranded drivers of either sex when they are present.

Then I saw the rest of the commercial. How nice. Goodyear Double Eagle tires carry a spare inside. And is the driver made aware that the damaged tire now needs to be replaced (as opposed to driving on with a smile), so the tire does not REALLY strand them?

I am also one of those who sense an implied physical danger to the woman because there is "no man around" to help/save/protect her, and believe the "give her a second chance" somehow refers to the woman herself. As in, allow her to avoid this kind of "no man around" to help her kind of danger by using these "spare within a spare" tires, not, give her a second chance for some offense she herself committed.

[I am surprised that she was not also portrayed stranded in "that" part of town (I just watched "In the Heat of the Night" again and learned racial tensions were then so high, according to broadcaster AMC, the production had to take place in Sparta, Illinois, not in the actual South.) Attitudes in the US have thankfully come a way since then, though how far may be debated, seeing the margin of victory map from the Democratic Primary campaign.]