Silly marketers, tricks are for trade...

May 13, 2006 7:48 PM

Silly little fairy!
posted by mischief (42 comments total)

I've long desired an automobile capable of protecting me from teh ghey.
posted by stet at 7:50 PM on May 13, 2006

You know, what a lot of people in this country need is a week of insensitivity training.
posted by Steven C. Den Beste at 7:55 PM on May 13, 2006

The fairy does not actually say "who's the fairy now" at the end of the commercial.
posted by delmoi at 8:06 PM on May 13, 2006

Oh, my mistake, the author claimed it implied that.
posted by delmoi at 8:08 PM on May 13, 2006

Weird, I always thought that new dodge was their cutesy non-tough model.

The "silly little fairy" doesn't come off as anti-gay until the fairy turns him into a gay stereotype (bright colors, small dog). Dodge is known for goofy ads that try to appear tough (I recall the "like a cheeseburger in the land of tofu" billboard outside of SF).
posted by mathowie at 8:24 PM on May 13, 2006

Are you trying to 'out' Colin Mochrie?
Silly little mischief.

It takes a real man to wear a pink tutu and sell cookies on TV. Remember, it was Ryan Stiles who licked Colin's head one time on "Whose Line", not the other way around.

Oh, and the Ad Age columnist who thought the Dodge ad was 'hate speech'? He also thought Burger King's "Whopperettes" was one of the best ads on the last Super Bowl. Total moron.
posted by wendell at 8:36 PM on May 13, 2006

I think one of the coolest TV ads I've ever seen was the one where Shaq dressed up in tights and did rhythmic gymnastics with the stick-and-ribbon. I don't even remember whose ad it was, but that image is classic.
posted by Steven C. Den Beste at 8:40 PM on May 13, 2006

Until I read this, it never occured to me that the fairy in the comercial could be construed as a reference to gays. It's a tiny elfin creature with wings. It wields a tiny wand. What else would you call it?
posted by SPrintF at 8:56 PM on May 13, 2006

Isn't this "controversy" like thre weeks old?
posted by oddman at 9:08 PM on May 13, 2006

Stupid commericial making use of stupid cliches to sell a car, woohoo. I didn't see gay bashing, I saw Dodge trying to make a car appear tough. BFD.

And the Fairy Train would totally not fit in with Thomas and the other trains on Sodor, at all. That BizWeek columnist was reaching and missing.

The Bud Light/Ted Ferguson ads are ten times stoopider and stereotypically offensive.
posted by fenriq at 9:19 PM on May 13, 2006

"It takes a real man to wear a pink tutu and sell cookies on TV."

How about a black cocktail dress to the Augusta National Clubhouse back in '85? Been there, done that.
posted by mischief at 9:47 PM on May 13, 2006

Just watched the ad. Didn't like it particularly, but it's not subversively homophobic, as the reviewer seems to think.

He's a big guy, with a big dog. She just turned him into something embarassing, which by all appearances appears to be a yuppie, not a gay guy.
posted by BlackLeotardFront at 10:01 PM on May 13, 2006

I think one of the coolest TV ads I've ever seen was the one where Shaq dressed up in tights and did rhythmic gymnastics with the stick-and-ribbon. I don't even remember whose ad it was, but that image is classic.

Well, then it wasn't a very good ad, was it :P
posted by delmoi at 10:14 PM on May 13, 2006

Isn't this "controversy" like thre weeks old?

Five weeks. Despite the best efforts of a few people looking for reasons to be offended and journalists desperate to find something to write about, it's gone nowhere.

She just turned him into something embarassing, which by all appearances appears to be a yuppie, not a gay guy.

I thought preppie. But no, not gay.
posted by pmurray63 at 11:05 PM on May 13, 2006

Until I read this, it never occured to me that the fairy in the comercial could be construed as a reference to gays. It's a tiny elfin creature with wings. It wields a tiny wand. What else would you call it?

Uh... I think they were talking about the Land's end model with a pomeranian that the elfin creature thurs the macho man into...
posted by arcticwoman at 11:37 PM on May 13, 2006

[...] but I've seen bikers act like they own the road [...] or just right in the middle of the road like they own the place [...] Well, perhaps this is true, but nearly everyone speeds 5-10 mph and that did not necessarily cause the accident. -- Mitrovarr

Dunno about you guys, but a lot of what I've read sounds like very biased 'information' by a bunch of car-hating bike nazis. -- drstein

Legality discussions aside for a second, every time cyclist safety is discussed, people on Metafilter jump to the driver's defense. I hate the fact that so many people here jump to be apologists for this guy because they empathize with the driver because driving is something that is or is imagined to be essential to your lifestyle.

The fact is that the driving lifestyle is a choice. The choice may or may not improve your standard of living, I'm not convinced, but it is a choice. You choose where you live, where that is relative to where you choose to work, and how many children you choose to support with the resources you choose to support them with.

Well, I'm biased too. I empathize with the bicyclist. That's the lifestyle I've chosen for moral, health and career reasons. But being a pedestrian or bicyclist who interacts with streets and may be killed by automobiles is not a choice, because asphalt is everywhere. No matter how removed you feel from the possibility of a death like this happening to you or your loved ones, you are wrong. If you're healthy and you die today, odds are better than not that a car will be involved.

You will keep on blaming the victim, though. Just don't pretend to yourself that what you say is any better than the hateful words Jose Vincens posted on MySpace.

Callously dangerous drivers get off the hook all the time because juries can see themselves in the drivers' shoes. I would argue that this says more about the average American than it does about the seriousness of the crime. It's so bad that police never, ever follow-up with non-fatal reckless drivers in bicycle cases, even when fault is extremely clear.

Imagine that maybe there's a rational reason why I have a chip on my shoulder. I know more about car culture than the average driver knows about car-free living, because I grew up in cars, most of my friends drive cars and all of my family drives cars. I am imperfect, too, and sometimes I am required to drive cars. Recognizing my imperfection, I try very hard to limit my driving to emergencies.

I can honestly say that I hate the act of driving. Point me to the place that I can live peacefully and I never have to deal with automobiles on a day-to-day basis ever again and I will quiet down my proselytizing.

Cars kill more people in America than falls, poison, drowning, fire, suffocation, guns, and machinery combined, with about 10,000 more deaths on top of that. If you think I'm a extremist, at the very least take away the wisdom that your car is the single most dangerous tool that you own. Most people are lulled into a sense of security from the familiarity and comfort of the modern automobile. If you handle your firearms or your chainsaw with deliberate care, then you should handle your car with just as much care. Answering without bias, do you drive safely enough?
posted by Skwirl at 2:25 AM on May 14, 2006 [1 favorite]

i don't know, i came away from that commercial thinking about how cute the chick who played the fairy was so i guess the gay agenda must have been lost on me.
posted by quin at 3:33 AM on May 14, 2006

And all this time I thought I liked the commercial because of the adorable redhead playing the fairy.

You know, what a lot of people in this country need is a week of insensitivity training. posted by Steven C. Den Beste

So many people are so thin-skinned these days, if you stuck them with a pin, they would pop like balloons.
posted by Enron Hubbard at 4:17 AM on May 14, 2006

The fairy does not actually say "who's the fairy now" at the end of the commercial.
posted by delmoi at 11:06 PM EST on May 13

Ah! You obviously don't watch enough television, delmoi. When this ad first ran, the "butch" stereotype said clearly "Silly little fairy!" before being transformed into a, well, silly little fairy.

They edited it, I'm guessing after folks complained. Heck, I found it offensive.
posted by jpburns at 5:07 AM on May 14, 2006

Never mind all that, the flying fairy is teh hotness. Who is she? Has she done anything besides this ad?
posted by Gungho at 6:12 AM on May 14, 2006

Yeah, I was put off by the ad when I first saw it too. It's clearly appealing to the beefy straight male, "this car will not be sissified", and the recent comments here noting how the fairy is hot just underscores that audience-picking.

In retrospect, the commercial only works if she turns the big manly man into a sissy (or a "silly little fairy"); when I first saw the commercial I thought the fairy was turning ordinary things into extraordinary things, and the car was resisting by staying black and boring. I only saw what they were getting at when she turns the dude into the "silly little fairy".

This is a car for real men; that seems to be the unwritten ad text.
posted by Hildegarde at 9:46 AM on May 14, 2006

What a stupid looking car.
posted by Baby_Balrog at 11:00 AM on May 14, 2006

How about a black cocktail dress to the Augusta National Clubhouse back in '85?

Depends: as part of a costume ball/drag night? BFD. Just because? Manly.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 11:16 AM on May 14, 2006

turns him into a gay stereotype

Hmm, I thought he was supposed to be a preppie!
posted by zarah at 11:46 AM on May 14, 2006

The "silly little fairy" crack ONLY makes sense if they're protraying a gay man. Preppie really doesn't cut it. The idea is about being "less of a man", and I don't think "preppie" means that.
posted by Hildegarde at 12:00 PM on May 14, 2006

It does to me, so I guess that's why my bias went there; straight preppie types are the bottom of the boy-pile so I equated the transformation with general male obnoxiousness. I don't in any way see gay men as unmanly, so my subconscious didn't go there.

Grrr. Ads are evil, we should not spend time being amused, offended, or analyzing their hidden meanings. Usually I can tune out the ads when I watch the idiot box, but that damn pretty fairy splatting against the wall was a bit irresistible. So's Colin Mochrie in a tutu for that matter, dammit. (I would so hate & be jealous of his wife if she weren't such a nice & talented person, hehe)
posted by zarah at 12:56 PM on May 14, 2006

straight preppie types are the bottom of the boy-pile

This may be your personal view, but it's not the view of the dominant majority. "Straight preppie types" are the ones making all the money, getting the best education, and running the damn country in most places.
posted by Hildegarde at 1:04 PM on May 14, 2006

Skwirl: While I appreciated you rant and agreed with you on several points, I think you are in the wrong thread. You might have wanted this one.
posted by arcticwoman at 1:17 PM on May 14, 2006

PST: It was a reception for some newly elected state representative.

The idea is about being "less of a man", and I don't think "preppie" means that.

I dunno, preppies are a whole hell of a lot further down the list than fairies. ;-P
posted by mischief at 2:03 PM on May 14, 2006

The fairies of legend, that is.
posted by mischief at 2:03 PM on May 14, 2006

I honestly think that the critic's observations say more about him than the ad itself. He seems predisposed to find this sort of message from the material in question... or any material, for that matter.
Some people look at pencils, telephone poles, straws and pipe cleaners and say "phallic" -and it's their pov that is the problem.
posted by ArsncHeart at 2:30 PM on May 14, 2006

Sorry, but anyone one who fails to see that the fairy's revenge is transforming the mocking, macho dude into a fairy himself is either being obtuse or disingenuous.

If you think pointing out culturalized bigotry is political correctness gone awry, then it's doubtful that anything I could say is going to change your mind.

Too bad those Coon Chicken Inns aren't around anymore. That was some good chicken.
posted by xod at 3:33 PM on May 14, 2006

Calm down dear, it's only a commercial!
posted by funambulist at 3:44 PM on May 14, 2006

arcticwoman: I tried to post an apology about that, but I guess it just wasn't my posting day.

Uhm, I do have some opinions about this issue, too, though.

Ads are focus grouped to death and alternate meanings are often intentional, so I do get a little worked up about this stuff. It's perhaps unlikely, but not impossible, that the ad exists because gay bashing is coming back in style and plausible deniability a la "constitutional constructionist == anti-abortion" or the "hit me baby one more time" double entendre are a great way to covertly fire up the base.

Portland used to have an advertising history museum, and looking chronologically, you really got a feeling for when the shift went from factual strategies to full-tilt lifestyle, entertainment strategies and it feels really cynical. Notice that this ad tells you absolutely nothing about the product and takes a lot of effort to tell you only one thing about the brand (i.e. it's macho). Its goal is lifestyle manipulation of some sort (Maybe: Be more macho, buy our car?). In that sense, it's at least as much social speech as it is commercial speech. As social speech, it's very disheartening. As commercial speech, it's just dumb. In general, it's extremely condescending and cynical towards consumers, regardless of implicit bigotry.
posted by Skwirl at 4:33 PM on May 14, 2006

I guess my gaydar is on the fritz. I saw the jerk become a preppie; any sexual orientation was ambiguous.

I'm more interested in finding out who played the fairie. She can transform me any time she wants.
posted by Seabird at 5:10 PM on May 14, 2006

It's just marketing trolls capitalizing on the predictable backlash against the metrosexual aesthetics jerks like them helped promote in the first place.

We've always been at war Eastasia.

For what it's worth, the transformed character didn't read as gay IMO, either.
posted by evil holiday magic at 5:31 PM on May 14, 2006

This may be your personal view, but it's not the view of the dominant majority.

Uh, yah, which is why I was sharing it with you 8) Just because preps might tend to be successful types, doesn't preclude them from also being an odious stereotype that's generally disliked. Movies & tv often use the male preppie character in this way, so I don't think it's unusual that this is what my subconscious latched onto.

I do see now that the ad's meaning is most likely different from my interpretation, but I also think that I've got a lot of company (with that much maligned dominant majority everyone loves to think they're not part of) in honestly missing it's apparent intended message.
posted by zarah at 6:25 PM on May 14, 2006

I remember seeing that dodge commerical, and I did see it as a gay bash.

Fairy?

Maybe pixie? Sprite?
posted by rougy at 7:10 PM on May 14, 2006

Do I really have to choose between a car that either captures the essence of a Land's End metrosexual or the fat guy from American History X? Did they really mean to imply they're selling the automotive equivalent of the latter? I think I'm more impressed with the dandy than the yob.
posted by dgaicun at 7:38 PM on May 14, 2006

It's not subversively homophobic. It is homophobic. It's just Corporate America tapping into the zeitgeist — and vomiting up yet another poorly scripted, unimaginative commercial.
posted by Mr. Six at 9:04 PM on May 14, 2006

well scripted, imaginative
posted by funambulist at 2:03 AM on May 15, 2006

I think one of the coolest TV ads I've ever seen was the one where Shaq dressed up in tights and did rhythmic gymnastics with the stick-and-ribbon. I don't even remember whose ad it was, but that image is classic.

I believe that was one of the Shaq commercials produced by a company called Digex, who did managed web server hosting, got swallowed up by MCI/Worldcom, and then Verizon (and my former employer).

Ah, the heady days of dot-com boom, where companies could dress big basketball players up in tutus!
posted by jeditanuki at 3:17 PM on May 15, 2006