Not sure I’m buying the authenticity of these.
It’s not a TV show, and it is staged—they’re public service announcements / advertisements produced by Everlast Peru. Here’s an article from El Pais.
Still, pretty damn clever.
Staged, and kinda questionable that they’re using a boxing manufacturer’s brand to answer sexual harassment with (mild) battery. But still very clever! I’d love to see a US version of this, even if it’s a homemade blogger version. Some better closeups on the guys’ faces when they see it’s their mother would be nice.
I don’t think so. Women’s boxing and other martial arts can be pretty effective important in the self-empowerment of many women.
While I don’t know anything about Everlast’s brand per se (and, of course, in many ways this is an ad for them), I don’t think there’s anything wrong with calling up images of strong women who like to box.
Google translate of that page is… A touch innacurate
“I’m cholera in Peru not put a stop to sexual harassment in the public media”
Calling up images is fine. The bit has a blatant theme of answering sexual harassment with physical violence (opening scene in which a boxing glove-themed vehicle is almost driven into a catcaller, host saying “She should slap the bastard” and “Take your wig off and beat the jerk up”, etc.). It damages their moral high ground, and encourages women to answer these crimes with a more serious physically violent crime.
For me, the real clincher here was the extraordinary embarrassment that any man must feel when he realizes he just hit on his mom, and the notion that you shouldn’t catcall because someone, somewhere, might be doing the very same thing to your own mother. They could’ve played that up a bit more, rather than the physical violence aspect.
I think that, without proper treatment, cholera might put a stop to sexual harassment.
All harassers and abusers should have prescribed sentences of cholera or dysentry without treatment for X number of days !
I can see concern based on the fact that melee combat with people of unknown capability(and potential allies) is a rather risky activity; or the potential for some moronic assertion that failure to respond with violence amounts to assent to grow up; but (if it could be achieved without these issues) would it actually be a bad thing if engaging in harassment carried the risk of a little blunt force injury?
Tactically, it wouldn’t be a plan I would endorse (because of the risks noted above); but in a situation where somebody is harassing in order to flaunt, and revel in, their impunity, is the ‘moral high ground’ really so delicate that it would not bear a demonstration that their impunity is not so great as they believe? Permanent damage might be a bit excessive; but there’s a whole, rich, spectrum of largely temporary soft tissue injury to work with.
Mod note: Don’t tell victims of sexual harassment how they are supposed to react to it. Cheers!
I like the concept of an overkill lesson in shaming shameful behaviour but I think the tried and tested repeating-everything-they-say-back-at-them-like-a-child-does would probably work better. I dunno, I’m not a psychologist but I reckon that gets on most people’s tits.
I saw a bit of one of those shows where they honey-trap the partners of suspicious girlfriends to see on camera if they play away but ultimately ended up destroying a fine relationship because of the elborate display of mistrust. I suppose it made good telly though (in the sense that people like watching cruel bs).
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.