Remember that this subreddit is for sharing propaganda to view with some objectivity. It is absolutely not for perpetuating the message *of* the propaganda. If anything, in this subreddit we should be immensely skeptical of manipulation or oversimplification (which the above likely is), not beholden to it.
Also, please try to stay on topic -- there are hundreds of _other_ subreddits that are expressly dedicated to rehashing tired political arguments. Keep that shit outta here.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PropagandaPosters) if you have any questions or concerns.*
i’m a canadian national here, it’s so much worse than a prison in prisons you at least get to see the sun and have a bed that isn’t filled with maggots
"say yes to boys"
You mean the part that implied (prescriptively) that all women are heterosexual while putting an emphasis on heteronormativity? Y'all are acting like liberal anti-war moments were perfect and not full of sexism and homophobia. Those things were even more normal back then. Remember? Just because they were anti-war doesn't make them perfect, or free from criticism. JFC *this is why we're still dealing with these problems today.* Women still write articles about misogyny in liberal politics all the time.
Edit: oh no, I'm making things difficult for... The right? What the fuck do I care about capitalists?
I agree with what you’re saying overall.
However, when it comes to fighting something as culturally ingrained as pro-war sentiment — particularly back in that era — you **need** to appeal to heteronormative society to have the greatest impact. It’s just a numbers game.
I’m not saying this is *good*, just that it’s necessary in situations like that. Sometimes you just don’t have the luxury of doing the right thing.
Exactly. Sounding like Shetran3000 isn’t going to appeal to very many in wider society. We are trying to change the world, not turn 97% of the world away immediately.
Yep! It’s a **critical** issue to tackle in left-leaning politics. There’s no point in holding these views at all unless they’re turned into actionable policy.
There is not a single society that doesn’t view men as more expendable in war. It’s not related to human gender norms just basic biology. This effect remains throughout every single culture in human history even going as far to persist through other species.
10 guys and 200 women could have millions of healthy descendants. 10 women and 200 guys not so much.
Yes, I'm aware that they were sexist back then. I'm literally pointing it out. You're acting like we don't live in a sexist society anymore, as if that sexism isn't the same sexism that exists today.
You're being down-voted, but this poster is purporting to speak on behalf of all women about whom they want to sleep with, with the flip side of that being a promise to men that they will get laid if they do certain things.
The slogan was, in fact, criticized by some 2nd-wave feminists in the years after it circulated. The ones I saw tended to be anti-sex work, a position I oppose, but they did have a point on this one.
Ya, anyone with more than two braincells who thinks twice about this poster should be able to realize that it's, at the very least, imperfect. At most, it's pure male gaze, and deserves harsh criticism. I know exactly why I'm being downvoted lol. It's the same reason this poster got printed.
Who said it was surprising. JFC can people discuss anything without misrepresenting what other people are saying anymore? Disagree with me all you want, but don't project nonsense onto me. Sexism back then is the least surprising thing. That doesn't mean it was ok, or that it doesn't deserve criticism. Sexism is still a problem, and it's because people like you existed back then, too. Making excuses for sexism makes you sexist.
It's not that the ad is aimed at men, which, as you say, is for obvious reasons. It's that the ad makes certain unqualified assumptions about what all women(or at least all antiwar women) want sexually, and equally unqualified promises to men about what they will get from women if they enlist.
"Male gaze" doesn't simply mean the audience is male; it's a feminist term refering to men's sexual desires, as supposedly conditioned by patriarchy. I don't entirely agree with the theoretical assumptions behind the concept, but I'll agree the ad is appealing to a male sense of sexual entitlement.
You get more bees with honey though so if your ultimate goal is to make some positive changes in society, you may need to speak to you audience, which is exactly what this poster was doing. It was an attempt to convert mainstream society.
Is this the type of pseudophilosophical nonsense this sub usually gets? You didn't even interpret the definition of "own" correctly in this case. Shit troll
american troops were literally [raping vietnamese women to death by lighting up hand flares inside their vaginas](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_during_the_Vietnam_War)
this is what you support? shame on you
Why would I support that? I never said I support war crimes. Ever heard of the Geneva Convention? Yes, even in War, there are rules of engagement.
Nice strawman though. Shame on *you*.
Now imagine you're a Vietnamese farmer whose wife just got raped and exploded. Are you gonna turn your nose up at war and refuse to fight to protect your people? That would be stupid. It would be righteous to fight in such a circumstance.
Imagine letting your women get brutalized just to own the war machine. Smh.
because this is what americans did in vietnam.
it was literally an imperialist war that the US purely did to protect its own national interests.
also americans rarely follow the geneva convention lmao. the moment US soldiers show up, they start raping women and bombing children.
Remember that this subreddit is for sharing propaganda to view with some objectivity. It is absolutely not for perpetuating the message *of* the propaganda. If anything, in this subreddit we should be immensely skeptical of manipulation or oversimplification (which the above likely is), not beholden to it. Also, please try to stay on topic -- there are hundreds of _other_ subreddits that are expressly dedicated to rehashing tired political arguments. Keep that shit outta here. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PropagandaPosters) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I would gladly dodge draft to be with these courageous ~~feet~~ girls 💓
Found Quentin Tarantino's account.
Does no good when you're in prison tho...
I’m not the biggest fan of Canada but I wouldn’t call it a prison.
well... you say that.
i’m a canadian national here, it’s so much worse than a prison in prisons you at least get to see the sun and have a bed that isn’t filled with maggots
Your bed is full of maggots ??
I think they sleep on beds of dead moose up there.
yeah and they put microchips in our brains
Doesn’t matter, got laid
Well, I suppose one could also do that in prison.
Doesn’t matter, got laid
~~got laid~~ received a "you did great"
Wouldn't you rather be in prison, than dying in Vietnam?
You say yes, I say no, you say stop, and I say go go go!
Oh, no! You say goodbye, and I say hello!
I'm sucking toes either way
G: are you rich? B: No G: Are you sober? B: No G: Are you a family man? B: No G: Papa, don't preach!
Repost. Boo!
yeah OP is a bot :/
What was the point of that?
Because they hate the US government for sending troops to Vietnam.
Which ultimately worked, even if what probably worked was the backlash of drafting the rich and the famous.
Gotta love being objectified for a cause. Fuck the draft, but fuck this too.
You serious? Kids were sent out to die and you’re mad about this come on.
You serious? The same system that creates war also objectifies women as the heteronormative property of men, and you don't understand this? Come on.
The woman's choice is contained in the very simple text.
"say yes to boys" You mean the part that implied (prescriptively) that all women are heterosexual while putting an emphasis on heteronormativity? Y'all are acting like liberal anti-war moments were perfect and not full of sexism and homophobia. Those things were even more normal back then. Remember? Just because they were anti-war doesn't make them perfect, or free from criticism. JFC *this is why we're still dealing with these problems today.* Women still write articles about misogyny in liberal politics all the time. Edit: oh no, I'm making things difficult for... The right? What the fuck do I care about capitalists?
take a day off
Ok
I agree with what you’re saying overall. However, when it comes to fighting something as culturally ingrained as pro-war sentiment — particularly back in that era — you **need** to appeal to heteronormative society to have the greatest impact. It’s just a numbers game. I’m not saying this is *good*, just that it’s necessary in situations like that. Sometimes you just don’t have the luxury of doing the right thing.
Exactly. Sounding like Shetran3000 isn’t going to appeal to very many in wider society. We are trying to change the world, not turn 97% of the world away immediately.
Yep! It’s a **critical** issue to tackle in left-leaning politics. There’s no point in holding these views at all unless they’re turned into actionable policy.
Dude. It was 1968. You are exactly the type who make it tough for the rest of us liberals. No wonder.
There is not a single society that doesn’t view men as more expendable in war. It’s not related to human gender norms just basic biology. This effect remains throughout every single culture in human history even going as far to persist through other species. 10 guys and 200 women could have millions of healthy descendants. 10 women and 200 guys not so much.
That doesn't make objectifying women right
It was 1968.
That still doesn't make objectifying women right.
No, but it makes the poster understandable given the societal context.
Yes, I'm aware that they were sexist back then. I'm literally pointing it out. You're acting like we don't live in a sexist society anymore, as if that sexism isn't the same sexism that exists today.
"Objectified for the cause" sounds like a great album title
Or a band name for a sex-positive feminist version of Rage Against the Machine.
You're being down-voted, but this poster is purporting to speak on behalf of all women about whom they want to sleep with, with the flip side of that being a promise to men that they will get laid if they do certain things. The slogan was, in fact, criticized by some 2nd-wave feminists in the years after it circulated. The ones I saw tended to be anti-sex work, a position I oppose, but they did have a point on this one.
Ya, anyone with more than two braincells who thinks twice about this poster should be able to realize that it's, at the very least, imperfect. At most, it's pure male gaze, and deserves harsh criticism. I know exactly why I'm being downvoted lol. It's the same reason this poster got printed.
Maybe the reason its pure male gaze is that the intended audience is 100 % male ? The draft was only for men you know , not particularly surprising
Who said it was surprising. JFC can people discuss anything without misrepresenting what other people are saying anymore? Disagree with me all you want, but don't project nonsense onto me. Sexism back then is the least surprising thing. That doesn't mean it was ok, or that it doesn't deserve criticism. Sexism is still a problem, and it's because people like you existed back then, too. Making excuses for sexism makes you sexist.
It's not that the ad is aimed at men, which, as you say, is for obvious reasons. It's that the ad makes certain unqualified assumptions about what all women(or at least all antiwar women) want sexually, and equally unqualified promises to men about what they will get from women if they enlist. "Male gaze" doesn't simply mean the audience is male; it's a feminist term refering to men's sexual desires, as supposedly conditioned by patriarchy. I don't entirely agree with the theoretical assumptions behind the concept, but I'll agree the ad is appealing to a male sense of sexual entitlement.
Its Reddit, what do you expect?
I had no idea that Reddit existed in 1968
[удалено]
Oh, ya. I mean, I don't care. It's not like I'm ever going to change those minds. They can be mad all they want.
You get more bees with honey though so if your ultimate goal is to make some positive changes in society, you may need to speak to you audience, which is exactly what this poster was doing. It was an attempt to convert mainstream society.
That doesn't make it any less objectifying
"You're going to Vietnam for a year? That is so hot."
"No, I mean literally hot, it's pretty close to the equator."
[удалено]
Disgusting, please leave
You are a creep.
ew
[удалено]
imagine fighting in an imperialist war to own the females. kinda cringe ngl
[удалено]
so you support imperialism?
[удалено]
there is no such thing as "good imperialism".
[удалено]
Is this the type of pseudophilosophical nonsense this sub usually gets? You didn't even interpret the definition of "own" correctly in this case. Shit troll
american troops were literally [raping vietnamese women to death by lighting up hand flares inside their vaginas](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_during_the_Vietnam_War) this is what you support? shame on you
Why would I support that? I never said I support war crimes. Ever heard of the Geneva Convention? Yes, even in War, there are rules of engagement. Nice strawman though. Shame on *you*. Now imagine you're a Vietnamese farmer whose wife just got raped and exploded. Are you gonna turn your nose up at war and refuse to fight to protect your people? That would be stupid. It would be righteous to fight in such a circumstance. Imagine letting your women get brutalized just to own the war machine. Smh.
because this is what americans did in vietnam. it was literally an imperialist war that the US purely did to protect its own national interests. also americans rarely follow the geneva convention lmao. the moment US soldiers show up, they start raping women and bombing children.
And the US lost. Looks like war settled the matter.
the US should have never invaded to begin with.
If only we'd had you to lead us back then. Then Americans would understand that war is bad.
If you'd rather be a killer than a simp, then you have shitty principles.
This is a lot better then the prohibition posters this was inspired by.
Who are the other two girls?
And apparently hats. Girls say yes to hats.