<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Marriage for Sale</title>
	<atom:link href="http://stilettorevolt.com/2009/08/marriage-for-sale/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://stilettorevolt.com/2009/08/marriage-for-sale/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Jun 2010 04:48:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Morgan Elizabeth</title>
		<link>http://stilettorevolt.com/2009/08/marriage-for-sale/comment-page-1/#comment-408</link>
		<dc:creator>Morgan Elizabeth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 22:53:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stilettorevolt.com/?p=1482#comment-408</guid>
		<description>We&#039;re just having fun with over-the-top ad campaigns. It&#039;s all hyperbolic satire, not meant to be a perfect scholarly assessment.

Also, re: the Vegas ad - it doesn&#039;t say that was the interpretation of the ad. It&#039;s just a comment on Vegas in general.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We&#8217;re just having fun with over-the-top ad campaigns. It&#8217;s all hyperbolic satire, not meant to be a perfect scholarly assessment.</p>
<p>Also, re: the Vegas ad &#8211; it doesn&#8217;t say that was the interpretation of the ad. It&#8217;s just a comment on Vegas in general.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jodi</title>
		<link>http://stilettorevolt.com/2009/08/marriage-for-sale/comment-page-1/#comment-407</link>
		<dc:creator>Jodi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 22:26:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stilettorevolt.com/?p=1482#comment-407</guid>
		<description>LOL chill out &quot;Happily Unmarried&quot;! Everyone knows Vegas is a sleazy place, and movies make fun of drive-thru Elvis weddings all the time. I don&#039;t see anything wrong with poking fun at the most UN-romantic place on earth. Don&#039;t let it ruin your day!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>LOL chill out &#8220;Happily Unmarried&#8221;! Everyone knows Vegas is a sleazy place, and movies make fun of drive-thru Elvis weddings all the time. I don&#8217;t see anything wrong with poking fun at the most UN-romantic place on earth. Don&#8217;t let it ruin your day!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Happily Unmarried</title>
		<link>http://stilettorevolt.com/2009/08/marriage-for-sale/comment-page-1/#comment-404</link>
		<dc:creator>Happily Unmarried</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 19:59:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stilettorevolt.com/?p=1482#comment-404</guid>
		<description>Ok, marriage is an archaic institution that perpetuates stereotypical gender roles and the idea  that the wedding day is the climax of a woman&#039;s life (perpetuated by almost every Disney movie, to mention just one source of cultural influence) causes a huge amount of psychological distress in women everywhere. Of course I could go on, but.... the commentary here is really reaching sometimes to find fault with these adds. So, that Vegas add you say the meaning is &quot;preserving the sanctity of marriage, one drunken hook-up at a time&quot;? Huh? It looks to me like a married couple making out? Do you consider a honeymoon a drunken hookup? As if it&#039;s hard to legitimately criticize advertising these days. When you make these claims as to the messages of these adds, you are discrediting what could have been a valid and insightful look into the twisted messages of contemporary advertising.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ok, marriage is an archaic institution that perpetuates stereotypical gender roles and the idea  that the wedding day is the climax of a woman&#8217;s life (perpetuated by almost every Disney movie, to mention just one source of cultural influence) causes a huge amount of psychological distress in women everywhere. Of course I could go on, but&#8230;. the commentary here is really reaching sometimes to find fault with these adds. So, that Vegas add you say the meaning is &#8220;preserving the sanctity of marriage, one drunken hook-up at a time&#8221;? Huh? It looks to me like a married couple making out? Do you consider a honeymoon a drunken hookup? As if it&#8217;s hard to legitimately criticize advertising these days. When you make these claims as to the messages of these adds, you are discrediting what could have been a valid and insightful look into the twisted messages of contemporary advertising.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Schatz</title>
		<link>http://stilettorevolt.com/2009/08/marriage-for-sale/comment-page-1/#comment-398</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Schatz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 16:31:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stilettorevolt.com/?p=1482#comment-398</guid>
		<description>I agree with Morgan!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with Morgan!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Morgan Elizabeth</title>
		<link>http://stilettorevolt.com/2009/08/marriage-for-sale/comment-page-1/#comment-397</link>
		<dc:creator>Morgan Elizabeth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 15:43:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stilettorevolt.com/?p=1482#comment-397</guid>
		<description>Maybe it feels like an overstatement, but the pervasive anti-male imagery in advertising is hard to ignore, and it perpetuates the clash and inequality between genders. 

Husbands in particular are targeted as useless idiots, but if women were portrayed that way, the ads would be called sexist. Check out http://current.com/items/90569059_sarah-haskins-in-target-women-doofy-husbands.htm</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe it feels like an overstatement, but the pervasive anti-male imagery in advertising is hard to ignore, and it perpetuates the clash and inequality between genders. </p>
<p>Husbands in particular are targeted as useless idiots, but if women were portrayed that way, the ads would be called sexist. Check out <a href="http://current.com/items/90569059_sarah-haskins-in-target-women-doofy-husbands.htm" rel="nofollow">http://current.com/items/90569059_sarah-haskins-in-target-women-doofy-husbands.htm</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan Hohensee, Genius</title>
		<link>http://stilettorevolt.com/2009/08/marriage-for-sale/comment-page-1/#comment-396</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Hohensee, Genius</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 14:54:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stilettorevolt.com/?p=1482#comment-396</guid>
		<description>&quot;Surely divorces cause both people stress and headaches. So this ad could alienate 50% of divorcees by implying he’s the only one in the wrong. It might work better as a split-screen ad, with ExHusband and ExWife side by side.&quot;
Are you serious?  Don&#039;t you think you are being a tad over-sensitive?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Surely divorces cause both people stress and headaches. So this ad could alienate 50% of divorcees by implying he’s the only one in the wrong. It might work better as a split-screen ad, with ExHusband and ExWife side by side.&#8221;<br />
Are you serious?  Don&#8217;t you think you are being a tad over-sensitive?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
