What does it mean to be a man?

Sometimes an advertising campaign is so completely and utterly on trend, so obvious in its attempts to capitalise on the zeitgeist, that to ignore it would be remiss. And so it is with the latest Dockers campaign from the US, one which is worth taking a closer look at. In South Africa, we’ve just been through the annual 16 days of activism campaign, and questions about the role of men in society apply just as much to us as they do to the chino-wearing masses of America.

“Wear the pants”, the new Dockers campaign challenges us. I’ll reproduce some of the copy from the “man-ifesto” (groan) here so that you don’t have to go to the trouble of reading it in the ad:

“Once upon a time, men wore the pants and wore them well. Women rarely had to open doors and little old ladies never had to cross the street alone. Men took charge because that’s what they did. But somewhere along the way the world decided it no longer needed men. Disco by disco, latte by foamy non-fat latte, men were stripped of their khakis and left stranded on the road between boyhood and androgyny. But today there are questions our genderless society has no answers for. The world sits idly by as cities crumble, children misbehave and those little old ladies remain on one side of the street. For the first time since bad guys, we need heroes. We need grown ups. We need men to put down the plastic fork, step away from the salad bar, and untie the world from the tracks of complacency. It’s time to get your hands dirty. It’s time to answer the call of manhood. It’s time to wear the pants.”

The global VP of marketing for Dockers, a woman named Jennifer Sey, explains the rationale behind the campaign:

“The intent of the campaign is to put forth a new definition of masculinity, one that embraces strength and sensitivity and appeals to men who can change a tire AND a diaper. We’re not trying to shame men. We want to make them laugh at themselves and at the state of manhood. And, at the same time, encourage them to dress up, man-up and embody today’s new definition of masculinity.”

Wearing my marketer’s hat, I could argue that the campaign shows nice art direction, a logical link to the product (one key difference between jeans — Dockers is owned by Levi Strauss — and chinos: women wear jeans, but never chinos) and is well-integrated across channels. There’s a Facebook group, a Twitter account, and plans to flight TV ads during next year’s Superbowl. And yes, it might well prove popular. In the eternal debate about whether advertising leads society or reflects it, this is clearly a campaign that reflects much of the discourse around masculine identity over the past couple of years. If anything, this campaign is too obvious, too on trend. It’s not as if questions around masculinity haven’t been around since the 90s.

Putting on a different cap though, that of an academic and critical discourse analyst, my take on it is somewhat different. What exactly does it mean to “wear the pants”, for one thing? Why is it necessary for men to “wear the pants”? “Wear the pants” is an expression that remains in common use despite the supposed antiquity of its origins. This source claims it has its origins in the 1500s; another (possibly more reliable) traces its beginnings back to 1931.

When we look at a heterosexual couple and say, “She wears the pants in that relationship”, there’s a mutual understanding of what that means: that the man is somewhat henpecked, and the woman has emasculated him. Pants are such an obvious marker of gender (which is why, when David Beckham wore a sarong, it caused so much excitement). There’s a distinct air of judgment, that gender roles are not being expressed as they should be, in the natural order of things.

That Dockers should find it necessary to challenge men to wear the pants is evidence, partly, of the inherent tendency of advertisers to resort to glib generalisations: essentially, creativity by focus group. “[S]omewhere along the way the world decided it no longer needed men” claims the ad. To support this argument, the copy offers the following observation: “Disco by disco, latte by foamy non-fat latte, men were stripped of their khakis and left stranded on the road between boyhood and androgyny”. Men have been emasculated by music, fashion and coffee. (For some reason, the latte has become shorthand for everything that okes hate: trendy, effete, foreign).

So men are positioned, yet again, as unwilling victims of change, bereft of identity in a world that prizes ambiguity. Ultimately, this campaign is as bland and unremarkable as Dockers themselves, which is why it is perfectly on strategy and will do a great job for the brand.

And I love it. I’ll tell you why.

I love it because it’s a beautiful demonstration of the fact that men are just as vulnerable as women to being screwed over by the ubiquitous marketing machine (of which I am a member, and for which nobody will take responsibility, because we are all merely cogs in a gigantic and ceaselessly turning wheel). As women are promised salvation in the form of cosmetics, clothes — or soap with one-quarter moisturiser, a la Dove, so men are invited to reclaim a spurious and contingent form of identity at the behest of a brand. We’ve made so much progress haven’t we?

Pants, as the Australians would say.