Gillette | Toxic masculinity advert.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

meeeeh wrote: »

I'm a woman and I have very little patience for men feeling hard done by me too or similar but I still don't like the ad.

It's lazy and preachy and it adds very little to anything. It reminds me of one of the Kardashians and Pepsi making protesters and antiriot police friends.

Yep, that’s the one I referenced! That’s exactly why that Pepsi ad tanked, because it was patronising. And if there’s one thing grown adults universally hate, it’s being patronised and lectured. It didn’t help that the face of the Pepsi ad was a cosseted little madam who’d run screaming at even a hint of a protest.

GLaDOS

It's a cringy ad, clumsily executed, but I wouldn't get excited about it one way or another.

0cp71eyxkb94qf

seamus wrote: »

Look up the meaning of the phrase "one step removed".

Toxic masculinity exists on a spectrum. In much the same way that religious extremism ("toxic religiosity"?) exists on a spectrum.

When you try to defend or legitimise behaviours at the less extreme end of the spectrum, you provide a cover behind which the more extreme (read: violent) individuals can hide.

But neither you or the usual gaggle of offended men who are thanking eachothers' posts, can see the wood for the trees on this. You're too busy being outraged that a company would make an ad which tries to encourage people to be better humans.

There's only one person on a spectrum here...

Wibbs

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I think it exists but the meaning of the term has been warped by fanatics. Feckin' Twitter and the incessant hunt for retweets and likes certainly doesn't help.

The bigger concern is that larger agencies like the WHO and national psychiatric boards are stating "toxic masculinity" is akin to an "illness". Apparently being stoic, "overly" self reliant, competitive, dominant are all bad for you and lead to serious mental illnesses like depression all the way up to suicide. They seem to miss the part that in the past and in present gender polarised societies where conservative masculinity is the culture in play the rates of those are less.

MichaelM93l wrote: »

This ad got all your knickers in a twist lads? Relax you're just proving how toxic masculinity can be, there are real problems happening in the world right now, focus on them.

The irony of it. You do realise that anti feminists say the exact same thing to western feminists complaining about western issues and suggest they go to Saudi Arabia and be feminist there?

seamus wrote: »

Look up the meaning of the phrase "one step removed".

Toxic masculinity exists on a spectrum. In much the same way that religious extremism ("toxic religiosity"?) exists on a spectrum.

When you try to defend or legitimise behaviours at the less extreme end of the spectrum, you provide a cover behind which the more extreme (read: violent) individuals can hide.

OK. So an ordinary but very devout Muslim guy praying in a mosque is "one step removed" from a suicide bomber on jihad who listens to and reads the same religious texts? Am I doing it right? You'd foam at the mouth if someone suggested that. Rightfully as it would be moronic.

Nope, sorry, I'll stick with my original assessment that you over revved the oul brain and went Full Retard(tm)

Plopsu

seamus wrote: »

You can misrepresent all you like, but you'll still be wrong.

Anyone who thinks the psychopaths aren't online and looking at all the usual anti-feminist haunts, and using the content therein to legitimise their beliefs and become radicalised, are deluding themselves.

Anyone who seriously believes the narrative that there's a "war on men" is helping to radicalise these nutjobs every time they say it.

One step removed.

So, just so we're all clear, your new direction is that anybody expressing a dislike of this ad is encouraging future child rapists? :pac::pac::pac::pac::pac:
Two sharks. I never thought you'd make it.

Gravelly

seamus wrote: »

You can misrepresent all you like, but you'll still be wrong.

Anyone who thinks the psychopaths aren't online and looking at all the usual anti-feminist haunts, and using the content therein to legitimise their beliefs and become radicalised, are deluding themselves.

Anyone who seriously believes the narrative that there's a "war on men" is helping to radicalise these nutjobs every time they say it.

One step removed.

Psychopaths are being "radicalised" by people not liking a razor ad?

:D:D:D

I didn't think you could, but you've just outdone your earlier "people who don't like a razor ad are paedos" comment.

BTW, is a radicalised psychopath worse than an unradicalised one?

Tenderribs

seamus wrote: »

You can misrepresent all you like, but you'll still be wrong.

Anyone who thinks the psychopaths aren't online and looking at all the usual anti-feminist haunts, and using the content therein to legitimise their beliefs and become radicalised, are deluding themselves.

Anyone who seriously believes the narrative that there's a "war on men" is helping to radicalise these nutjobs every time they say it.

One step removed.

I'd say there are plenty of pyschopaths who call themselves feminists, not sure why you focus on anti feminists.

ahnowbrowncow

seamus wrote: »

Look up the meaning of the phrase "one step removed".

Toxic masculinity exists on a spectrum. In much the same way that religious extremism ("toxic religiosity"?) exists on a spectrum.

When you try to defend or legitimise behaviours at the less extreme end of the spectrum, you provide a cover behind which the more extreme (read: violent) individuals can hide.

But neither you or the usual gaggle of offended men who are thanking eachothers' posts, can see the wood for the trees on this. You're too busy being outraged that a company would make an ad which tries to encourage people to be better humans.

You seem to be the most triggered person on this thread.

You haven't made a point without an insult or a ridiculous comparison.

No one is defending or legitimising bad behaviour, they are stating their dislike for a patronising ad that is attempting to get individual men take responsibility for other men's bad behaviour.

Woke Hogan

Anyone who feels strongly by this commercial has been hoodwinked by snake oil salesmen. Whether you're male or female, Gillette only see you as a big pile of money and they hate you.

El_Duderino 09

Plopsu wrote: »

Lather me b*llix. People are objecting to a stereotypical portrayal of men in the ad. And, big surprise, they're snowflakes, foaming in a lather etc. What would you suggest they do? They could complain to advertising standards I suppose (though I don't think the ad's been shown here). Beyond that, what?
And, just so I'm clear, you appear to be saying that if men find something objectionable, they shouldn't talk about it??

Lather your own b*llix.

Are they objecting to the men at the end of the ad who don't simply go along with the chorus and act assertively to do the right thing, acting as a role model for the boys watching? Or are they objecting to the fact that all men aren't at all times portrayed as saints and models with six packs and a ferrair?

What would I suggest they do? Actually do something beyond simply helping Gillette with its advertising campaign while crying into their iPad about how the world is so hard on them.

Women organised and now their concerns are taken seriously at all levels. Whether you agree with those concerns or not, the way to have concerns taken seriously is to organise. It's a safe bet that these big brave keyboard warriors will do absolutely nothing in the real world.

The International Men's Day and International Women's Day serve to demonstrate the point beautifully. On IMD a few men take it seriously as a way to raise awareness of men's issues. Some men couldn't give a toss and some are openly hostile towards it. Some posters only raise a "meh" for IMD.

But the day when IMD gets most traffic on twitter is in IWD! The clever bucks who only "meh" IMD are out in full force feeling sorry for themselves because IWD is so much bigger than IMD.

Gillette can rely on those men to give them lots of free publicity but never do anything else.

Irish Guitarist

When I was in school I was minding my own business between classes when a girl gave me an unmerciful kick right between the arse cheeks. It was excruciatingly painful as well as highly embarrassing.

There are plenty of girls who act like this because they know boys have been hearing "don't hit girls" for their entire lives. A lad knows if he hits another lad he's risking getting a punch in the face back. A girl is more likely to get away with it.

There's no ad campaigns telling women to teach their daughters to respect men though. Instead every ad for a womans product tells women how great they are. "Because you're worth it".

Plopsu

Wibbs wrote: »

The bigger concern is that larger agencies like the WHO and national psychiatric boards are stating "toxic masculinity" is akin to an "illness". Apparently being stoic, "overly" self reliant, competitive, dominant are all bad for you and lead to serious mental illnesses like depression all the way up to suicide.

Yes bottling things up is bad for you. Apparently, though, speaking about things you find objectionable, makes you a whinging snowflake one step from child rape. :rolleyes:

0cp71eyxkb94qf

Topathemornin wrote: »

There's only one person on a spectrum here...

TIL you can call people child rapists but get infracted for writing this. Boards is as fair as usual.

Standman

seamus wrote: »

That's because there is no problem.

Just a group of people whose entire sense of identity is based on "manliness" and who foam at the mouth whenever anyone would dare to question whether traditional notions of manliness such as "boys will be boys" are actually a reasonable way to raise children who can be functional members of society that treat everyone else with respect.

Realistically the people who get worked up about this so-called "attack on men" are only one step removed from the same psychopath who kidnapped that 13 year old girl and kept her trapped for months.

You tell 'em, seamus.

That ad is dead right, we men should help each other do better, we should care for each other and put a stop to the toxicity.

And if any men don't like it, those triggered murderous psychopaths can fuck right off!

Tenderribs

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Lather your own b*llix.

Are they objecting to the men at the end of the ad who don't simply go along with the chorus and act assertively to do the right thing, acting as a role model for the boys watching? Or are they objecting to the fact that all men aren't at all times portrayed as saints and models with six packs and a ferrair?

What would I suggest they do? Actually do something beyond simply helping Gillette with its advertising campaign while crying into their iPad about how the world is so hard on them.

Women organised and now their concerns are taken seriously at all levels. Whether you agree with those concerns or not, the way to have concerns taken seriously is to organise. It's a safe bet that these big brave keyboard warriors will do absolutely nothing in the real world.

The International Men's Day and International Women's Day serve to demonstrate the point beautifully. On IMD a few men take it seriously as a way to raise awareness of men's issues. Some men couldn't give a toss and some are openly hostile towards it. Some posters only raise a "meh" for IMD.

But the day when IMD gets most traffic on twitter is in IWD! The clever bucks who only "meh" IMD are out in full force feeling sorry for themselves because IWD is so much bigger than IMD.

Gillette can rely on those men to give them lots of free publicity but never do anything else.

Do you realise it's perfectly possible to criticise feminism without "crying into an ipad"?

One can see the hypocricies and discuss them for no other reason than having an interesting debate.

conorhal

Tenderribs wrote: »

I'd say there are plenty of pyschopaths who call themselves feminists, not sure why you focus on anti feminists.

It's usually as soon as a person describes themselves as a 'male feminist ally' that I tend to quietly start the countdown on how long I think it's gonna take for their sanctimony to crash and burn into a #metoo accusation....

El_Duderino 09

Topathemornin wrote: »

How ironic. A man that spends his life defending Louise O'Neill and every ridiculous notion she has is calling anyone who disagrees with an ad "moaning" "bitching" etc. Pathetic.

I rarely defend anything she says. I'm immensely amused by the hyperbolix used to criticise her in the LON appreciation thread.

Bit off topic for this thread though, wouldn't you say?

lawred2

Irish Guitarist wrote: »

When I was in school I was minding my own business between classes when a girl gave me an unmerciful kick right between the arse cheeks. It was excruciatingly painful as well as highly embarrassing.

There are plenty of girls who act like this because they know boys have been hearing "don't hit girls" for their entire lives. A lad knows if he hits another lad he's risking getting a punch in the face back. A girl is more likely to get away with it.

There's no ad campaigns telling women to teach their daughters to respect men though. Instead every ad for a womans product tells women how great they are. "Because you're worth it".

Isn't it so unfair! You should be free to cave her face in

Cienciano

TCM wrote: »

It's not so long ago that Gillette were using serial cheater Tiger Woods and another football cheat Therry Henry to sell their products. Hypocrites.

Hypocrites? No, it's an ad to sell razors. They're razor salesmen, that's it.
They'll change it completely tomorrow and apologise if they think they'll sell more razors.

Irish Guitarist

lawred2 wrote: »

Isn't it so unfair! You should be free to cave her face in

Okay. I rarely use this smilie but :rolleyes:

Plopsu

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Lather your own b*llix.

Are they objecting to the men at the end of the ad who don't simply go along with the chorus and act assertively to do the right thing, acting as a role model for the boys watching? Or are they objecting to the fact that all men aren't at all times portrayed as saints and models with six packs and a ferrair?

What would I suggest they do? Actually do something beyond simply helping Gillette with its advertising campaign while crying into their iPad about how the world is so hard on them.

Women organised and now their concerns are taken seriously at all levels. Whether you agree with those concerns or not, the way to have concerns taken seriously is to organise. It's a safe bet that these big brave keyboard warriors will do absolutely nothing in the real world.

The International Men's Day and International Women's Day serve to demonstrate the point beautifully. On IMD a few men take it seriously as a way to raise awareness of men's issues. Some men couldn't give a toss and some are openly hostile towards it. Some posters only raise a "meh" for IMD.

But the day when IMD gets most traffic on twitter is in IWD! The clever bucks who only "meh" IMD are out in full force feeling sorry for themselves because IWD is so much bigger than IMD.

Gillette can rely on those men to give them lots of free publicity but never do anything else.

That's quite the tirade of non-answer, there. IMD is not what's being discussed here, so how about you stop trying to derail and answer the questions.
What I find objectionable is secondary to the fact that you're basically saying finding anything wrong with anything in the ad is whinging (which is just another way of saying men should shut up). You really find nothing objectionable in the portrayal of entire group of men standing watching two children beat the snot out of each other? Really? If you watch the ad, you'll notice that that line seems to extend indefinitely, like it represented all men and not just a small subset. And you don't find that objectionable? Really?

So, again, are you saying if men find something objectionable, they should just stoically say nothing?

rm75

Clever marketing this. Gets the insecure bedwetters commenting and at the same time the "right on woke" crowd also comment. Big money in identity politics these days, nice monetisation by P&G. Push the product, get people talking, well done to the marketing team.

RocketRaccoon

Can someone simplify this for me?

What's the issue with this ad?

rm75

RocketRaccoon wrote: »

Can someone simplify this for me?

What's the issue with this ad?

Some people are complaining its anti men and others are celebrating that fact.

At the end of the day it's successful ,so nothing else matters.

Cartroubles

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Lather your own b*llix.

Are they objecting to the men at the end of the ad who don't simply go along with the chorus and act assertively to do the right thing, acting as a role model for the boys watching? Or are they objecting to the fact that all men aren't at all times portrayed as saints and models with six packs and a ferrair?

What would I suggest they do? Actually do something beyond simply helping Gillette with its advertising campaign while crying into their iPad about how the world is so hard on them.

Women organised and now their concerns are taken seriously at all levels. Whether you agree with those concerns or not, the way to have concerns taken seriously is to organise. It's a safe bet that these big brave keyboard warriors will do absolutely nothing in the real world.

The International Men's Day and International Women's Day serve to demonstrate the point beautifully. On IMD a few men take it seriously as a way to raise awareness of men's issues. Some men couldn't give a toss and some are openly hostile towards it. Some posters only raise a "meh" for IMD.

But the day when IMD gets most traffic on twitter is in IWD! The clever bucks who only "meh" IMD are out in full force feeling sorry for themselves because IWD is so much bigger than IMD.

Gillette can rely on those men to give them lots of free publicity but never do anything else.

One of your comments on the Louise O Neill thread was that you didn't intervene in a rape you witnessed at a party you were at. You're the type of person the ad is talking about.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

In those few years I saw some incredible things. Lads tagging each other in and out on drunk women

When challenged by a poster you go on to say it's not your job to intervene as you're not the police. Hypocrisy at it's most tragic .

Tenderribs

rm75 wrote: »

Some people are complaining its anti men and others are celebrating that fact.

At the end of the day it's successful ,so nothing else matters.

Well we don't know if it's successful yet, come back in a year and see what sales are like.

Plopsu

rm75 wrote: »

Clever marketing this. Gets the insecure bedwetters commenting and at the same time the "right on woke" crowd also comment. Big money in identity politics these days, nice monetisation by P&G. Push the product, get people talking, well done to the marketing team.

Can't quite tell from your post but which one are you? :pac:

Bannasidhe

Gravelly wrote: »

You don't come across as a raving lunatic at all :eek:

Yeah, cos I'm getting my tighty whiteys in a twist about an ad... oh wait...

That's not what I'm doing at all.
I'm laughing like a raving lunatic at all the broflakes whose masculinity is being threatened by an ad.

AN AD.

lawred2

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Lather your own b*llix.

Are they objecting to the men at the end of the ad who don't simply go along with the chorus and act assertively to do the right thing, acting as a role model for the boys watching? Or are they objecting to the fact that all men aren't at all times portrayed as saints and models with six packs and a ferrair?

What would I suggest they do? Actually do something beyond simply helping Gillette with its advertising campaign while crying into their iPad about how the world is so hard on them.

Women organised and now their concerns are taken seriously at all levels. Whether you agree with those concerns or not, the way to have concerns taken seriously is to organise. It's a safe bet that these big brave keyboard warriors will do absolutely nothing in the real world.

The International Men's Day and International Women's Day serve to demonstrate the point beautifully. On IMD a few men take it seriously as a way to raise awareness of men's issues. Some men couldn't give a toss and some are openly hostile towards it. Some posters only raise a "meh" for IMD.

But the day when IMD gets most traffic on twitter is in IWD! The clever bucks who only "meh" IMD are out in full force feeling sorry for themselves because IWD is so much bigger than IMD.

Gillette can rely on those men to give them lots of free publicity but never do anything else.

I gave the ad a 'meh'

I don't know when IMD is or when IWD is...

Church on Tuesday

The continued eroding of masculinity. That was a pretty sad watch.