Gillette | Toxic masculinity advert.

hatrickpatrick

As an aside, I'm not buying this sh!te again. Been using fushion since I was 12, can anyone recommend a good alternative?

Tenderribs

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

As an aside, I'm not buying this sh!te again. Been using fushion since I was 12, can anyone recommend a good alternative?

For shaving gel I'd get Nivea for men, then for the razor try Wilkinson.

hatrickpatrick

Tenderribs wrote: »

For shaving gel I'd get Nivea for men, then for the razor try Wilkinson.

I'll give them a go, cheers!

El_Duderino 09

Tenderribs wrote: »

Are there usernames who say they will take action but don't?

Duno.
What a strange question. I didn’t mention people doing that.

Zorya

Haha the amount of times I have seen the phrase ''lather your own boll*x'' while scrolling here and chuckled helplessly has made this discussion worthwhile.

Silentcorner

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Just look at the state of people getting worked into a lather about this. A company selling a product publishes an ad with the intention of getting people talking. Woke, liberal, SJW, feminist, PC gone mad. Some poster even said P&G has been hostile to men for a long time! It's capitalism and it's job is to make money and it doesn't have morality or politics.

They know they're safe as houses because easily offended men will whinge and moan about how they're so oppressed, but will do nothing else. They're doing the company's job by getting on social media and sharing the ad. But there's almost no chance that they'll organise to do anything about it.

The same big brave bucks who will throw a tantrum on International Women's Day but can only raise a "meh" for International Men's Day, will be out whinging, bitching and moaning about this but won't DO anything beyond helping to share the ad.

Whether you like the ad or not, it was probably vastly more successful than they hoped.

Whether you agree or disagree with the thrust of the ad, it is very divisive.

This isn't a case of "all publicity is good publicity"....Imagine if Gillette has signed up Paddy Jackson or Stuart Olding for a new campaign last April...

Imagine a car manufacturer, who is trying to sell cars specifically to men, instead of showing them the car with a good looking man or woman driving through a good looking location they showed men honking horns and abusing other drivers and telling them to improve their behaviour!! How would that work out!!

Or if the Catholic Church, in bid to get new followers, showed pictures of abuse survivors and cover ups?

This has the potential to be a huge own goal (the upside gain would be fairly modest)...they sell to a market of men, who tend to be very brand loyal, they do not have a high quality product, they do however charge a high price...

This is as risky as f##k....and for what?

And by the way, if you are not freaked out by american companies directly telling us how to live our lives you are not in a position to be looking down at anyone!!

This ad is one dimentional and poorly executed, they have exposed themselves to accusations of racial bias...

They'll be studying this ad in years to come I feel!

jimgoose

It's a bit cheesy, a bit shit if I'm honest, but I don't see what all the on-line wailing and gnashing of teeth is about.

Plopsu

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Your questions were:
1 what should men do?
2 should men not talk about things that hey find objectionable?

I think I did answer those questions but I’ll do it again just to be sure.

1 what should men do?
“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.”

So I think that if they care about it, they should do something about it.

2 should men not talk about things that hey find objectionable?
I honk talking is grand. The difference between talking and whinging is not subtle but I’ll illustrate it for you.

When someone talks about how terrible things like this ad are, but then are apathetic or actively discourage men organising to highlight their issues, that’s whinging.

Chatting about an issue to highlight the issue encourage others to fix the problem, is constructive.

I wonder if whinging about hear things is just a hobby for some people.

I have seen nobody discourage anybody from organising anything on this thread. Can you give an example maybe?
I also believe (open to correction) that if this ad were complained about in this jurisdiction for it's portrayal of men that the complaint would be upheld. However, as far as I know the ad has not been shown here, so that avenue is out. I suppose there could be a letter writing campaign but (in case you haven't noticed) a lot people are already writing (like me right now) and I Have now doubt that it is being taken notice of by Gillette. There are already calls for a boycott. So what more organisation would you like? Because the fact is, according to your definition of whinging above, nobody here is whinging. They are demonstrably not apathetic just by the very fact that they're engaged in discussion and nobody is discouraging organisation.

Your quite right about women organising. I wonder if when they were at the talking about things stage of those organisation, if there were people jumping in to call them whingers too.

Plopsu

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I doubt there are any examples in this thread. Why would it come up in This thread?

So you were calling people whingers based on nothing?

El_Duderino 09

Silentcorner wrote: »

Whether you agree or disagree with the thrust of the ad, it is very divisive.

This isn't a case of "all publicity is good publicity"....Imagine if Gillette has signed up Paddy Jackson or Stuart Olding for a new campaign last April...

And by the way, if you are not freaked out by american companies directly telling us how to live our lives you are not in a position to be looking down at anyone!!

It’s divisive alright. But I really don’t look to advertisements to learn how to live my life. American company or otherwise, I figure out how to live my life based on my own deliberation. Ads for Gillette don’t factor into my moral philosophy.

greencap

conorhal wrote: »

Well we'll see, but If identity politics is such big business, then why are all the purveyors of this super woke ideology like Vox, Buzzfeed, Vice etc. all going broke after leaning hard into identity politics on the advice of their marketing strategists?
Could it be that normies don't actually care for the sort of identity politics that represents only a tiny, but very vocal minority of people on twitter, and thus marketing at those broke ass loosers is never a good strategy to capture market share?

Maybe because they are recent media outlets, and not a long term industry leader in a solid market, with a gigantic war chest.

hatrickpatrick

"Men in general aren't good enough and need to be better". That's the toxic message which is becoming widely endorsed in mainstream society. Male utilitarianism is a close second, IE "a man's worth is defined by his usefulness to others and not by his own standards or his own happiness".

I can't see how anyone can be honestly surprised that more and more men are getting utterly tired of being spoken to and spoken about in these terms just because they happened to be born with a bollocks.

TCM

ButtersSuki wrote:

Has Ciara Kelly approved this yet?

She's some dose.

Silentcorner

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

It’s divisive alright. But I really don’t look to advertisements to learn how to live my life. American company or otherwise, I figure out how to live my life based on my own deliberation. Ads for Gillette don’t factor into my moral philosophy.

Gotta love you ignorance, I'm willing to bet, advertising companies have been selling you products successfully all your life without you realising it...but that wasn't my point, my point was, they are now attempting to frame a moral structure that they believe we should all live by....that is bonkers!

VeryTerry

Shaving is for soyboys. What do you expect?

hatrickpatrick

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

"Men in general aren't good enough and need to be better". That's the toxic message which is becoming widely endorsed in mainstream society. Male utilitarianism is a close second, IE "a man's worth is defined by his usefulness to others and not by his own standards or his own happiness".

I can't see how anyone can be honestly surprised that more and more men are getting utterly tired of being spoken to and spoken about in these terms just because they happened to be born with a bollocks.

Nah, shut up, gender pay gap, etc.

El_Duderino 09

Plopsu wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I doubt there are any examples in this thread. Why would it come up in This thread?

So you were calling people whingers based on nothing?

I didn’t say you would find it in this thread which is why I thought your question was strange. I did mention somewhere you would find it though.

Hint. Try the IMD threads and the IWD threads. I feel pretty sure you won’t actually look up those threads but I might be wrong.

Rory28

VeryTerry wrote: »

Shaving is for soyboys. What do you expect?

What is a soyboy? I have seen the word being used a lot the last year but for the life of me I dont know what it means. At first I thought it was a dig at asian lads but that is not it.

Can you tell me VeryTerry?

Ficheall

Next Gillette ad:


* Man trying to slit another guy's throat with a generic razor - another man comes along and says "Don't do that!" and hands him a Gilette razor, which slits with ease, and everyone smiles, including the dead guy *


* Person tries to slit their wrists with a brand razor - Gilette man comes along and shows them how to do things properly *


* Wanna know how I got these scars? *

Hurrache

Rory28 wrote: »

The reaction you are seeing is not about the ad. Its the way we are supposed to just take it and if we say anything about we are "triggered" "snowflakes/broflakes" or as Seamus said, child abducting murderpaths.

LOL, are we supposed to just take it?

FFS, ignore it and move on with your life instead of being a wuss about it.

Tenderribs

Plopsu wrote: »

So you were calling people whingers based on nothing?

I suspect it is a case of pyschological projection. El Duderino has likely been accused of whinging in the past, he doesn't feel he can live up to masculine ideals which makes him feel inferior. His strategy is to attack masculinity. He accuses others of whinging in an attempt to make them feel how he has felt.

From wiki:

Psychological projection is a defence mechanism in which the human ego defends itself against unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others.[1] For example, a person who is habitually rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude. It incorporates blame shifting.

Plopsu

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I didn’t say you would find it in this thread which is why I thought your question was strange. I did mention somewhere you would find it though.

Hint. Try the IMD threads and the IWD threads. I feel pretty sure you won’t actually look up those threads but I might be wrong.

Actually, I read quite a bit of them when they were ongoing (could still be). My point was that they're not relevant to this thread and really seemed just an effort to drive the thread off topic (but I might be wrong too).

Rory28

Hurrache wrote: »

LOL, are we supposed to just take it?

FFS, ignore it and move on with your life instead of being a wuss about it.

Ya see right there. Because I questioned it I am a wuss. Less of a man so to speak. The ad does not concern me in the least. I havent been clean shaven in more than a decade but the msg is certainly annoying.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Rory28 wrote: »

What is a soyboy? I have seen the word being used a lot the last year but for the life of me I dont know what it means. At first I thought it was a dig at asian lads but that is not it.

Can you tell me VeryTerry?

Too much soy in the diet is said to lower testosterone levels in men. Don't know if that's true or not tbh.

Soyboy has become a derogatory term for effeminate weak men. One of these internet things.

El_Duderino 09

Silentcorner wrote: »

Gotta love you ignorance, I'm willing to bet, advertising companies have been selling you products successfully all your life without you realising it...but that wasn't my point, my point was, they are now attempting to frame a moral structure that they believe we should all live by....that is bonkers!

Do you mean the bit in the ad where the man steps in to help the boy being chased by a group? That stood out as a noble thing to do.


Do you really think ads are a big part of your own moral philosophy?

Rory28

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Too much soy in the diet is said to lower testosterone levels in men. Don't know if that's true or not tbh.

Soyboy has become a derogatory term for effeminate weak men. One of these internet things.

The opposite of the Alpha Male the incels and their ilk deify. This makes sense.

Thanks Deft.

Captain Obvious

Sorry for poor quality video but I was reminded of this joke.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYbQ3O1ebv8

How Soon Is Now

Ah nothing surprises me with what the media can get away with when comes to white men.

Has been going on long before the race / gender bull**** really took flight last few years!

Will I lose any sleep over it nope but do I like it hell no!

Gigantic double standards is my biggest issue with it.

Hurrache

Rory28 wrote: »

Ya see right there. Because I questioned it I am a wuss. Less of a man so to speak. The ad does not concern me in the least. I havent been clean shaven in more than a decade but the msg is certainly annoying.

So as you say it doesn't concern you in the least, but you wail that are 'we' supposed to take it? So it obviously does concern you at some level.

VeryTerry

Rory28 wrote: »

What is a soyboy? I have seen the word being used a lot the last year but for the life of me I dont know what it means. At first I thought it was a dig at asian lads but that is not it.

Can you tell me VeryTerry?

I believe it refers to vegans/vegetarians who consume a lot of soy. They are as a result lacking in protein and testosterone and thus can't grow a decent beard. Gillette need these lads to buy their products to shave the bum fluff off their liberal chins.

I'm having a laugh of course but this is what these broflakes think when they reference soyboys.