Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Gillette | Toxic masculinity advert.

Options
1…34689…64

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    lbc2019
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,291 ✭✭✭lbc2019


    cgcsb wrote: »
    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    When the double standards regarding women's sexuality are applied to men perhaps you'll have an argument.

    To be fair women's sexuality is policed by other women. If not by nuns then by modern 'feminists'.

    Fecking Nuns!


  • Options
    #153
    lbc2019
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,291 ✭✭✭lbc2019


    freshpopcorn wrote: »
    lbc2019 wrote: »
    Yep, and women face that the whole time. Some men seem to think that they know what the women really means when she says no.

    It's just something I find interesting. I know a good few people who got together because they struck up conversation on the street and it was generally the man that approached the woman similar to how they'd approach somebody in a club/bar and try and talk to them.
    I just wonder if you've an issue with somebody in the street trying to connect with you. Shouldn't you also have the same issue with them doing it in a pub/club?
    Is it a thing people want made illegal?

    I don’t want it made illegal - people should be able take social ques, you smile at at person, they smile back, sure go say hello.

    Don’t just lunge in front of the first hottie you see on the street


  • Options
    #154
    lbc2019
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,291 ✭✭✭lbc2019


    I don’t know anyone that got together on the street, but I don’t need an anicdote to justify my behaviour


  • Options
    #155
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,607 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Deleted User wrote: »
    for turning down sex

    Said no man ever. JK :D


  • Options
    #156
    Jude13
    Registered Users Posts: 3,814 ✭✭✭Jude13


    Men bad, women good. White men very bad. Paying for the sins of other in a different era on a different continent.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    lbc2019
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,291 ✭✭✭lbc2019


    CanyonCreek75 wrote: »
    Some people find it easier to approach during the day as it can be difficult to have a conversation in some venues with loud music.

    Some people don’t want to be approached during the day. Smile, if they smile back, say hello


  • Options
    #158
    lbc2019
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,291 ✭✭✭lbc2019


    Jude13 wrote: »
    Men bad, women good. White men very bad. Paying for the sins of other in a different era on a different continent.

    Poor white man


  • Options
    #159
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Plopsu wrote: »
    PUA nonsense? Like negging? Like they're doing in the ad? Come on you can do better. You barely made it over that shark (I think you actually connected with the dorsal fin).
    Deleted User wrote: »
    Not really, your posting is idiotic. It's more of the same with-me-or-you're-a-horrible-person ****. I'm a leftie, I'm guessing I probably went on 4chan at some point when I was a teenager, haven't seen redpill stuff other than to laugh at it and yeah, I don't get as much action as I would like. But I think this ad is bull**** so I'm right next to those guys who are right next to a double-murderer and kidnapper. Absolutely retarded posting altogether.
    Wibbs wrote: »
    That's up there in the brilliant logic stakes with video game violence makes men more violent. Hand wringing nonsense. Insert reverend Lovejoy's wife meme here.
    Such sensitivity!

    Who'd have thought that pointing out the link between toxic masculinity and violence would be met with such anger?


  • Options
    #160
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    cgcsb wrote: »
    To be fair women's sexuality is policed by other women. If not by nuns then by modern 'feminists'.

    It's policed by society, men as still legends , women sluts for the same on night stand . The use of tinder seems to be changing that however.


  • Options
    #161
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,607 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    lbc2019 wrote: »
    Yes but you don’t allow a third party to interrupt the 2nd party- can you understand what you wrote yourself???

    It's not up to me to 'allow' anything. I'd think it inappropriate to interrupt someone trying to speak to another person about something that was not their business, between people they don't know. Regardless of the gender or the nature of the conversation.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #162
    Ush1
    Registered Users Posts: 11,474 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    lbc2019 wrote: »
    Some people don’t want to be approached during the day. Smile, if they smile back, say hello

    ...then instantly whip it out! Amirite guys?


  • Options
    #163
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    Ush1 wrote: »
    ...then instantly whip it out! Amirite guys?

    So you've moved from out and out sexism to sexual harassment jokes.


    Yet some people think there isn't a problem.


  • Options
    #164
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,607 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    lbc2019 wrote: »
    Some people don’t want to be approached during the day. Smile, if they smile back, say hello

    I listen to music, and say no if they start talking to me. I don't need a mob of idealogues preventing people from speaking to me.


  • Options
    #165
    0cp71eyxkb94qf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 198 ✭✭0cp71eyxkb94qf


    seamus wrote: »
    Such sensitivity!

    Who'd have thought that pointing out the link between toxic masculinity and violence would be met with such anger?

    You need help.


  • Options
    #166
    lbc2019
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,291 ✭✭✭lbc2019


    cgcsb wrote: »
    lbc2019 wrote: »
    Yes but you don’t allow a third party to interrupt the 2nd party- can you understand what you wrote yourself???

    It's not up to me to 'allow' anything. I'd think it inappropriate to interrupt someone trying to speak to another person about something that was not their business, between people they don't know. Regardless of the gender or the nature of the conversation.

    But the second is allowed interrupt the first???


  • Options
    #167
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,607 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    lbc2019 wrote: »
    I don’t know anyone that got together on the street, but I don’t need an anicdote to justify my behaviour

    So you should prevent it happening in the future to the best of your ability.


  • Options
    #168
    littlevillage
    Registered Users Posts: 3,052 ✭✭✭littlevillage


    More men growing beards in the last decade has destroyed Gillette razor sales..... so the not soo subtle sub-text in this adverts is

    Men with beards = Bad men
    Men clean shaven = Good men


    Lets get this trending on Twitter and see if there is a sheepish re-edit of this propaganda advert.

    https://twitter.com/hashtag/BoycottGillette?src=hash


  • Options
    #169
    lbc2019
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,291 ✭✭✭lbc2019


    cgcsb wrote: »
    lbc2019 wrote: »
    Some people don’t want to be approached during the day. Smile, if they smile back, say hello

    I listen to music, and say no if they start talking to me. I don't need a mob of idealogues preventing people from speaking to me.

    Great - imagine if someone pulled out your headphones...


  • Options
    #170
    lbc2019
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,291 ✭✭✭lbc2019


    CanyonCreek75 wrote: »
    lbc2019 wrote: »
    I don’t know anyone that got together on the street, but I don’t need an anicdote to justify my behaviour

    Do you think there is something wrong with talking and/or flirting with people in the street?

    If people can do it properly and read signals and both are consensual to it- I’ve no issue


  • Options
    #171
    lbc2019
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,291 ✭✭✭lbc2019


    CanyonCreek75 wrote: »
    lbc2019 wrote: »
    Some people don’t want to be approached during the day. Smile, if they smile back, say hello

    Some people don't want to be approached in a nightclub, pub etc. so should people never approach?

    I’ve told you what I think is ok? Which bit don’t you get?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #172
    Babooshka
    Registered Users Posts: 1,142 ✭✭✭Babooshka


    Meursault wrote: »
    Gillette know what they are doing. The fact of the matter is most household purchases for food items, toiletries, etc are made by women and this ad is directed at them mostly.

    For whatever reason, ads that make fun of or belittle men seem to work well with women.

    Add to that, the cynical jumping on the metoo bandwagon for commercial gain, and you can see why Gilette came up with this sh*t.

    By the way, these comments like "men are very easily offended at the slightest criticism of their gender", or men need to "grow a pair" or whatever is nonsense. If an ad like this was made about women, there would be uproar, and everyone knows it.

    I am happy enough with allowing people to offend each other. People are a bit precious these days. But the fact of the matter is that its really only okay to offend one obvious demographic in particular. Criticism and offending any other demographic is not socially acceptable any more.

    Why are you interpreting the ad as just about men, and putting men down? Sure, it's a product for men and the slogan has "men" in it, but the ad is about how we treat each other as a species. Women and men have a part in that and the ad is merely pointing out that old fashioned ideas about men being manly are a load of b*llox and they're ripping apart an older ad that they pushed on the market in the first place - so they are doing an autopsy on their own marketing strategies and trying to offer a better marketing angle.


  • Options
    #173
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,607 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    It's policed by society, men as still legends , women sluts for the same on night stand . The use of tinder seems to be changing that however.

    Perhaps but I think women are by far the biggest enforcers of those rules. I was in the canteen in work the other day and one woman was showing another photos of a party and she quite openly pointed at a photo and said, 'Is that her, the slut? you'd know by the look of her'. I just have never heard men say similar, perhaps I keep quite polite male company. I've seen men in similar situations say that a certain woman was sexy, and be complimentary, but slut shaming seems to be a majority female pursuit.


  • Options
    #174
    Fr_Dougal
    Registered Users Posts: 9,166 ✭✭✭Fr_Dougal


    seamus wrote: »
    Such sensitivity!

    Who'd have thought that pointing out the link between toxic masculinity and violence would be met with such anger?

    You need to step away from the computer, Seamus.


  • Options
    #175
    Plopsu
    Registered Users Posts: 671 ✭✭✭Plopsu


    seamus wrote: »
    Such sensitivity!

    Who'd have thought that pointing out the link between toxic masculinity and violence would be met with such anger?

    There's no anger in what you quoted, just well deserved ridicule.


  • Options
    #176
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,607 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Ush1 wrote: »
    ...then instantly whip it out! Amirite guys?

    I actually laughed out loud. :pac:


  • Options
    #177
    freshpopcorn
    Registered Users Posts: 30,603 ✭✭✭✭freshpopcorn


    lbc2019 wrote: »
    I don’t want it made illegal - people should be able take social ques, you smile at at person, they smile back, sure go say hello.

    Don’t just lunge in front of the first hottie you see on the street
    lbc2019 wrote: »
    Some people don’t want to be approached during the day. Smile, if they smile back, say hello

    I often smile and say hello to people and it's not an invitation to chat me up!


  • Options
    #178
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,607 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    lbc2019 wrote: »
    But the second is allowed interrupt the first???

    It is 'allowed' I would find it inappropriate though for the most part and at the same time recognise my utter lack of business interfering in such a situation.


  • Options
    #179
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,607 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    lbc2019 wrote: »
    Great - imagine if someone pulled out your headphones...

    happened a friend of mine by a female charity worker, he told her in no uncertain terms that she was a cheeky cow and she ought to fu(k off.


  • Options
    #180
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,611 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    seamus wrote: »
    Such sensitivity!

    Who'd have thought that pointing out the link between toxic masculinity and violence would be met with such anger?
    Pathetic stuff and to be expected from you.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #181
    cgcsb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,607 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    lbc2019 wrote: »
    If people can do it properly and read signals and both are consensual to it- I’ve no issue

    Read the signs? that's not very sensitive to men on the aspergers spectrum. Anyway you're going well beyond the realm of your business if you tell strangers how to read body language.


Advertisement