Or, it's a commercial telling men to behave better toward women and each other. What's the problwm with that?
I know I don't treat women improperly so I don't think pointing out to others to not do so is a bad thing, but hey, maybe some of you guys do.
I just think the right probably shouldn't act like it's a good idea to degrade or boycott a company that says that hurting others is a bad thing. The video/commercial in the OP cites stats to...I guess...point out that men aren't that bad because they have more dangerous jobs, die more in war, die more at the hands of others, get the shaft when it comes to child support, kill themselves at higher rates, are homeless at higher rates, and all those things are "the good in men". Um, what?
I guess Gillette could have cited stats that men beat each other up at higher rates, or that men commit more violence than women, or that sexual harassment is perpetrated moreso by men, and simply said that it's important that men have good role models but that would be a collectivist assumption. That all men are guilty of something, but the Gillette ad never did that. It never said masculinity as a whole is bad. It simply said to treat each other better to try and sell some ####ty razors and the right gets all bent out of shape as if that message is a bad thing.
If you (royal) feel like a razor commerical hits a little too close to home and that it's trying to make you out as an abuser, the commercial probably isn't the problem.
Oh is that how it works? People are just supposed to figure out what other people are thinking through, what, osmosis?