The flip side of the Gillette commercial
- Thread starter This_person
- Start date
This_person
Well-Known Member
The problem with that is that it strongly implies men don't already know this and do this. The long line of BBQ guys parroting "boys will be boys", then "some... is not enough", and "no going back....for the men of tomorrow" strongly implies that the plurality of men today are problematic.
It's beyond insulting and degrading.
We agree. I don't think that's what people are doing. They're not arguing against the idea of "hurting others is a bad thing", they're arguing against the idea that "telling men most of them are crap" is degrading.
That's not really what it said, though. I mean, just think about how it was worded - if you watch the whole 90+ second one. It's not saying to not be bad, it's saying "too many of you are being bad, and the future will be better when masculinity is not a 'thing' anymore."
Not at all. It didn't even come close to hitting home, but presumed that it did for the plurality of modern man. That's insulting and degrading and downright misandrous.
This_person
Well-Known Member
Shouldn't that, in and of itself, explain to you that your version/interpretation of the ad is inaccurate?
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
It's only insulting and degrading to people who can't simply watch an ad and not be all snowflake about it. For the record, I watched the full ad/short story and the bottom line is, don't be violent, don't harass, and don't be a dick. I don't see whatever underlying message or dig you all see, but I also refuse to be pissed off just to be pissed off, or because my media outlet tells me to.
No. This forum taught me that polls can't be trusted and are basically devil worship.
This_person
Well-Known Member
No one that I can tell is pissed off just to be pissed off. I'm not pissed off, I know that.
But, I can tell when the plurality of men are being insulted, and this ad did just that.
You get that out of what people say, but you can't see the ad isn't saying "don't be bad" but rather is saying "most of you are bad, and the few of you that are good need to hold the majority to account"?
Interesting.
LightRoasted
If I may ...
If I may ...
Chris 'ol boy is a neutered eunuch. Any manliness he may have had, lost to the ages. He is attempting to be academic about the issue because he has lost any sense of what being a man is all about. Instead of recognizing the ad for what it is, he tries to rationalize. A man that cannot defend himself, or his gender, cannot defend others.
Chris 'ol boy is a neutered eunuch. Any manliness he may have had, lost to the ages. He is attempting to be academic about the issue because he has lost any sense of what being a man is all about. Instead of recognizing the ad for what it is, he tries to rationalize. A man that cannot defend himself, or his gender, cannot defend others.
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
"Most of you are bad". You're right. I didn't hear that part. I also don't see what's wrong with the second part of your statemement. Should we not hold accountable people who are "bad"?
What do you feel being a man is about? Beating women? Beating each other? Dying at work? Dying at war?
Do you do nothing but ask questions?
We realize you dont get it. Quit embarrassing yourself.
This_person
Well-Known Member
Sure, if you think you should tell people how to act, yeah. If I see someone hurting a defenseless person, I'm likely to act. Other than that, I think people have the right to be #######s.
Take Trump, "you can grab 'em, and they let you" comment. I've heard men say that. I am not friends with those men. If I were friends with those men, I stopped the second that sentence came out of their mouth. But, unless I see the guy grab some defenseless girl, I'm not going to tell them how to act because they're not my child.
But, the thrust of the message the majority of us heard is "most of you are bad".
I could not possibly write into a forum what I feel being a man is about. But, I can assure you, it's (a) not telling other men how to live their life (bar the "defenseless victim" part), and (b) not about treating women in what I feel is an improper way, (c) not what the ad depicts the average men to be.
Why do more men die at work? We take the riskier jobs, because they pay better and society still holds the male more responsible than the female for providing an income to the home, so we do it for a better income.
Why do more men die at war? Because, we have legislated that more males must be in the military than females by drastic margins, and only in the most recent of years allowed women to even fight - because even if our political leadership is female, we don't expect women to physically protect us in war in anywhere near the way we expect men to do so.
Why are more men homeless? Because there are women's shelters and Women/Infant/Children, but far fewer men's shelters and programs like WIC were not designed for men in distress.
Why do you think more women are victims of sexual harassment? Because, even when men are victims they are laughed at for acting like victims.
The ad in the OP notices good things about men, which is the reality of the vast majority of men. The Gillette ad strongly implies the worst of men is the norm of men.
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
It's a forum for discussion. People ask questions during discussions. If it bothers you, don't chime in when someone asks a question. Asking questions allows a person (me) to understand the thought process behind someone's stance on a subject. In these times of hyper-partisan tribal politics, I can understand you not wanting questions being asked, but it's certainly not a bad thing to be curious and ask questions.
Seems simple enough and I can assure you....I'm not embarassed about anything.
Look, I understand why things are the way they are. Why those stats are true. I don't recognize the idea that men are more likely to die at work, kill themselves, die at war, be homeless, etc. is pointing out "good things about men".
Did you see the watch commercial that highlights the good in men? It sends the same message in a positive way. The Gillette commercial is virtue signaling and presuming that men suck and need to be re-educated; the watch commercial praises men who behave in a socially beneficial way.
The Gillette commercial was clearly written by someone who hates men and thinks they're bad; the watch commercial was written in praise of men.
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
Yes. I watched both. Multiple times.
The watch commercial showed video clips of men and showed stats on how men die more and the Gillette commercial asked men not to be violent and sexually harass women.....and that's a bad thing according to you folks.
I don't think it's a bad thing and if you believe it's a left-wing position to not beat women, or be violent, or harass women, or whatever men not to do, then perhaps a look in the mirror is warranted. Or maybe a second look into why you're upset in the first place because it's certainly not as "clear" as you make it out to be.
I'm not upset. You're projecting that for whatever reason. I am scoffing and mocking, but not upset. In fact I don't think about it at all unless someone brings it up, which happens in my real life zero times.
And it is clear, you just want to pretend that it's not - again, for whatever reason.
Man-hating IS a leftwing ideology. "Men are all evil rapists" IS a Democrat talking point. Probably because so many high-profile Democrat men *are* evil rapists and predators, or sexually deviant in some way. Harvey Weinstein and all those Hollywood guys accused of sexual assault and rape? The folks who closed their eyes to child rape and applauded Roman Polanski? Yeah, those people are not Republicans.
kom526
They call me ... Sarcasmo
I have a confession to make. I am evil incarnate.
Hetero, conservative, Catholic, married male. My kids believe that there are two sexes and that marriage is between a man and a woman. I let my boys physically fight each other. I correct them in front of their peers when needed and I teach them manners and how to comport themselves in public. I have taught them to respect others and to not take shiat from others.
Thank you but I do not need Gillette to tell me to be better. Being a better man is a helluva lot more than the trivialized emasculated version that society wants you to be.
Hetero, conservative, Catholic, married male. My kids believe that there are two sexes and that marriage is between a man and a woman. I let my boys physically fight each other. I correct them in front of their peers when needed and I teach them manners and how to comport themselves in public. I have taught them to respect others and to not take shiat from others.
Thank you but I do not need Gillette to tell me to be better. Being a better man is a helluva lot more than the trivialized emasculated version that society wants you to be.
Hijinx
Well-Known Member
Amen, Good Post
And that's kind of what I took it for, before I turned it off and ignored it.
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
New commercial just came out
Yooper
Up. Identified. Lase. Fire. On the way.
In response to the back & forth here, I want to ask why can't a company just sell me a razor (or watch or whatever) w/o getting into all of this? What I want from an ad is info about the product: how much does it cost, how well does it do its job, etc.
But that makes me a dinosaur, I guess. Because it seems that people have clearly bought into "everything (ad, sporting event, etc.) needs a story" instead of the item (ad, sporting event, etc.) standing on its own.
Why are these entities doing this? I think it's pretty straight-forward: AS A RULE women like the emotional side of things rather than the thing itself. So an ad has to appeal emotionally, sports leagues show all the "And what are you like when you're not on the playing field? Sensitive? Love to paint? What?" things that I care not a whit about.
Okay, Yoop, but you still haven't really answered the question, "why?"
Well, here's why: women hold the purse strings these days in more respects than just controlling the man's take-home pay. More women are working, more women are making more, etc. Women, as a bloc, control most of the (discretionary) cash these days. (I am NOT saying this is a bad thing or a good thing; just that it's true).
As such, women are the most formidable consumer bloc and businesses would be idiotic not to respond to this fact.
But I think the business response is generally terrible: harmful not only to men, but also to women in its pandering to what I think is what these businesses think they see "out there" rather than what is actually out there. (We see this "echo chamber"/group think all the time with ads/stories supporting only women who have generally liberal/Left social/ideological positions and diminishing women who hold conservative/Right positions by writing them off as dumb or kowtowed or stupidly religious, etc. The recent case of Jaelene Hinklecomes to mind (see, below).)
thefederalist.com
Which brings me back full circle to where I kicked off (but this time just singling out Gillette). Gillette does itself no favors by alienating a still sizable consumer group (men) and by fluffing women by endorsing obviously unhealthy life choices (its recent female pro-obesity tweet).
Bottom line, makes me wonder if Gillette actually has a decent product to sell if everything it says these days has nothing to do with its products.
Ironically, that approach also insults women; an implicit claim that women are too stupid to know a good product from a bad one because they're too focused on the emotional appeal of the irrelevant story. So what appears as a pro-feminist (blah, blah, blah) campaign by Gillette and others is actually an insult.
Something I think real women understand.
--- End of line (MCP)
But that makes me a dinosaur, I guess. Because it seems that people have clearly bought into "everything (ad, sporting event, etc.) needs a story" instead of the item (ad, sporting event, etc.) standing on its own.
Why are these entities doing this? I think it's pretty straight-forward: AS A RULE women like the emotional side of things rather than the thing itself. So an ad has to appeal emotionally, sports leagues show all the "And what are you like when you're not on the playing field? Sensitive? Love to paint? What?" things that I care not a whit about.
Okay, Yoop, but you still haven't really answered the question, "why?"
Well, here's why: women hold the purse strings these days in more respects than just controlling the man's take-home pay. More women are working, more women are making more, etc. Women, as a bloc, control most of the (discretionary) cash these days. (I am NOT saying this is a bad thing or a good thing; just that it's true).
As such, women are the most formidable consumer bloc and businesses would be idiotic not to respond to this fact.
But I think the business response is generally terrible: harmful not only to men, but also to women in its pandering to what I think is what these businesses think they see "out there" rather than what is actually out there. (We see this "echo chamber"/group think all the time with ads/stories supporting only women who have generally liberal/Left social/ideological positions and diminishing women who hold conservative/Right positions by writing them off as dumb or kowtowed or stupidly religious, etc. The recent case of Jaelene Hinklecomes to mind (see, below).)
Soccer Star Megan Rapinoe Uses Soccer To Push Her Politics
One player sacrificed a once-in-a-lifetime privilege due to her convictions, while the other insists on using that same privilege to demand conformity.
thefederalist.com
Which brings me back full circle to where I kicked off (but this time just singling out Gillette). Gillette does itself no favors by alienating a still sizable consumer group (men) and by fluffing women by endorsing obviously unhealthy life choices (its recent female pro-obesity tweet).
Bottom line, makes me wonder if Gillette actually has a decent product to sell if everything it says these days has nothing to do with its products.
Ironically, that approach also insults women; an implicit claim that women are too stupid to know a good product from a bad one because they're too focused on the emotional appeal of the irrelevant story. So what appears as a pro-feminist (blah, blah, blah) campaign by Gillette and others is actually an insult.
Something I think real women understand.
--- End of line (MCP)