Gilette Advert

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, ozleicester said:

its like saying " im sorry your friend is dead".. im not apologising, im genuinely sorry.

Well you don't need to apologise for that either. He played fast and loose with the laws of physics and has no one to blame but himself really. 

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

https://spectator.us/open-letter-gillette-godfrey-elfwick/

[MC Prussian]

Directed by a woman with a track record of feminist propaganda.

@ozleicester: From your neck of the woods, btw.

Edited 20 January 2019 by MC Prussian

[urban.spaceman]

24 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

Directed by a women with a track record of feminist propaganda.

@ozleicester: From your neck of the woods, btw.

1 Timothy 2:12  12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man;[a] she must be quiet.   Sorry sweetheart but you can't argue with the Lord.

[ozleicester]

[MC Prussian]

@ozleicester:

 

I'm sorry, but since when are there different types of "masculinity"? Who defines different types or these "variations" of "masculinity"? That's all subjective!

 

In general and by definition, masculinity is 

The properties characteristic of the male sex 

The trait of behaving in ways considered typical for men

 

Traits traditionally viewed as masculine in Western society include strength, courage, independence, violence,^[5] and assertiveness.

 

"Toxic masculinity" is bullcrap, a new term coined by leftists (feminists mostly). You cannot put all men or all typical male behaviour into the same pot, thus making general assumptions about half of the population. That's populist. And somewhat condescending.

 

Also quite revealing how Proctor & Gamble, Gillette's parent company see it all and what their motivations are:

 

This is not about the Zeitgeist or the cause, it's superficial claptrap in order to boost sales.

Most interesting part starts with LL Cool J's question at approx 07:06.

Edited 26 January 2019 by MC Prussian

[orangecity23]

Obviously there is some stereotypical "masculine" behaviour that can be described as toxic, but I don't like the phrase itself. The only time we ever hear the word "masculinity" these days is almost always preceded by "Toxic", and once it's repeated enough, then there will be a natural word association - as soon as anyone says "Masculine", the first thought people will have is "Toxic". You wouldn't catch the media using the phrase "Muslim Terrorists" every time they reported on Al-Quaida or ISIS - they would make sure to refer to the groups by name, to avoid the kind of negative stereotyping that would follow, possibly inciting racism and prejudice against Muslims. I can't see why such behaviour can't just be referred to as "Sexist Behaviour".

 

Which comes back to the ad - it's patronising. "Some" men are doing the right thing - the implication that the majority aren't. The implication that men would happily stand by and lets kids kick the shit out of each other, like they have no clue how to do any parenting at all. A cynic would say that it is remarkable that Gillette have discovered their deep lying commitment to fighting sexism when they've recently received lots of bad publicity from feminists for over pricing Lady Razors, by charging loads extra for pink Venus razors that are almost identical to the male products.

[leicsmac]

6 hours ago, orangecity23 said:

Obviously there is some stereotypical "masculine" behaviour that can be described as toxic, but I don't like the phrase itself. The only time we ever hear the word "masculinity" these days is almost always preceded by "Toxic", and once it's repeated enough, then there will be a natural word association - as soon as anyone says "Masculine", the first thought people will have is "Toxic". You wouldn't catch the media using the phrase "Muslim Terrorists" every time they reported on Al-Quaida or ISIS - they would make sure to refer to the groups by name, to avoid the kind of negative stereotyping that would follow, possibly inciting racism and prejudice against Muslims. I can't see why such behaviour can't just be referred to as "Sexist Behaviour".

 

Which comes back to the ad - it's patronising. "Some" men are doing the right thing - the implication that the majority aren't. The implication that men would happily stand by and lets kids kick the shit out of each other, like they have no clue how to do any parenting at all. A cynic would say that it is remarkable that Gillette have discovered their deep lying commitment to fighting sexism when they've recently received lots of bad publicity from feminists for over pricing Lady Razors, by charging loads extra for pink Venus razors that are almost identical to the male products.

As mentioned earlier, I think the cynics would be right. A company like Gillette or any other are about the bottom line first, last and always and as such they wouldn't have made a move like this without getting some sound advice that same bottom line wasn't going to take damage.

 

However...for all that, that doesn't change that what was said in the ad needed to be said.

 

It's most definitely not all or even most men, and the ad shouldn't imply that. However, it is enough men. Enough that most women have a cautionary anecdote to tell about it. And that needs to change. Unfortunately, the blokes referred to here probably aren't going to listen to an ad as they already know what they do is scummy and simply don't care because Might Makes Right.

[Carl the Llama]

On 27/01/2019 at 00:54, leicsmac said:

As mentioned earlier, I think the cynics would be right. A company like Gillette or any other are about the bottom line first, last and always and as such they wouldn't have made a move like this without getting some sound advice that same bottom line wasn't going to take damage.

 

However...for all that, that doesn't change that what was said in the ad needed to be said.

 

It's most definitely not all or even most men, and the ad shouldn't imply that. However, it is enough men. Enough that most women have a cautionary anecdote to tell about it. And that needs to change. Unfortunately, the blokes referred to here probably aren't going to listen to an ad as they already know what they do is scummy and simply don't care because Might Makes Right.

So why did what was said in the ad need saying if most men are fine and the people who specifically needed to hear it won't listen anyway?

[leicsmac]

3 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

So why did what was said in the ad need saying if most men are fine and the people who specifically needed to hear it won't listen anyway?

Tbf you've got me there, other than the other side of the "probably" being that some of the above blokes might, just might, listen and as such it's (about) better than doing nothing.

[Finnegan]

56 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Tbf you've got me there, other than the other side of the "probably" being that some of the above blokes might, just might, listen and as such it's (about) better than doing nothing.

 

Well no, it's an advert is the reason. End of the day, let's not kid ourselves, the idea was brand awareness and they certainly got attention.

 

There's been a growth in indie shaving brands recently advertised, Gillette know they can't compete with these for either quality of value. 

 

So they do this, it's clever marketing but it still is marketing. Regardless of whether or not the message is a good one, regardless of whether or not any executives at Gillette believe in it, they did it to sell razors. They don't actually care if it brings about social change, they're just jumping on a popular social media bandwagon. 

 

It reminds me of the Reebok Terry Tate adverts years ago. Reebok as a brand can't compete with Nike and Adidas toe to toe so just having some generic advert showing their products does nothing. But making a mini The Office style mockumentary series to show around the NFL playoffs? Smart. 

Edited 28 January 2019 by Finnegan

[leicsmac]

20 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

Well no, it's an advert is the reason. End of the day, let's not kid ourselves, the idea was brand awareness and they certainly got attention.

 

There's been a growth in indie shaving brands recently advertised, Gillette know they can't compete with these for either quality of value. 

 

So they do this, it's clever marketing but it still is marketing. Regardless of whether or not the message is a good one, regardless of whether or not any executives at Gillette believe in it, they did it to sell razors. They don't actually care if it brings about social change, they're just jumping on a popular social media bandwagon. 

 

It reminds me of the Reebok Terry Tate adverts years ago. Reebok as a brand can't compete with Nike and Adidas toe to toe so just having some generic advert showing their products does nothing. But making a mini The Office style mockumentary series to show around the NFL playoffs? Smart. 

Well yeah, I said above that Gillette wouldn't even have thought of doing this if it didn't have a positive effect on the bottom line and what you've said about the particular marketing strategy here is most likely accurate.

 

I just think that, like the Nike Kap ad, perhaps there might also be more positive social effects than if the ads were not showed at all.

[Finnegan]

19 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Well yeah, I said above that Gillette wouldn't even have thought of doing this if it didn't have a positive effect on the bottom line and what you've said about the particular marketing strategy here is most likely accurate.

 

I just think that, like the Nike Kap ad, perhaps there might also be more positive social effects than if the ads were not showed at all.

 

Well we're talking about, thinking about it. Can't hurt. 

 

The delicate little egos who saw the advert and got offended are probably beyond hope, if some absolute ****ing unit like Terry Crews breaking down over abuse doesn't make you think, a cheesy razor advert certainly won't. 

 

Sod em, ignorant people are always going to be ignorant. What do you do when your ninety year old great uncle cracks a racist joke? You sigh and shrug it off. What's the point in lecturing him? He doesn't give a toss. 

 

Social change is a generational thing, kids are more impressionable than adults and as more and more adverts, celebrities, "social media influencers" (God I hate that phrase and the fact they exist), sports stars and whoever else push an increasingly egalitarian message, more and more kids will be brought up listening to it. 

 

The world becomes more socially liberal with every generation and with a few notable exceptions ("woke" hippy parents railroading little kids in to sex reassignment because they're so preoccupied with gender roles can go to the noose) I don't think that's particularly a bad thing but it doesn't happen overnight. 

[lgfualol]

Can't believe this advert got people so riled up. What snowflakes.

[MC Prussian]

Sales for all Proctor & Gamble products are up - except for Gillette:

https://www.barrons.com/articles/gillette-procter-gamble-earnings-51556117984

 

Serves them right.

[Guest MattP]

38 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

Sales for all Proctor & Gamble products are up - except for Gillette:

https://www.barrons.com/articles/gillette-procter-gamble-earnings-51556117984

 

Serves them right.

I thought about this the other day and forgot to look up what it had done to sales.

 

I actually ended up switching from them after this as well, not because I was offended by the ridiculous advert but it did make me Google other shaving offers out of curiosity and I've gone with DSC now - fantastic btw and far cheaper.

 

Well done Gilette - who would have thought people don't like being lectured?