Are you upset by this Gillette ad? Is it an attack on men?

Harambe wrote:

Bib #1 wrote:

Somewhere in the bowels of corporate America some advertising / marketing executives are self contentedly clucking about having instigated “conversation” and visibility for the Gillette brand. We’re all just being used, as are the causes that are purportedly being supported

Having national ad campaigns about this stuff does make it seem more normal to people. This is longer lasting and more powerful (likely) than any backlash from troglodytes. Normalization will make these ideas commonplace for the next generation

Perhaps. I’m sure a good number share that view. I’m also certain that a fair number of people, if they had to sit through a commercial, would rather that they be entertained, made to laugh, have a lighthearted jingle engraved in their brain, or be educated, rather than be scolded, bashed on the head or be made to feel defensive. I fall in the latter camp.

LRC Idiots everywhere. wrote:

Commercial gain and social benefit are not mutually exclusive. We know this is an advertisement; that's not what is being discussed. You scored 0 "clever" points here. Try again.

Bib #1 wrote:

Somewhere in the bowels of corporate America some advertising / marketing executives are self contentedly clucking about having instigated “conversation” and visibility for the Gillette brand. We’re all just being used, as are the causes that are purportedly being supported

Not trying to be clever. Just saying what I think. Stop trying to bully me for what I think

Bgybuhhuhhy wrote:

According to Gillette, the vast majority of men are animals.

Lmao. Who could say this with a straight face after watching the ad. You would have to be looking to get butthurt for this to be your response.

No logic or facts displayed in above poster's rant.

Harambe wrote:

over-defensive person wrote:

Accusing all men of supporting rape and harassment is a pretty serious attack. Why shouldn't people be defensive?

Add in hyperbole and self-victimization that list. No reasonable person reads that from the video unless... they were looking to get offended!

Liberals used to be the best at acting outraged. Whiny conservatives have now surpassed them in only a few years. It's impressive.

The implication of the ad is that men (with the generous exception of "some") need to be convinced not to rape and harass by shaving commercials and Twitter campaigns, so yes, that is a reasonable interpretation.

Bib #1 wrote:

Perhaps. I’m sure a good number share that view. I’m also certain that a fair number of people, if they had to sit through a commercial, would rather that they be entertained, made to laugh, have a lighthearted jingle engraved in their brain, or be educated, rather than be scolded, bashed on the head or be made to feel defensive. I fall in the latter camp.

Just like advertising doesn't work by making you consciously decide to buy something, many social campaigns rely on normalization and repetition to effect change.

You can sit there and think "wow this is lame I am going to ignore the message" and still end up changing your behavior because of it. It's just advertising -- it works.

boys will be whiners

Can't Shave Anymore wrote:

Did you watch the video? Look closely at the guys BBQ'ing saying "boys will be boys" in their "ad". They absolutely are lumping ALL men together as BAD. The line of BBQers is the most offensive part of that ad for me.

I mean, yeah, Weinstein is bad. Cosby is bad. But every guy ISN"T like this. Most guys don't dismiss bad behaviour. Already.

I saw about 20 men. There are ~160 million men in America. I thought the overall message was clear -- we need to hold each other accountable and not give into bystander effect. A single scene out of context is a weak argument.

over-defensive person wrote:

The implication of the ad is that men (with the generous exception of "some") need to be convinced not to rape and harass by shaving commercials and Twitter campaigns, so yes, that is a reasonable interpretation.

Would you say most men would publicly call out a man catcalling women on the street? Would most men call out their boss for patronizing a women in a meeting? Or would you say... some....!!!

Hmmm.... When you put it in the context of the ad and don't submit to hyperbole (while discarding facts and logic)....

another ad idea wrote:

So when will the #MeToo movement get around to addressing the massive number of black men who impregnate women and then refuse to act as fathers? What company is going to release that ad, and will the liberal response be equally positive?

Let's not get off track from the critical message of grinding white male Trump-voting-climate-denying-red-meat-eating-pickup-truck-driving racists into the mud. Once they are crushed then maybe we can ask black dudes to pretty-please start acting a little more civilized, but only if they feel like it mmmkay?

Harambe wrote:

Bib #1 wrote:

Perhaps. I’m sure a good number share that view. I’m also certain that a fair number of people, if they had to sit through a commercial, would rather that they be entertained, made to laugh, have a lighthearted jingle engraved in their brain, or be educated, rather than be scolded, bashed on the head or be made to feel defensive. I fall in the latter camp.

Just like advertising doesn't work by making you consciously decide to buy something, many social campaigns rely on normalization and repetition to effect change.

You can sit there and think "wow this is lame I am going to ignore the message" and still end up changing your behavior because of it. It's just advertising -- it works.

I’m not a marketing guy, so I’ll take your lead. That said, there is a fine line between normalization/repetition and nagging/proselytizing.

Harambe wrote:

over-defensive person wrote:

The implication of the ad is that men (with the generous exception of "some") need to be convinced not to rape and harass by shaving commercials and Twitter campaigns, so yes, that is a reasonable interpretation.

Would you say most men would publicly call out a man catcalling women on the street? Would most men call out their boss for patronizing a women in a meeting? Or would you say... some....!!!

Hmmm.... When you put it in the context of the ad and don't submit to hyperbole (while discarding facts and logic)....

Stop the BS. Reminds of when this feminist did this:

Roberts by men, reporting there were 108 such instances. The behaviors included people saying "hello" or "good morning," comments on Roberts

Just saying, "hello, how are you?" is considered cat calling now?

Harambe wrote:

over-defensive person wrote:

The implication of the ad is that men (with the generous exception of "some") need to be convinced not to rape and harass by shaving commercials and Twitter campaigns, so yes, that is a reasonable interpretation.

Would you say most men would publicly call out a man catcalling women on the street? Would most men call out their boss for patronizing a women in a meeting? Or would you say... some....!!!

Hmmm.... When you put it in the context of the ad and don't submit to hyperbole (while discarding facts and logic)....

Many men wouldn't come to the help of a woman being beaten. Most men wouldn't call out another man for making sexual advances toward a woman in the workplace. These are facts

What I am wondering is whether we have now hit the tipping point (let's call it the Gillette moment), where advertisers will have to stop portraying men as stupid, sexist and ignorant and state that pretty much every woman (if given the chance) would be superior to pretty much all men. Or will this go even further? I can't wait to see the Super Bowl commercials. We may hit new heights. Advertisers will hit a limit at some point where the general population will say that's enough stereotyping (I have to believe).

Then again, maybe not...

GoatZenHeimer wrote:

The line in the ad, "some is not enough..." implies that the problem lies with "most" men. How is that a call for common decency? It's stereotyping. "Kettle, you're black."

I just can't wait for the Vagicil or Kotex ad showing a woman drowning her newborn in the sink, female highschool teacher sleeping with a male student, and a young hot chick marrying a fat rich slob with a feminine voiceover saying "some is not enough" and "we can do better".

Then we can watch all the women come out and say - "hey, what's so wrong with asking women to be good people?"

Except for the Progressive Flo commercials I've never been upset by a TV ad.

Is this considered toxic masculinity?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lXyVkUKEX5k

Here's a comment that keeps getting deleted below the ad video (along with most of the other top-voted for comments)

"I work for P&G, the company which owns Gillette. I have to tell you that this stuff goes all the way to the top. A VP said in a 100 person meeting that she will never promote a white man again. There was a diversity training I was forced to go to that put up 2 pictures, one of a white male team, and one of non-whites and we were asked "i know it's an obvious answer, but look at these 2 teams, which would you rather work with?" Then they hired a black intern right out of college,

he was decent but not great, and had his summer boss give him an offer letter. The salary was 15% higher than the manager who had worked for the company for 13 years. The manager quit 2 weeks later, the project they were working on fell apart. I’ve never been more miserable working anywhere in my life."

reminds me of this wrote:

Harambe wrote:

Would you say most men would publicly call out a man catcalling women on the street? Would most men call out their boss for patronizing a women in a meeting? Or would you say... some....!!!

Hmmm.... When you put it in the context of the ad and don't submit to hyperbole (while discarding facts and logic)....

Stop the BS. Reminds of when this feminist did this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10_Hours_of_Walking_in_NYC_as_a_Woman

Roberts by men, reporting there were 108 such instances. The behaviors included people saying "hello" or "good morning," comments on Roberts

Just saying, "hello, how are you?" is considered cat calling now?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1XGPvbWn0A

Happened to me last week, and I wish someone would have intervened.

Why are guys always assumed to be doing nothing wrong? This guy commented on me using my phone and when I ignored him, said to be he was ‘just trying to say hello’. Since he was drunk and creepy, I told him to leave me alone. He then started shouting ‘slut’ and ‘whore’ at me really loudly and followed me along the street doing so (until I shouted back at him, at which point he shouted more violent threats but stopped following me). I really wish other people would intervene in sitayatsituations like this. Sometimes it feels like the whole of society is condoning men’s behaviour in interpreting it as ‘just being friendly’ when of course to a woman, it is anything but. Threatening, domineering, annoying, anything g but friendly.

I’m not a club hostess, I don’t have to go around being friendly to random, possibly violent men. The men you end up dating do not approach you uninvited in the street.

You really need this explained to you?

aoxomoxoa wrote:

Flounder wrote:

Kind of disgusting considering that they own an NFL football team.

What team would that be?

My bad. I didn't know that Gillette had been bought by P&G. I figured that Gillette owned the team since they named the stadium where the Patriots play.