Gillette ad on toxic masculinity... have you seen it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DH here: I thought it was lame, insulting, and will backfire. Whatever market research says about who does the shopping, I find it very hard to believe men don’t have or express preferences about shaving items, which are reasonably personal, and I suspect this is going to hurt Gillette more than it helps. Woke Capital is tiresome and is due a comeuppance. We shall see, the reaction will be interesting.

What about it did you find insulting? Genuinely? To me it seemed very pro man, just pro good man.

How would you react to an ad for a product predominantly used by females with base line message that women have to break the toxic feminist culture and become good women? It just shows how poorly all men are thought of by our society. The baseline being men are bad because they are men.

I actually like that it addressed the issue while still selling a very positive view of masculinity. Interesting that we viewed it so differently. I think fighting toxic masculinity needs a big branding makeover. It's important but we can't kill a generation of men's self esteem to get there or we'll have a bunch of creepy MRA losers.

When you label advocates for men's rights as "creepy", you're perpetuating the very problem you say you want to cure.

Just sayin'

Do you believe the population who currently identifies as 'men's rights advocates' are men you want to have your sons model their behavior on? There are absolutely types of feminists that I don't want my daughter to emulate. The current crop of 'men's rights advocates' focus on where men are held back, they do not teach how to be good men. They teach that women have stolen things from them and that they are entitled to sex from women. That movement is, in fact, creepy.

If you want men's rights advocacy to look more like teaching men how to be good, strong, respectful but still masculine then you have a LONGGGGGG way to go.

I'm not sure.

The only thing I ever hear about Mens Right Advocacy is from a very few angry sounding women who are constatnly harping about it. Beyond that, I know literally nothing about it. But I'm certainly not going to form an opinion of it based on what you alone say, because frankly, you sound a little crazy and angry.

https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/reddit-red-pill/
https://www.reddit.com/r/asktrp/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Peterson#Gender_relations_and_masculinity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men%27s_rights_movement
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incel

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems like there are one or to posters who are obsessed with calling out or identifying "MRA" language or postings, or attitudes.

It's weird. Very stalker-ish.

You are what Gillette is fighting. I support that for sure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like there are one or to posters who are obsessed with calling out or identifying "MRA" language or postings, or attitudes.

It's weird. Very stalker-ish.

You are what Gillette is fighting. I support that for sure.

+1000

[Anonymous]

I was meh on the commercial initially but the weird and entitled MRA responses in this thread and others I've seen elsewhere online have turned me pro-Gilette.

[Anonymous]

How would progressives feel if there were a women’s products as that reminds women that 1 in 3 women have abortions , literally killing their own child, vast majority is for convenience and women have to do better and not kill their own offspring . You’d be outraged demanding firings and boycotts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's very good. And imo it's the way we should culturally start talking about boys in general.

The problem with the phrase 'toxic masculinity' is that it can so easily be construed as 'masculinity is toxic'. We need to preserve the good in masculinity. Show them how to be strong good men.

I personally am amazed at the kids programming on nick and Disney, how prolific the 'strong smart girl's protagonist is versus a boy. A boy is either an anthropomorphized animal or object (Mickey, blaze etc) or Ryder. We have done a fantastic job getting feminist messaging into children's ears. We need to do the same thing for boys.

Huh. This is all about perspective, I guess. Because I watch Paw Patrol with my daughter and think - where the hell are the girls? Why are all but one (two if you count Everest) of the "save the day" pups boys? Why is Mayor Goodwin such a numb-skull?
And Minnie and Daisy are annoying damsels in distress most of the time, having to call on Toodles and Mickey for help. Hell even Goofy is more competent than them.
I do give huge kudos to Odd Squad, there are strong girls and boys on that.
But for most of children's programming, just count the sheer number of boy characters vs. girl characters (of all species). It's pretty stark.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's very good. And imo it's the way we should culturally start talking about boys in general.

The problem with the phrase 'toxic masculinity' is that it can so easily be construed as 'masculinity is toxic'. We need to preserve the good in masculinity. Show them how to be strong good men.

I personally am amazed at the kids programming on nick and Disney, how prolific the 'strong smart girl's protagonist is versus a boy. A boy is either an anthropomorphized animal or object (Mickey, blaze etc) or Ryder. We have done a fantastic job getting feminist messaging into children's ears. We need to do the same thing for boys.

Huh. This is all about perspective, I guess. Because I watch Paw Patrol with my daughter and think - where the hell are the girls? Why are all but one (two if you count Everest) of the "save the day" pups boys? Why is Mayor Goodwin such a numb-skull?
And Minnie and Daisy are annoying damsels in distress most of the time, having to call on Toodles and Mickey for help. Hell even Goofy is more competent than them.
I do give huge kudos to Odd Squad, there are strong girls and boys on that.
But for most of children's programming, just count the sheer number of boy characters vs. girl characters (of all species). It's pretty stark.

If you watch Paw Patrol then you are watching it between:

Paw Patrol (strong male lead, some token female characters)
Abby Hatcher (strong active female lead)
Bubble Guppies (good mix, neutral)
Nella the Princess Knight (strong female lead, saves the day with some token boys)
Shimmer and Shine (girl show with three lead female characters, 100% sparkles)
Max and Ruby (nuetral)
Team Umizoomi (I think nuetral we don't watch this much)
Blaze (boy show, anthropomorphized cars)
Top Wing (boy show, but anthropomorphized birds)
Butterbeans Cafe (seems like a girls show but we haven't watched it)
Sunny Day (total girls show, although I think too appearance focused)
Peppa Pig (strong female lead but generally balanced)

That is double the programming on Nick Jr targeted at girls to boys. Yes Paw Patrol skews male but honestly I'm ok with that, because they are outnumbered 6 to 3 on Nick. I think Humdinger is as much of an idiot as Goodway, I frequently wonder what the local government was like in the town that the creator of that show grew up in.

I will STRONGLY disagree with you that Goofy is portrayed as more competent then Minnie and Daisy. We actually frequently comment on how they seem by and large to be the most competent but their interests and clothing are pretty stereotypical/retro agreed. Goofy and Donald are def the weak links in that crew though. Minnie runs a business!

I think you should actually count up male v female characters in preschool kids programming. It definitely skews girls.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I'm not sure.

The only thing I ever hear about Mens Right Advocacy is from a very few angry sounding women who are constatnly harping about it. Beyond that, I know literally nothing about it. But I'm certainly not going to form an opinion of it based on what you alone say, because frankly, you sound a little crazy and angry.

The MRA movement started out with legit issues, like how courts used to treated fathers unfairly in custody cases. I think you may be the only one on the internet who hasn’t ever read about them. The info is out there, if you’re so inclined.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's very good. And imo it's the way we should culturally start talking about boys in general.

The problem with the phrase 'toxic masculinity' is that it can so easily be construed as 'masculinity is toxic'. We need to preserve the good in masculinity. Show them how to be strong good men.

I personally am amazed at the kids programming on nick and Disney, how prolific the 'strong smart girl's protagonist is versus a boy. A boy is either an anthropomorphized animal or object (Mickey, blaze etc) or Ryder. We have done a fantastic job getting feminist messaging into children's ears. We need to do the same thing for boys.

Huh. This is all about perspective, I guess. Because I watch Paw Patrol with my daughter and think - where the hell are the girls? Why are all but one (two if you count Everest) of the "save the day" pups boys? Why is Mayor Goodwin such a numb-skull?
And Minnie and Daisy are annoying damsels in distress most of the time, having to call on Toodles and Mickey for help. Hell even Goofy is more competent than them.
I do give huge kudos to Odd Squad, there are strong girls and boys on that.
But for most of children's programming, just count the sheer number of boy characters vs. girl characters (of all species). It's pretty stark.

If you watch Paw Patrol then you are watching it between:

Paw Patrol (strong male lead, some token female characters)
Abby Hatcher (strong active female lead)
Bubble Guppies (good mix, neutral)
Nella the Princess Knight (strong female lead, saves the day with some token boys)
Shimmer and Shine (girl show with three lead female characters, 100% sparkles)
Max and Ruby (nuetral)
Team Umizoomi (I think nuetral we don't watch this much)
Blaze (boy show, anthropomorphized cars)
Top Wing (boy show, but anthropomorphized birds)
Butterbeans Cafe (seems like a girls show but we haven't watched it)
Sunny Day (total girls show, although I think too appearance focused)
Peppa Pig (strong female lead but generally balanced)

That is double the programming on Nick Jr targeted at girls to boys. Yes Paw Patrol skews male but honestly I'm ok with that, because they are outnumbered 6 to 3 on Nick. I think Humdinger is as much of an idiot as Goodway, I frequently wonder what the local government was like in the town that the creator of that show grew up in.

I will STRONGLY disagree with you that Goofy is portrayed as more competent then Minnie and Daisy. We actually frequently comment on how they seem by and large to be the most competent but their interests and clothing are pretty stereotypical/retro agreed. Goofy and Donald are def the weak links in that crew though. Minnie runs a business!

I think you should actually count up male v female characters in preschool kids programming. It definitely skews girls.

I'm going to follow up and say that Disney Jr appears more balanced because of Jake and the Neverland Pirates, Miles of Tomorrowland and Handy Manny but both networks really struggle with diversity in male leads. You have a black girl doctor, a hispanic princess and Vampirina on Disney. Lots of color/ethnicity. You have two white boys on wild adventures and a a latino boy in a VERY stereotypical role on the male side.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like there are one or to posters who are obsessed with calling out or identifying "MRA" language or postings, or attitudes.

It's weird. Very stalker-ish.

You are what Gillette is fighting. I support that for sure.

Gillette is fighting a 41 year old woman with two boys in her second marriage?

Weird.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm not sure.

The only thing I ever hear about Mens Right Advocacy is from a very few angry sounding women who are constatnly harping about it. Beyond that, I know literally nothing about it. But I'm certainly not going to form an opinion of it based on what you alone say, because frankly, you sound a little crazy and angry.

The MRA movement started out with legit issues, like how courts used to treated fathers unfairly in custody cases. I think you may be the only one on the internet who hasn’t ever read about them. The info is out there, if you’re so inclined.

Not being a man, I must confess I don't really pay much attention to mens causes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like there are one or to posters who are obsessed with calling out or identifying "MRA" language or postings, or attitudes.

It's weird. Very stalker-ish.

You are what Gillette is fighting. I support that for sure.

Gillette is fighting a 41 year old woman with two boys in her second marriage?

Weird.

Play dumb all you'd like.

[Anonymous]

Ads like this show desperation.

Dollar Shave Club must be doing very well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So tired of corporate virtue signaling. So lame. So fake.

Gillette (or any other company) would throw a dozen babies on a bonfire if it could gain them a 5% increase in market share.

agree

lame as hell

I'm done with the preaching. I can make up my own mind, thank you very much. I don't need Gillette or Nike for that matter (Colin Kaepernick, anyone?) telling me how to live my life.

but once a sheeple, always a sheeple
sad

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Ads like this show desperation.

Dollar Shave Club must be doing very well.

That's a fantastic response! ha!