Jump to content

Curious to see how many men on here find it offensive


Triage

Recommended Posts

When raising these boys, they’re not raising the best, they’re not raising you. They’re not raising you. They’re raising people that have lots of problems, and those problems are with us. They’re raising drug addicts. they’re raising criminals. They’re raising rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”

 

- Gillette

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Nokra said:

IMO you should at least watch it before you form an opinion. No offense, but either taking your opinion from another or having others simply confirm your preexisting notions does not seem like a very fair or thoughtful reaction to me. 

 

As to the stupid dad trope, I think I can see what you mean about the trope existing, given the examples you gave. But I think this isn't really what the ad is saying. It's an undeniable fact that some men have some shitty behavior, just as some women do, and in my opinion, the ad was speaking to those men, calling on them to improve their behavior.  It isn't saying that all men are stupid or that all men need to improve their behavior. 

 

I'm not sure what you mean by not wanting your son or nephew to grow up in any manner that society seems they should. Would you mind explaining this, please? 

 

Just to put it simple, men are not hairier bigger women, and women aren't less hairy smaller men. The things that make them different should be celebrated, not chastise. 

 

A lot of what is currently being chastised (well beyond the stupid dad trope) is natural to the male half of virtually ever species. A lot of it is part of healthy development, and builds some of the basic things needed for survival. You may say well we are humans not "animals" (to which I would laugh because it seems people pick and choose what they want to take from the animal kingdom to fit their narrative), so we don't need these things. But I'd question your qualification of survival. Is it just making it, or its making it comfortably (happily). As humans we should strive for later, as we are more likely to fulfill the meaning of life (nothing more than sustaining and continuing ones life/lineage). 

 

Should I teach my son to be ashamed of liking women, and all that comes with it (looking, thinking, peacocking)? No, because that will be contrary continuing his and his forefathers life.

Should I teach him not to take advantage of his God given physical abilities? Again, no because they may compensate for his weaknesses. Or can be used for gain.

Should I teach him break down and wallow in the uncomforts of life? No, he should be strong enough to face them head on, and courageous enough to make sacrifices to change them. 

Should I teach him not to be a leader, not to strive to stand out from the pack?

 

Just to an example of where I can personally see the difference. My mom and her cousin ( they are best friends as well, making it even more special to them) had children at the same time and cadence. One mom (and allow the step father to) raised her men along the lines of how I am and will; she let "boys be boys" (I'm just putting it simply). The other pacified her boys, hindered (to the chagrin of her husband, their father) any masculine act to keep them safe and docile. Fast forward to their teenage years, one group of kids is independent, self starting, confident, the other group is the opposite. Fast forward to the earlier twenties, one group has built on their teenage years and are bringing home women mom of which mom can be proud (although a lot seem to come through the door, lol); the other group is either not bring any home, or bringing home women that are only their to take and dominate. Now step into their earlier thirties; one mom is celebrating her with larger family, in the households (and communities) her sons lead. The other, just went from three men in the house to two, and says (direct quote) "I messed up my boys."

 

One group knew the world was hard, the other met a hard world. Who do you think is surviving more comfortably (happily)?

 

Guess what, I'll teach my daughter to do all those same things (I'm all about "strong" women), but will also teach her to, like the moms before, be self sufficient, but find a man like the moms before you did, one who can take care of you like your father did, so you can celebrate the ultimate difference between you and him, motherhood. 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a parent of two kids I appreciate commercials and anything else that supports how I raise my kids. I raise my kids not to bully not to harras and to be good human being and if they do stupid shit, own up to it, learn from it and be better. Hence as a parent of two I have zero issues with the commercial or anything that supports positive message. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Commodore D said:

 

Just to put it simple, men are not hairier bigger women, and women aren't less hairy smaller men. The things that make them different should be celebrated, not chastise. 

 

A lot of what is currently being chastised (well beyond the stupid dad trope) is natural to the male half of virtually ever species. A lot of it is part of healthy development, and builds some of the basic things needed for survival. You may say well we are humans not "animals" (to which I would laugh because it seems people pick and choose what they want to take from the animal kingdom to fit their narrative), so we don't need these things. But I'd question your qualification of survival. Is it just making it, or its making it comfortably (happily). As humans we should strive for later, as we are more likely to fulfill the meaning of life (nothing more than sustaining and continuing ones life/lineage). 

 

Should I teach my son to be ashamed of liking women, and all that comes with it (looking, thinking, peacocking)? No, because that will be contrary continuing his and his forefathers life.

Should I teach him not to take advantage of his God given physical abilities? Again, no because they may compensate for his weaknesses. Or can be used for gain.

Should I teach him break down and wallow in the uncomforts of life? No, he should be strong enough to face them head on, and courageous enough to make sacrifices to change them. 

Should I teach him not to be a leader, not to strive to stand out from the pack?

 

Just to an example of where I can personally see the difference. My mom and her cousin ( they are best friends as well, making it even more special to them) had children at the same time and cadence. One mom (and allow the step father to) raised her men along the lines of how I am and will; she let "boys be boys" (I'm just putting it simply). The other pacified her boys, hindered (to the chagrin of her husband, their father) any masculine act to keep them safe and docile. Fast forward to their teenage years, one group of kids is independent, self starting, confident, the other group is the opposite. Fast forward to the earlier twenties, one group has built on their teenage years and are bringing home women mom of which mom can be proud (although a lot seem to come through the door, lol); the other group is either not bring any home, or bringing home women that are only their to take and dominate. Now step into their earlier thirties; one mom is celebrating her with larger family, in the households (and communities) her sons lead. The other, just went from three men in the house to two, and says (direct quote) "I messed up my boys."

 

One group knew the world was hard, the other met a hard world. Who do you think is surviving more comfortably (happily)?

 

Guess what, I'll teach my daughter to do all those same things (I'm all about "strong" women), but will also teach her to, like the moms before, be self sufficient, but find a man like the moms before you did, one who can take care of you like your father did, so you can celebrate the ultimate difference between you and him, motherhood. 

 

Teaching boys to respect women is not the same as teaching them to be 'ashamed' for liking women, teaching them to avoid bullying/fighting is not the same as teaching them to refrain from self-defense, teaching them it is OK to embrace their emotions is not the same as teaching them to wallow in it, and teaching them to be socially harmonious is not the same as teaching them to be docile.

 

You are fucking psychotic.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Chris- said:

 

Teaching boys to respect women is not the same as teaching them to be 'ashamed' for liking women, teaching them to avoid bullying/fighting is not the same as teaching them to refrain from self-defense, teaching them it is OK to embrace their emotions is not the same as teaching them to wallow in it, and teaching them to be socially harmonious is not the same as teaching them to be docile.

 

You are fucking psychotic.

That’s what a beta male cuck would say.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Chris- said:

 

Teaching boys to respect women is not the same as teaching them to be 'ashamed' for liking women, teaching them to avoid bullying/fighting is not the same as teaching them to refrain from self-defense, teaching them it is OK to embrace their emotions is not the same as teaching them to wallow in it, and teaching them to be socially harmonious is not the same as teaching them to be docile.

 

You are fucking psychotic.

 

 thats so blatantly obvious, im amazed anyone could misconstrue the message for something else. 

 

this dude has a warped sense of masculinity. 

 

being a douchebag and being masculine are not mutually exclusive. you can be strong, independent, confident, handy, etc.. without being an asshole to women or other "inferior" men. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, atom631 said:

 

 thats so blatantly obvious, im amazed anyone could misconstrue the message for something else. 

 

this dude has a warped sense of masculinity. 

 

being a douchebag and being masculine are not mutually exclusive. you can be strong, independent, confident, handy, etc.. without being an asshole to women or other "inferior" men. 

just so all you beta cucks are clear, the vast majority of all toxic masculinity is directed towards other men.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, kittykat said:

 

What if your sons aren’t attracted to women?

 

way to assume. 

 

HOMOPHOBE

 

im calling 9-1-1

Doesn't seem to be the case, so why would I speak from that position. Plus, just from a numbers perspective, I'm safe to assume they aren't until proven otherwise. Stop being a bigot.

 

Lol at psychotic( @Chris-), and liked by a group of people that by their own admissions are on various meds to stabilize themselves. <shrug shoulders>

 

Also @Keyser_Soze it would be pretty creepy if @Boyle5150 or any of you had a picture of me to edit on a hat.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎1‎/‎24‎/‎2019 at 10:11 AM, Slug said:

I think many of the people who are offended by this message are inappropriately conflating 'toxic masculinity' with masculinity in general.  There's nothing wrong with the latter.

 

That's all I got.

Maybe that's the case, but I've seen enough stuff that assaults regular masculinity to see the lines are being blurred. 

 

My kids will be raised to respect all people, from all backgrounds, because that is how I was raised (put yourself in their shoes), and they will also be raised not to blindly accept what society "feels' is right, just as I was raised. You don't have to run with the pack to respect that the pack should be able to run. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't find the ad offensive at all.  I've gone my whole life without ever cat calling, whistling, or grabbing a woman.  I was never one to get physical with other people growing up(probably helped I was always bigger than everybody else through most of school). The message I saw in the ad was basically "if you're an asshole to other people, stop being an asshole".  I personally didn't need the reminder and I'm not going to take offense to the ad.   The message is directed at all the people we've seen in life being a dick to other people.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's simply brilliant marketing, much like the Nike ad. When's the last time a Gillette ad got a 3 page thread here? A 30+ page era thread (last I knew, don't know where it's at now) and a thread or topic on every forum or blog I visit, plus countless youtube videos. Let's not forget that Gillette is owned by a company that tests it's products on animals and uses child labor, so I hope none of you think they are some wonderful Progressive liberal company. They simply hired an ad company that knows it's perfectly acceptable to bash white men and any form of masculinity in current year.

 

Liberals of course ate it all up, conservatives got mad and drove a brilliant viral marketing campaign that will more than offset whatever handful of people will actually stick to a boycott. 

 

I almost exclusively use their gel deodorant, and that will continue.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/24/2019 at 9:35 AM, Chris- said:

 

Teaching boys to respect women is not the same as teaching them to be 'ashamed' for liking women, teaching them to avoid bullying/fighting is not the same as teaching them to refrain from self-defense, teaching them it is OK to embrace their emotions is not the same as teaching them to wallow in it, and teaching them to be socially harmonious is not the same as teaching them to be docile.

My favorite post from you! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.thepostmillennial.com/gillette-has-a-problem-with-men-and-now-consumers-have-a-problem-with-gillette/

 

 

"Our razor packages don’t say, “not for use by rapists or bullies.” Our clients are just men. If anyone had asked me whether it was a great idea to slag our customer base with an expensive artsy film that has zero to do with razors, I would have said, probably not. But nobody asked me.

Anyway, what do I know? I’m retiring soon. Back in the day, we didn’t do fancy-pants “virtue-signalling,” which is a term I only recently learned. So this film got made because the women on our board told us we needed to get with the program. We needed a specialist in “social context” (whatever the hell that is.) So we hired this young woman—very sharp, very definite in her opinions—who used to teach Gender Studies. She was very keen on this film, and kind of wore us down until we said yes.

I’m sorry the film made it look as though we at Gillette think being a guy means you’re automatically bad, or predisposed to be bad if someone doesn’t step in and stop you. That’s honestly not the case. We made this film because we were told the feminists would love it, and we were told men are so used to seeing themselves portrayed as asshats, they wouldn’t notice how insulting it is.

Believe me, the president and the board are in shock that so many men did notice. (And lots of women are angry about it too, which is kind of puzzling, since the film makes it look like it’s only men who do bad things. Go figure.) The only good thing to come out of this mess from my point of view is that the “social context” woman hasn’t come into the office the last few days.

The thing about big corporations getting all preachy with people is that nobody with half a brain believes these sermons come from the heart. Nobody with half a brain really believes corporation honchos sit around brooding about social injustice. Everyone knows it’s all about reading the public tea leaves to increase sales and that whole “I’d like to give the world a coke” jazz is pure hot air posing as sincerity and soul. But at least the Coke ads don’t attack their own clients."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Boyle5150 said:

https://www.thepostmillennial.com/gillette-has-a-problem-with-men-and-now-consumers-have-a-problem-with-gillette/

 

 

"Our razor packages don’t say, “not for use by rapists or bullies.” Our clients are just men. If anyone had asked me whether it was a great idea to slag our customer base with an expensive artsy film that has zero to do with razors, I would have said, probably not. But nobody asked me.

Anyway, what do I know? I’m retiring soon. Back in the day, we didn’t do fancy-pants “virtue-signalling,” which is a term I only recently learned. So this film got made because the women on our board told us we needed to get with the program. We needed a specialist in “social context” (whatever the hell that is.) So we hired this young woman—very sharp, very definite in her opinions—who used to teach Gender Studies. She was very keen on this film, and kind of wore us down until we said yes.

I’m sorry the film made it look as though we at Gillette think being a guy means you’re automatically bad, or predisposed to be bad if someone doesn’t step in and stop you. That’s honestly not the case. We made this film because we were told the feminists would love it, and we were told men are so used to seeing themselves portrayed as asshats, they wouldn’t notice how insulting it is.

Believe me, the president and the board are in shock that so many men did notice. (And lots of women are angry about it too, which is kind of puzzling, since the film makes it look like it’s only men who do bad things. Go figure.) The only good thing to come out of this mess from my point of view is that the “social context” woman hasn’t come into the office the last few days.

The thing about big corporations getting all preachy with people is that nobody with half a brain believes these sermons come from the heart. Nobody with half a brain really believes corporation honchos sit around brooding about social injustice. Everyone knows it’s all about reading the public tea leaves to increase sales and that whole “I’d like to give the world a coke” jazz is pure hot air posing as sincerity and soul. But at least the Coke ads don’t attack their own clients."

 

 

Wait a minute, what even is this article you're linking to?  That whole diatribe is introed with the following:

 

"What were they thinking in making this film? To find out, I climbed inside the head of the Vice-president for Communications who gave this film the go-ahead, and here is what I found:"

 

So this entire thing is just... fan fiction about what a Gillette exec might be thinking?  Notice it's not actually a quote, it doesn't give a name, it's just "I crawled inside the head..."  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not offended by this ad because it's a commercial, a thing designed to manipulate a person to buy into their products with half truths and outright lies. It's a work of fiction really and a funny one. It's hilarious that that father, in the process of going to break up a bully fight, leaves his son alone in the middle of a crowded street. Or that black guy telling the white guy it's not ok to talk to women; worst wing-man ever. The sitcom protraying the dad as a letch that has never existed on TV ever. I don't even think the Honeymooners was that bad. And then there's those stereotypical BBQ fathers saying "boys will be boys", when in reality it's the MOTHERS who are the ones that always say that! 

 

What's even funnier is the backlash this ad is getting. The Youtube ad has been deleting negative comments and deleting downvotes. Other razor products like Dollar Shave Club, and some Watch manufacturer swooped in and have been selling out as an alternative. Bad publicity is good publicity for other companies in this case it seems. Fun times. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...