The New Gillette Social Awareness Campaign

308 posts in this topic

18 hours ago, J0ker said:

Every civilization eventually dies so why do you think that the West is an exception?  The typical signs of a declining civilization are declining birth rates, a widening gap in the distribution of wealth, increased promiscuity, decline in traditions/religion, the unwillingness of the native stock to fight, decadence and all these are present in the West.  Ancient Rome went into demographic decline around the time of Julius Caesar when children were "a luxury that only the poor could afford" and had all these other signs as well.  They were able to offset the problem for a couple of centuries by quasi-immigration i.e.mass enslavement after which the slaves would become emancipated and their children/grandchildren would become full citizens.  But eventually the task was too great and the city eventually fell.

 

This may be a difficult pill to swallow especially for somebody with liberal leanings but that's just the way it is.  I'm actually a fan of Will Durant, a 20th century American historian.  Although he was a leftist, he recognized these inevitabilities in his research.

 

I recall you brought this up in another thread.  I regret that I did not have a chance to respond, but my available time for arguing in long TT threads has been drastically diminished of late. In a nutshell, saying that a mid 20C historian is a "leftist" is not really relevant here, the economic left of the time hadn't really invested itself on social questions much further than vague skepticism towards religion.  The implication of this form of history is to argue that civilization depends on the very form of masculine vigour that creates the victim classes with an interest in overthrowing it. People object to the form of masculinity (that apparently you, Svetlana, WiccaChica, etc so prize, despite its similarity to what you consider to be civilizational threats) because it has a broad oppressive penumbra. If civilization depends on maintaining that kind of penumbra, then maybe what we're calling civilization in this discussion is not all that it's cracked up to be?  Let's overthrow both the civilization/barbarism binary.

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/18/2019, 2:21:02, Eupathic Impulse said:

*Both of which facts are true, but say nothing about masculinity as a set of oppressive gender expectations inculcated through thousands of years of cultural conditioning and emotionally defended as essential biological fact.

 

You're using a lot of nice words but are speaking nonsense. Lions fighting over control of a pride is also cultural conditioning? Funny coincidence how many animal cultures have toxic masculinity. I guess it's all cultural conditioning.

6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/17/2019, 12:23:00, lisa13 said:

what the heck are you talking about?

 

un fucking real the shitpots that develop on this site.

 

y'all have "fun" now, ya hear?

 

 

Exhibit A.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Svetlana.Petro said:

You're using a lot of nice words but are speaking nonsense. Lions fighting over control of a pride is also cultural conditioning? Funny coincidence how many animal cultures have toxic masculinity. I guess it's all cultural conditioning.

 

And there you have it, folks.  Svetty thinks men have the same level of rationality and self-control as animals in the wild.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/18/2019, 2:43:42, Kalifornierin said:

Literally every ad towards women:  Make your hair straighter/curlier/lighter/less gray.  Make your face lighter/less pale/less wrinkled/less blotchy.  Make your body more curvy/less curvy/less hairy/less smelly/more soft/more smooth.  Wear these clothes that will make you look more professional/more fun/more sexy/more fit.  Carry this handbag.  Wear this jewelry, these shoes, these sunglasses. Eat this food, drink this tea, do this exercise to lose weight/have a better mood/cure cramps/be more attractive.  I even saw one for a drug that will help with "thinning eyelashes"!

Yer but these ads work.

No company is going to spend millions on ads that don't work on their target audiences.

The problem is with make up etc it's usually women who will comment on other women who don't wear make up as  the wife will attest as she very rarely wears any.

 

As for the Gillette ad well it is just an ad and Gillette have got exactly what they wanted from it,they don't care if it makes a difference just that the name Gillette is brought to the front of people and the medias conciousness.

People should look at Gillettes working practices before they start praising them.

 

Oh can I also suggest someone change the thread title to something more along the lines of Gillettes new ad campaign rather than their "social awareness" campaign.

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Anna66 said:

To be fair society as a whole is becoming rude. Lack of manners. You see it all the time, people charging on the bus, not giving their seat up for elderly people etc etc..

 

Sure the old days were hard, people worried about getting enough food etc etc.. but there were better manners. Swearing is almost completly normal nowadays and accepted. Nearly everyone swears like a sailor and it is ok.

 

It is kind of sad that there has to be an advert saying "hey be nice to each other, be polite".

Morality kind of going down the toilet in a way.

 

 

Lack of manners I agree with you.

However what is actually the problem with swearing ?

Who is to decide that for example "fuck" is a swear word and shouldn't be used ?

Languages change and evolve over time and because in our day no one would say fuck it doesn't mean its not an acceptable word nowadays.

Swearing was considered something only "common" people do which to me kind of shows why it's good that swearing has come out of the closet nowadays.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Keleth said:

Lack of manners I agree with you.

However what is actually the problem with swearing ?

Who is to decide that for example "fuck" is a swear word and shouldn't be used ?

Languages change and evolve over time and because in our day no one would say fuck it doesn't mean its not an acceptable word nowadays.

Swearing was considered something only "common" people do which to me kind of shows why it's good that swearing has come out of the closet nowadays.

 

I swear like a sailor too. My parents and grandparents do not. I just think it is overused. People become desensitized to it as well. I personally do not have a problem with it, but well in a civilised society and all that you know ;)

 

Another song to cheer up the thread. And it contains swearing! But the way it is done it is actually pleasantly nice. Goes well with the topic too in a way... well kind of...

 

Swearing is also kind of cathartic. It lets all that pent up negative energy out. (see link- Quite interesting)

 

https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/some-assembly-required/201801/profanity-can-be-therapeutic-af

 

 

 

 

 

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Eupathic Impulse said:

 

Religions don't have agency, so I don't know how a religion could "express its masculinity". There are some Muslims who operate violent social orders that are fully contiguous with the vigorous masculinity that so many people here seem to prize and see as the backbone of "Western Civilization" -- yes, traditional "Western" masculinity comes from the same source as the ancient patriarchal practices in the rest of the world. 

 

Okay and we let in the Eastern civilisation" of Wahhabist Arabia? 

 

Eup are you familiar with Ibn Batutta? He was Moor lawyer who travelled across the Maghreb and Arabia. Islam was at its most civilised height and back then 14 cent way more cultured than the West was before the Renaissance. 

 

 

 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jeremytwo said:

 

Okay and we let in the Eastern civilisation" of Wahhabist Arabia? 

 

Eup are you familiar with Ibn Batutta? He was Moor lawyer who travelled across the Maghreb and Arabia. Islam was at its most civilised height and back then 14 cent way more cultured than the West was before the Renaissance. 

 

 

 

 

Are you typing on Trump's phone?

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump wouldn´t know the history, hoops! Nor do most of us, Trump or not!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hooperski said:

 

Are you typing on Trump's phone?

 

Covfefe hamberders back at ya, hoops.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, balticus said:

 

Some of my best friends are 60 year-olds.   

 

Don't measure all lesbians by the antics you see from Metall and AlexTr on this thread.  Their desire to even some score against men in general which stems from their own bad experiences actually causes more dissonance.   

LOL I didn't say lesbian.  I said "lesbian".

 

5 hours ago, Eupathic Impulse said:

 

Au contraire, I can't think of anyone better. If anyone is to redefine masculinity, it should be someone with the experience of being on the receiving end of its problems, who will know what is necessary to defang it.

You're joking right?  Your idea has absolutely no probability of success in the real world.  If you're going to redefine masculinity then the burden of proof lies with you.  I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that brute force and mass sedation is out of the question so you're going to have to convince men to change.  Tell me how would a grumpy old "uncool" woman, who hates men by the way, convince men they should start acting differently?

 

5 hours ago, Eupathic Impulse said:

In a nutshell, saying that a mid 20C historian is a "leftist" is not really relevant here, the economic left of the time hadn't really invested itself on social questions much further than vague skepticism towards religion.

This 20th century historian offered quite a bit of hard evidence for his assertions.  If you're going to contradict him, you have to provide counter-evidence in addition to proof supporting your statements.

 

5 hours ago, Eupathic Impulse said:

The implication of this form of history is to argue that civilization depends on the very form of masculine vigour that creates the victim classes with an interest in overthrowing it. People object to the form of masculinity (that apparently you, Svetlana, WiccaChica, etc so prize, despite its similarity to what you consider to be civilizational threats) because it has a broad oppressive penumbra. If civilization depends on maintaining that kind of penumbra, then maybe what we're calling civilization in this discussion is not all that it's cracked up to be?  Let's overthrow both the civilization/barbarism binary.

There's a difference between seeing what you want to see and what is actually there.  The basic idea is that strong men create good times, good times create weak men, weak men create bad times, bad times create strong men.  It's a cycle that keeps on repeating itself.  I have given you evidence in the previous thread that it happened in the Greek world, in Rome and in the Abbasid caliphate.  Our goal shouldn't be denying this fact but it should be that each "good times" period is better than the previous one.

 

5 hours ago, Eupathic Impulse said:

People object to the form of masculinity (that apparently you, Svetlana, WiccaChica, etc so prize, despite its similarity to what you consider to be civilizational threats) because it has a broad oppressive penumbra.

What can I say?  It seems the ladies have spoken.  Anyways you seem to have the impression that traditional masculinity exclusively means brute strength which is not true.  There are good and bad sides to both masculinity and femininity and yet you are choosing to focus exclusively on the bad.

 

3 hours ago, Anna66 said:

 

I swear like a sailor too.

You swear like a sailor?  I must say I wasn't expecting that.  I pictured you as being polite and well mannered.  I see you have a bad girl side. :)

 

 

 

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, fraufruit said:

 

here

 

Only in America.

 

Quote

Graham Allen, a U.S. Army vet and the host of Rant Nation on Blaze TV, posted on his Facebook page a family photo shot in a field of cotton. He carries a weapon over his shoulder and his young daughter is flanked by her two brothers who hold a handgun and a rifle. “Practicing our ‘toxic masculinity,'” wrote Allen with an Amerian flag emoji. “Hey Gillette,does this offend you? I’ll raise my kids the way I believe they should be…thanks for your advice.”

 

Utterly brilliant!

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Eupathic Impulse said:

People object to the form of masculinity (that apparently you, Svetlana, WiccaChica, etc so prize, despite its similarity to what you consider to be civilizational threats) because it has a broad oppressive penumbra

 

That seems very exaggerated.    

 

Some object to oppression by others, but some simply want to be in a position of power and claim the role of oppressor.   Assuming that victims are somehow righteous and not susceptible to the trappings of power, greed, etc is a variant of the "sucker problem". 

 

The most vocal critic of the anti-Gillette crowd  on this thread is failing laughably in an attempt to be a bully here and elsewhere.    In my experience, a lack of masculinity which is more of a problem. 

 

Great line from this feminist file series 

 

 


 

 

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'Boys will be boys'... really?  Does anyone use that phrase today?  Seriously.  It's antiquated.  I can't recall the last time I actually heard it used.

This thread has truly caused be to think on it for a few days.  Not sure why, actually.  It simply has.  Many, many years ago, I learned to not discuss politics and religion amongst a social circle.  Beliefs are personal and to discuss these can cause a wee strife or create a distance with friends and mates.  I have friends on FB that discuss nothing but politics and have placed them on silence, as I simply don't wish to read their political views on a daily basis, but want to maintain contact with them.  It's a personal decision.

If I had to categorise myself into a political tribe, I would lean more conservatively.  To me noodle, it makes more sence to be so, however I have an appreciation for left leaning people and what they offer to society.  The left can have the populace look at things in a different way and I for one have an appreciation for that.

The left has helped the world see that all people are equal.  That we need to better care for our planet.  That we need to help the less fortunate.  That while the present way might be good, change is as well.  Etc, etc.

I never knowingly knew a gay man until I was about 23 or 24.  Can't recall the lad's name, but one of my mates told me one day he was gay.  I do recall being surprised, but it changed nothing about our friendship. I continued to hang out with him, but again it changed nothing.  Today, I have mates who are bisexual, homosexual, trans-gendered and vegans :lol:.  I take no issue with any of them on that as it has no direct effect on me.  They are all wonderful people.  When we do argue, it might be on music, politics (often heated), or other topics.  If any of my straight mates take issue with them, I ask them to be respectful or leave.

So, perhaps as a right leaning man, the left (perhaps) impacted my view on how to look at the world.  By that I mean that for decades the left (mostly) helped us to think how we view others.  How we think of others.  To look at a person of colour and not see simply another person, is not correct.  The left help to open our eyes.  But all of this is external to us.  'The way you are looking at XYZ is wrong.  Look at it this way in stead.'  As a whole we have changed or altered our view of others and the planet.  Today, we are more respectful of others.  I would say that bigotry is statistically less than it was 50 years ago.  More rights and equality exist today because of this positive change.  As a white man I can see the errors of our past and am thankful for this needed altering of our mindset.  Acceptance of others.  A man or woman born in Africa can't help where they were born.  They are simply brought into this world and are raised and taught to have difference beliefs about all kinds of things.  But they are basically no different than I am.  I agree.  Father Francis in Ghana is a good friend and do enjoy chatting with him when he is in Germany.  Our favourite topic:  The catholic church.  At least we are able to laugh and hug at the end.  He prays for my soul...  a waste of his valuable time. :lol:

Well, now the left has changed.  Today the focus is on us personally.  Since we have made numerous changes to things external to us (again, men and white men in general), the focus is now on us.  It's not enough that we've made changes to how we view things externally, but now have to change who we are and how we are.  The demand is that we change how we're wired internally and genetically.  The fact that I am a white male, makes me a walking blood bag of toxicity.  Well, isn't that lovely.

In reading several websites to fully understand 'Toxic Masculinity', most refer to the socially-constructed attitudes that describe the masculine gender role as violent, unemotional, sexually aggressive, and so forth. 

I have often been described as suffering from an emotional deficit.  Bothers me not in the least.  But to tell me it's wrong, would be as wrong as telling a woman she's too emotional.  Moreover, I would never demand a woman put her emotions in check or that she needs to turn her emotions down.  Theses are part of our make-up.  Men are less emotional and women are more emotional.  It's simply how we are made.  I can change these in me about as easily as a woman can changes these in her.  Personally, I think the differences make a relationship more exiting and challenging.

Aye, men are more violent than women.  We are physically more confrontational than women.  They key is finding an outlet for this violence that does no harm to another.  Be it meditation or exercise.  Most matters involving violence (aside from mass murders) deal with men who have no positive release of the rage inside them.  But this trait of violence has been passed along for millennia through our genes.  Education is (mostly) the difference between a man who knows how to properly release that stock-piled rage and one who doesn't.  I don't mean university education, simply being taught.

Sexually aggressive.  Yes, men are much more sexually aggressive than women when it comes to matters we call 'legally incorrect'.  However, most of the women I have personally interacted in my life do enjoy men being aggressive sexually - in a relationship.  Sexual aggressiveness that involves rape or sexual assault these deal with something entirely different and also involve education and society.  Where sex is consider a taboo or is repressed, the aggressiveness is increased.  South America and Africa have the highest rape statistics.  The USA is quite high. 

We are all different.  We have learned to accept others.  Regardless of beliefs.  We have changed so much over the past decades.  The late 1900s brought so many positive changes to the world.  Now the 2000s concern me.  While we were taught to accept others for how they are, it seems one group can no longer be accepted for how they are.  This group needs to change as other's forgot the old left idea of acceptance.  Men are toxic.  Men must change.

'Boys will be boys'...  Here's another old one, 'Live and let live'.  I think it better.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, BayrischDude said:

'Boys will be boys'... really?  Does anyone use that phrase today?  Seriously.  It's antiquated.  I can't recall the last time I actually heard it used.

 

In the US, yes, some people actually say this as well as believe it.

 

target audience is Americans.  do remember that.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard "boys will be boys" quoted at work when a male colleague misbehaved badly.

In German it was "er ist halt ein Lausbub".

No sanctions for him, of course.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now