The New Gillette Social Awareness Campaign

309 posts in this topic

1 hour ago, WiccaChica said:

Most women wouldn't want an ad how to behave so why should men?

 

 

This made me LOL.  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"!

 

Every ad tells women how to behave and tells them that they are inadequate.  This ad only tell men to be nicer (and to buy their razor).  It doesn't seem too offensive to me.  Can't they just ignore it?

6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, theGman said:

 

You are going to have to enlighten me of your point here. It was an era of progress, scientific and technological advancement, culture and arts. Yes it was also an era of a large divide between the rich and poor (like now), and it's end was marked by the beginning of WW1, but I still don't get the point. Are you saying we shouldn't try to better ourselves because in the end it will all collapse and result in war?

Yes it was an era of progress and technological advancement and the literature and Zeitgeist of the time said pretty much what you initially stated. In fact WW1 was considered to be the "war to end all wars". They were oblivious to the fact that they had just unleashed a war which would result in the greatest amount of casualties in history up to that point. What's to say it couldn't happen now? And we do have nuclear weapons.

 

50 minutes ago, theGman said:

???

Every generation thinks it's better than the previous ones but when reality hits, things are not so simple.

 

50 minutes ago, theGman said:

I don't agree. Of course there are ups and downs. And some things go and come back again. But for sure today is better than yesterday. Which era would you have rather have grown up in?

Than I suppose you have a Star Trek view of history instead of Spengler's or Cicero's. If you want a challenge read some of their literature. Yesterday is better than today in the modern era? Depends for who. If you're in the top 1 % then you are absolutely right. The gap between the rich and the poor gets greater by the year.

 

Also 2nd century Rome was better for the average citizen than 3rd - 17th century Europe. Rome went through a rise and fall as did Greece.

 

 

 

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, WiccaChica said:

If you want a challenge read of them literature.

 

I missed shift change? Damn! I love shift change.

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kalifornierin said:

 

This made me LOL.  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"!

 

Every ad tells women how to behave and tells them that they are inadequate.  This ad only tell men to be nicer (and to buy their razor).  It doesn't seem too offensive to me.  Can't they just ignore it?

LOL all you want but the same premise can be used to make the same argument against ads geared towards men: Get this car and you'll be popular with the ladies. Join our gym so you can get a six-pack. Wear this suit and you'll get that executive job etc. By this logic every ad tells men how to behave. The difference between this ad and previous ones is that the former is condescending and has a nanny like tone.

 

4 minutes ago, AlexTr said:

 

I missed shift change? Damn! I love shift change.

 

More like multi-tasking. Or hyper multi-tasking. Doing 20 things at once.

 

5

Share this post


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

Yes it was an era of progress and technological advancement and the literature and Zeitgeist of the time said pretty much what you initially stated. In fact WW1 was considered to be the "war to end all wars". They were oblivious to the fact that they had just unleashed a war which would result in the greatest amount of casualties in history up to that point. What's to say it couldn't happen now? And we do have nuclear weapons.

 

It could easily happen now. I would argue it's looking likely that it will. But if we survive such a war then 2119 will be better than today.

 

8 minutes ago, WiccaChica said:

Every generation thinks it's better than the previous ones but when reality hits, things are not so simple.

 

Of course things aren't so simple but I'm not writing essays here. In general, each generation is better off. Especially for you and me, right here, right now.

 

8 minutes ago, WiccaChica said:

Than I suppose you have a Star Trek view of history instead of Spengler's or Cicero's. If you want a challenge read of them literature. Yesterday is better than today in the modern era? Depends for who.

 

For you, and me and the dudes in the advert buying Gillette razor blades. You'd rather grow up in 1719 than today?

 

8 minutes ago, WiccaChica said:

If you're in the top 1 % then you are absolutely right. The gap between the rich and the poor gets greater by the year.

 

Yes it does, and that's bad. But a poor person today is still having a better life than the equivalent poor person in 1719.

 

8 minutes ago, WiccaChica said:

Also 2nd century Rome was better for the average citizen than 3rd - 17th century Europe. Rome went through a rise and fall as did Greece.

 

But you are comparing apples and oranges. I would also rather grow up in 1950s UK than 2019 South Sudan. Aboriginals would be happier back in 1719 than today in 2019. Of course there are ups and downs and local differences but it was better in the old days is an argument that doesn't hold for most.

3

Share this post


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

 

It could easily happen now. I would argue it's looking likely that it will. But if we survive such a war then 2119 will be better than today.

It really depends on how catastrophic the war is. If a fraction of humanity survives it will take longer than 100 years to recover.

 

12 minutes ago, theGman said:

Of course things aren't so simple but I'm not writing essays here. In general, each generation is better off. Especially for you and me, right here, right now.

Not necessarily. Have you heard of Generation Rent? Our parents and grandparents were able to afford houses. Our generation cannot (I'm 24). It looked like we were progressing after WW2 but as soon as the gap between the rich and the poor starts to widen progress stops.

 

15 minutes ago, theGman said:

For you, and me and the dudes in the advert buying Gillette razor blades. You'd rather grow up in 1719 than today?

2019 is better than 1719 but 119 was also better than 1719, at least in the civilized world. What I'm saying is that we are in decline.

 

16 minutes ago, theGman said:

But you are comparing apples and oranges. I would also rather grow up in 1950s UK than 2019 South Sudan. Aboriginals would be happier back in 1719 than today in 2019. Of course there are ups and downs and local differences but it was better in the old days is an argument that doesn't hold for most.

My argument is not me crying after the good old days which I never experienced. I'm saying that history is circular and doesn't progress in a linear path. I believe the world, at least the Abendland, is in decline.

 

 

 

3

Share this post


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

Wednesday night there was a Facebook post on one of the nearby 'spotted' town threads. A lad was asking for his friend the name of a girl who worked in a bakery. I newly spewed my beer on the Computer screen! I replied that a real man would simply ask her directly... and a real mate would tell him to do so.

 

The comments to my remark was astounding...both men and women and most of the women asked why men don't do so.  Weicheier! 😂😂

I actually find it creepy when a guy is lingering behind my back asking others for my number instead of directly talking to me. Just ignore the ridiculous comments. It seems those people say one thing even though they don't believe it.

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, WiccaChica said:

Not necessarily. Have you heard of Generation Rent? Our parents and grandparents were able to afford houses. Our generation cannot (I'm 24). It looked like we were progressing after WW2 but as soon as the gap between the rich and the poor starts to widen progress stops.

 

As true as that is I would argue that this is cherrypicking.  Firstly renting isn't necessarily bad, look at the Germans. Secondly it's one life factor out of many, I would still rather grow up today than the day of my parents or grandparents. Thirdly, it could be a momentary blip. Like I say, ups and downs. Maybe it's gonna be shit for the next 3 generations but in 15 generations things will be so much better.

 

I'll ask again. Would you rather grow up in the 50s instead of now? Or anytime in history instead of now?

 

Quote

2019 is better than 1719 but 119 was also better than 1719, at least in the civilized world. What I'm saying is that we are in decline.

 

My argument is not me crying after the good old days which I never experienced. I'm saying that history is circular and doesn't progress in a linear path. I believe the world, at least the Abendland, is in decline.

 

To what end? I don't agree at all. Maybe it will decline over 50 years, but you think we'll end up in the middle ages again?

 

But to come back to it. Why does any of this make you disagree with you, me and the boys buying Gillette bettering ourselves?

4

Share this post


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

The world can be both things simultaneously: in decline and progressing.

I have that issue with my teeth, EI! Top level making progress...but the three bastards in the middle down below are wonky.

I blame Brexit, Muslims, Trump,  José Mourinho and anything and anybody else --oh, should take responsibility for myself..fail...

:rolleyes:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, john g. said:

I blame Brexit, Muslims, Trump,  José Mourinho and anything and anybody else

 

and you're not blaming being English?

 

B)

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, 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.

 

Er, more alphabetti spaghetti. But aren't you an adherent of a religion which expresses its masculinity by throwing gays off buildings and stones young girls for adultery?

 

4 hours ago, theGman said:

 

As true as that is I would argue that this is cherrypicking.  Firstly renting isn't necessarily bad, look at the Germans.

 

Renting is shit because you pay and pay and end up with nothing. your landlord has the power. And many Germans buy cars which depreciate with value so you end up with nothing. Germans spend a fortune on shitty BMWs which they speed up autobahns and put lives at risk.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This guy nails what is happening at the moment.

 

 

 

It is my belief that what is happening at the moment is indeed temporary - about 10 years of ending war, auditing the Fed Reserve and going to the gold standard. When that specific misssion ends Trump will step down and we may even have a reformed left wing JFK style again.

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Won't be boycotting Gillette because I haven't used it in over 10 years since I find the store brand just as good and cheaper.  As for this topic, I'm seeing the same dumb comments from the same people i.e. fragile masculinity. Geez we're talking about men not Olympian Gods.  Of course men are flawed.  But do we really want a 60 year-old "lesbian" redefining masculinity?  If anything guys would be more interested in Svetlana's or WiccaChica's opinion.

 

We need to bring Al Bundy back.  He was a bad husband, father, employee, lover, provider but he was extremely effective against feminists.

 

 

 

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, theGman said:

To what end? I don't agree at all. Maybe it will decline over 50 years, but you think we'll end up in the middle ages again?

Sorry to eavesdrop but I think WiccaChica's right in a sense.  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.

 

May I also propose a compromise between your and WiccaChica's assertion of history being linear vs. circular?  I think the last 70 years have been the best time to be human but history does have a way of repeating itself, so wouldn't it make more sense to conclude that each time a historical cycle is completed we progress a little more?  I mean we may fall and stay down for centuries but the wheel not only spins but slowly goes upwards at the same time perhaps by passing the torch to a new civilization?  Humans haven't changed all that much in the last few thousand years so overall progression will be slow.

 

Apologies for going so far off topic but I can't help myself when it comes to history.

 

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