Uh, OK. I want to thank you for an excellent back and forth. This has been most satisfying.
That’s probably because the video was, in fact, referring to those particular men. When someone says, “Men shouldn’t harass and bully people,” the harassers and bullies are going to take exception to that statement. That’s who you see complaining about this ad online - the men who see the negative behavior that’s criticized in this commercial, and are upset that people want them to stop acting like that.
I don’t think anyone should harass and bully people but I find this kind of response tone deaf to the situation. To me it is tone deaf in the same sense that it would be tone deaf and wrong to have a commercial saying “Black men should stop being thugs, for too long black men have been acting like ghetto trash, here’s some respectable black men everyone should be like.” or “women should stop being such gold digging whores, act like these respectable ladies.” Now I get that men have had more power in society, but there is nothing really good about this approach. I have issues with the idea of toxic masculinity, I think it is misguided to infer that there is something inherently toxic about being a man.
I just don’t think I have the mindset to really view this type of approach favorably; being raised Catholic it was always hate the sin not the sinner.
Wow. I have no idea how you got that from the spot. That wasn’t my impression at all – it was, hey, some guys act like jerks…they should stop that and we should all try and be good role models.
Are you sure you watched the right commercial spot?
The impression I got from the spot:
- Some guys are jerks
- Non-jerk guys should step up and say something.
Who knows, maybe the jerks will wise up when their friend tells them ‘not cool, dude’, or a father tells his kid ‘that’s enough, son, he’s down’. I mean, what’s the alternative - keep your mouth shut and let the jerks do whatever they want? Doesn’t sound terribly manly to me.
I guess that’s a humorous comment? Anyway whether or not, I think it points to one basic problem with it as an ad for a profit making company serving the mass market. You don’t really want it to come out zero sum, that some of the potential customer base likes it because other segments hate it. Especially if it’s anything like even numbers, and doesn’t seem the people who like this ad heavily outnumber those who dislike it. The other way around if anything it would seem.
The other basic problem has been raised in a bunch of posts: lack of credibility of a profit making entity as ‘teacher of values’. You don’t have to be an anti-capitalist to be skeptical of that.
The ad made me laugh, but my sense of humor is kind of f-ed up.
In all seriousness the ad is good not for what it says, but for what it says about society. It shows that taking a stand against toxic masculinity is capable of making money, and therefor popular. This says good things bout society, not necessarily about Gillette.
It’s not just people on the right looking for any excuse to be offended. The right, the left, the top, the bottom, the front, the back and the in between all have their offenderatti.
But it doesn’t go after the sinner. There is never any point in the ad where any individual is called out. All of the “sins” are presented as just things that happen. And, when the one guy doesn’t remain silent, he never goes after a particular person. He fixes the underlying problem–the sin.
The ad is set up where usually one guy does something bad, and all the other men just sit silently and don’t intervene (often making excuses). The ad asks the question “Is this really the best a man can be?” It isn’t saying all men are bad. It’s saying that too many good men don’t step up. It is the classic “Evil triumphs because good people do nothing.”
There is no comparison to minority stereotypes, as none of these are anti-male stereotypes. Guys saying “boys will be boys” is not a stereotype of men. It’s just a thing that happens with some men. A guy who talks over a woman is not a stereotype that all men do. It’s something some particular assholes do.
It’s not dissimilar to ads I saw as a kid that no one complained about. They’d say, for instance, that it’s not the bully who is a real man, but the person who is strong enough to talk out their problems. It’s not the stoic guy who is never affected, but the guy who is confident enough to share his emotions. It’s not the guy who is afraid of being gay, it’s the guy who knows who he is and doesn’t care.
Put another way, it’s Goofus and Gallant, from Highlights Magazine. No one complained that Goofus was a poor stereotype of children because he did stupid things children do. Because no one identified with Goofus. You might not be as good as Gallant, but you at least knew you weren’t as bad as Goofus.
But these men are seeing themselves in this. They identify with the guy who is being an asshole in each encounter. No minority is going to identify with a stereotype. But these men do, because it’s not a stereotype. They actually act that way and believe those things.
This is an ad created by men, for men. You can’t compare that to an ad made by racists to attack black people.
It’s like when someone says “Fuck those racist assholes,” and someone gets offended, claiming they’re being called racist. No, you call yourself racist by identifying with the shitty person.
It’s not “I see a man, so I identify with him.” Because both sides are men. It is “I see a man who is like me.” It bothers them that said man is being treating as wrong. And, because of toxic masculinity, their response is not to consider criticism but to attack those who would dare say anything bad about them or their beliefs.
It’s to be expected that they will be upset, because they aren’t being coddled and worshiped like they used to be. They can either throw a tantrum like a child, or grow up and be a real man.
And, of course, Gillette can just reap the benefits of having an ad that is talked about and drawing in younger, more socially conscious customers, while losing little from the protests, as we’ve seen every single time this group of people has gotten upset.
Oh noes, they’ll buy Gillette razors to set them on fire! What should we do?
Really. It upsets the redpill guys to the point they reveal their fragility for all to see. And that by itself is something of a source of entertainment. Which is the most I ever expect from advertising.
Those certainly seem like negative male stereotypes to me.
This.
The ad isn’t targeted at the assholes. It’s targeted at the bystanders. I thought it made a good point - if you see bad behavior, it’s time to step up. Not with fists in most cases, more like a quiet word or nudge. Start from there.
In my world, I consider bad behavior that crosses certain lines to be a moral challenge, one that I find tricky to navigate. I appreciate Gillette’s moral support: I’ll take what I can get.[1] Anyway, in my experience moral challenges haven’t disappeared in the past 20 years.
[1] Think that’s laughable? Fine. Now contrast it with the glamorization of dysfunctional behavior -male and female- regularly showcased on TV. The ad was refreshing.
If it was saying we all should be good role models, then it would be gender neutral. I did not see a gender neutral advertisement, I saw an ad focused on men exclusively. I am sure I saw the same ad as you, I just have a different reaction to it. Maybe I’m a shitty person, but I feel how I feel for whatever reason.
heres what the advertising world thinks of it MSN
…if they had intended the advert to be gender neutral they would have made the advert gender neutral.
Because the problem of toxic masculinity is a problem that is the exclusive domain of men.
What part of “it was, hey, some **guys **act like jerks” made you think that RitterSport thought it was a gender neutral ad?
Right. Because there are so many women who are managers who squelch other women like the guy in the ad.
In my 38 years in industry you know how many of these I’ve seen? None.
I’m afraid we men have to own this one.
It was the using of the phrase “we all should be good role models” that I was reacting to. What, exactly, does a toxic man do that a toxic woman doesn’t do? Are we targeting toxic masculinity because men have more power in society and thus have different means by which they enact their nefariousness? Or is it that men by their very nature are inherently more toxic by virtue of being of the male sex?
Why don’t you review the threads where women of the Dope react to some of the awful threads on here and get back to me.
Also, take a look at the guy elected President and tell me that sexism is a thing of the past.
Yeah, we are better than we were 40 or 50 years ago (when an ad for shaving cream had the theme “take it all off” and the shaving was done to the tune of “The Stripper” by Billy Rose) but we are hardly in sexual equality paradise yet.
Though thinking we are is an excellent way of avoiding self-examination.
There is now and has always been bad behavior of men. I’ve seen plenty of it and I’ve always been against it. I’ve seen women dehumanized and put down in the workplace. If you think that is the issue I have with the ad I think I have not explained myself clearly.
I think the thing I don’t like about the ad is that it visually starts off painting men as conforming group of like minded people. Visually, to me that is pretty clearly not seeing men as individuals but as a group of people who are conforming to ideas such as boys will be boys. If I saw any large group of people portrayed this way I would not think of it as something good.
…gotcha. You cherry picked a fraction of a sentence, ignored the entire context of both what this thread is about and literally the words that RitterSport said, recontextualized what RitterSport into something that RitterSport didn’t say, argued against that, now you are defending those actions.
Okay. Glad we cleared that up.
The phrase is “toxic masculinity.” “Toxic men” and “toxic women” are an entirely different thing.
We are targeting toxic masculinity because toxic masculinity is a huge fucking problem that we need to address.
I think its because you are conflating “toxic masculinity” with “toxic”. Sort that out and you might get a better understanding of what we are all talking about.
Speaking of toxic, Gillette is owned by the guys whose tampons gave hundreds of women Toxic Shock Syndrome. And who tried their hardest to avoid liability,p.
Yeah, not buying their sudden embrace of feminism.