• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Gillette Commercial

Curious George

Veteran Member
That would be a matter of opinion.
I say mine is cromulent.
The parody commercial makes another.
It appears that you disagree.
What would it take for you to intervene in a situation? If you intervene to address another males behavior, are you a "defender of women?"
 

Salvador

RF's Swedenborgian
I just watched the video, and all I got from it was that it was suggesting that men should strive to be good examples to their kids and to stand up to bullying and the mistreatment of women. How exactly is this "PC/SJW" unless you believe that bullying and mistreating women are somehow an essential part of being a "real man"?

If bullying and mistreating and bullying of women were done by Muslims, then social justice warriors would excuse this as part of these Muslims' Islamic culture. However, if mistreating and bullying of women were done by white Anglo-Saxon men, then social justice warriors would consider this to be a grave immoral injustice towards women.

Too bad, Muslim men don't shave off their beards; otherwise, this Gillette commercial could be done with Muslims.
 

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
If bullying and mistreating and bullying of women were done by Muslims, then social justice warriors would excuse this as part of these Muslims' Islamic culture. However, if mistreating and bullying of women were done by white Anglo-Saxon men, then social justice warriors would consider this to be a grave immoral injustice towards women.

Any "SJW" who thinks the misogyny of Muslims should get a pass are hypocritical pieces of ****, but exactly how common is this view and what does it have to do with the Gillette commercial?
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
What would it take for you to intervene in a situation? If you intervene to address another males behavior, are you a "defender of women?"
I can't give you criteria off hand.
I can think of situations where I have though, both with males & females,
straight & gay. Question...
Why should only males intervene with their ilk when only females would benefit?

I see a more general approach, ie, males or females should intervene whenever
they feel called to reproach misbehavior by anyone of any gender. I find this
useful particularly in the workplace, dealing with sexual impropriety, bullying,
fighting, attire, etc.
 

Salvador

RF's Swedenborgian
Any "SJW" who thinks the misogyny of Muslims should get a pass are hypocritical pieces of ****, but exactly how common is this view and what does it have to do with the Gillette commercial?

Fortunately for Muslims, they don't shave their body, so they are spared from getting lectured by any Gillette razor commercials.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
I find nothing wrong with calling out bad behaviors and modeling good behaviors in their place. "Boys will be boys" is a lame excuse, and it's good to model the guy breaking up the boys fighting, it's good the one guy restrained his friend from harassing women, and it's good to point out kids need good role models because today's boys are tomorrow's men, and they need guidance not excuses.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
I'm guessing that you saw one the last time you looked in the mirror, Getting your panties in a twist because an ad suggests that real men shouldn't act like immature boys is the very definition of an insecure snowflake.
By the very definition boys are not men and men are not boys. Boy are physically and mentally immature. Men have a mature body and mind, and we should expect them to behave and act like it.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
I just watched the video, and all I got from it was that it was suggesting that men should strive to be good examples to their kids and to stand up to bullying and the mistreatment of women. How exactly is this "PC/SJW" unless you believe that bullying and mistreating women are somehow an essential part of being a "real man"?

I think it really depends on the context, and since this issue has gotten a lot of attention in the past couple of years, it's perceived in that light.

I don't think that anyone is arguing that bullying and mistreating women are an essential part of being a "real man."

However, I think that men often strive to be good examples to their kids. Back in the day, it used to be known as "teaching them to behave like gentlemen." Westerns were the favorite film/TV genre, and those were full of stories of standing up to bullying and the mistreatment of women. But it was presented more in a way of "this is what real men do," not so much in the sense of "we must stand against toxic masculinity." It's not so much that the overall message of the video was wrong, but I think some might take issue with how it was presented.

I think some people might take issue that there is some implied collective responsibility that all men must share, just because they're men. It doesn't imply collective guilt, but it does suggest that men should take responsibility for policing other men...just because. Many men would prefer not to be cajoled or shamed into telling other men what to do, and most would prefer to leave criminal matters in the hands of proper authorities.

The Gillette ad wasn't really that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things, but I think it's yet another example of how much of a communication breakdown there is in this country when it comes to public discourse over matters like this.
 

Curious George

Veteran Member
I can't give you criteria off hand.
I can think of situations where I have though, both with males & females,
straight & gay.
And did you consider ypurself a "defender of women" for it?
Question...
Why should only males intervene with their ilk when only females would benefit?

I see a more general approach, ie, males or females should intervene whenever
they feel called to reproach misbehavior by anyone of any gender. I find this
useful particularly in the workplace, dealing with sexual impropriety, bullying,
fighting, attire, etc.
Who ever suggested just males should intervene?
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
No, but it was you who saw men intervening on the behalf of women and boys and assumed they were cast as "the defenders of women."

That is just it, they never said such. They didn't even imply such.
This is the point where we agree to have different inferences.
 

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I find the typical online anti-feminist brigade every bit as ironically thin-skinned and insecure as they strive to portray their critics as. It's like the confused kid in middle school who believes everyone else is less intelligent than he is and bullies them because of that belief.

But isn't this exactly why X wave feminism exists? :D

I mean, just switch "anti-feminist" with "anti-masculine" and it's amazing how well that shoe fits. I'm not down with the haters, I don't care if they call themselves MRA's, feminists, or whatever. There was certainly a time in the past when women in the west lacked equality of opportunity, but that was before I was even born. It's no time in my lifetime, so it's unlikely that it's been the case in any time in the lives of anyone else in this forum. Maybe if someone around here is 80+ years old... maybe... lol
 
Top