This is not about personal insecurity (at least not for me). It's about double-standards. The very fact that advertisers have traditionally fed on people's insecurity (man or woman) to sell products should be a good indicator of why they aren't to be regarded as reliable sources of teaching about morality. I absolutely support the message in and of itself, but I have a problem with the messenger because I think there is ZERO genuineness involved there.

@Darius77 I totally agree that their motivation is not one of the heart but of the dollar...I am just saying that women have been fighting against these ads for years and have finally made some inroads because advertisers have realized that we aren't going to buy into their standards anymore...this new touchy-feely type of ad is an improvement but your point is valid...it is not for our sake but for the sake of making money...

@thinktwice Exactly! As if they didn't do enough damage with their fucking ass implant advertisements to begin with. Now, they're gonna accompany that with a moral lesson! Just sell your fucking bullshit and move on...

@Darius77 It would be nice if ads just showed the product, how it worked, and the features...but that is never going to happen...so, given a choice, I prefer this kind of ad over sexist or shaming ones.

First - "unless they have smooth skin, shiny hair, fat lips, etc. etc. etc. that they are basically worthless" is not typically taken seriously, nor is it a character attack against a whole sex.

Second - you don't have a whole anti-female media zeitgeist that says your are a defective human if you are born with a vagina, unlike what men are experiencing today.

Third - you, as a woman, were more than capable of standing up and voicing your disgust at this type of tactic, and also were afforded the opportunity to vote with your wallet. I am not attributing this to you (at least not consciously), but there are many both directly and indirectly telling men to shut up and take it...i.e. "if a man or woman is not "guilty" of bad behavior, why would such an ad bother them at all?" This last sentence essentially says to me that you think I am guilty of being a POS b/c I don't like the commercial's sexist message and there is no other reason. It also ties into my first point above, and implies a bit of hypocriticism (is that a word? lol) since you ascribe this to the men, but not to the women (if women are offended is it b/c they are worthless?).

Let me follow up by saying from our interaction on here, I think you are a thoughtful and reasonable person...so please don't think my argument against you points are hateful, malevolent, or disrespectful to you. You are in the group of few that I enjoy dialogue with; I am just attempting to point out there is a different POV to the situation, and to your comments. I don't think you intended them to be hurtful, I just point out they could be reasonable construed that way.

@jondspen The same items that you point out are the same ones used in any argument when a more repressed group speaks out ... I totally get that men feel they are underfire, but my point is, that women and others have been underfire for a very long time and when the tables are turned, all of a sudden, the one class that appears to be the most outraged are white males...is it fair? Is it justified? I think there is a balance...I don't believe the proper tactic is to turn on your "oppressors" and give them a taste of their own medicine nor do I believe in quietly allowing and soothing the outrage.

1. Numerous studies have shown that years of ads telling women what they should look like to be worthy and desirable have had an enormous impact on women...eating disorders, depression, bullying, suicide...to say that it was not a target of one group, women, is naive and discounts the millions that were affected by these ads negatively. Sure sold a lot of creams and beauty products, though.

2. The extremes in the feminist movement are just that...extremes. It is the everyday putting down of women and the slow eroding of their worth that ended up with women getting tired of it all and perhaps blowing up. You know how it is when you are angry and don't deal with it...it piles on and people explode, maybe at times,inappropriately and at the wrong person. Women have been considered the "lower" sex and even if you watch the behavior of someone like our VP, you can see that his wife and many wives like her are expected to be subservient to their husbands in a lot of ways.I respect that these types of attacks are not pleasant for many men, but women have endured that and much more for centuries.

3. What I was saying about the ad is that it is taking advantage of a way to make money by targeting an audience that wants to feel good about themselves. It is good old fashioned marketing. How is it any different than a commercial that gets you to drink Coke because a big football player gives a little kid his jersey and a Coke? Does it mean football players that don't do that are POS? No, it just means, people who like those kinds of commercials might buy Coke to support that behavior.

As well, you are coflating long term erosion of a woman's SELFesteem with hurtful behavior against others...the ads telling women what to think about body image don't address things like bullying, mansplaining, touching innappropriately, cat calling, etc. Those are all things hurtful to OTHERS...women and men...

Nowhere in the ad did they say all men do this...more like, IF you are knowingly or unknowingly doing these things, be better and stop it. Partly educational and gives the person a chance to look at themselves and see what can be improved...or a pat on the back because you don't do any of that shit....my comment was meant to say that if it doesn't apply to you, then good for you! What is wrong with that message? Many men here have acknowledged that it had no impact on them because they were not perpetrators of those behaviors...YAY...progress... isn't that a positive thing?

If you took my comments as being hurtful, knowing that I am such a reasonable person, then I would look more at your own view of the world and why you appear to be more than a little defensive...the old adage, if the shoe fits seems to be at play... Of course, the other reason could be that I am just a terrible person and purposely single out people to demean and aggravate them for sport...

@thinktwice When the tables are turned? Most outraged? OMG - women have been a vocal part of the rights movement since suffrage in the early 1900's! You and I both lived through the fiasco that was the ERA movement in the late 70's and early 80's. Are you honestly going to try and imply that women didn't make a huge fuss about the inequalities then, or even now....and that men are just being whiny over-reactionary babies about legitimate sexism in the media and in government policy? And regardless of any of those points - right is right, and wrong is wrong. Does it matter if women had it worse in the past, or in one certain aspect? Seems to me the whole "feminist equality" definition goes out the window when sexism or inappropriate behavior against men comes into the picture. This is not a zero-sum game of equality or respect between the sexes. Regardless of who has it worse, sexism against ANYONE is wrong and not productive. It would be like blacks saying that jews are over-reacting to racism and the Holocaust, simple b/c the black community experienced then and today what they consider worse and for much longer under the global slave trade and current racism. After all, you don't regularly see unarmed jewish men being shot on the streets of Ferguson. Wrong is wrong, and should not be dismissed b/c someone feels they have been wronged more. Both should have equality, justice, and respect IMHO.

@jondspen Are you even reading the same post I am?

I think there is some sort of failure to communicate here...I never mentioned anything about women not fighting this fight for a long time...a very long, long time...long...never advocated that because the tables are turned, that men should be treated the same...it is not a tactic I endorse

I never said men should be treated the same as others have been...

I never said anything about playing who had it worse or better...

I never said wrong is wrong and more wrong is "wronger"....

WTF are your reading? Obviously, you purport to be open to discussion but you have already set the outcome you want and aren't really listening, just preparing your rebuttal...sadly, I think we agree on the basic underlying issues but if you keep putting meaning and words to my comments, then I am going to bow out of the discussion...

@thinktwice " I totally get that men feel they are underfire, but my point is, that women and others have been underfire for a very long time and when the tables are turned, all of a sudden, the one class that appears to be the most outraged are white males" is what I was reading. You mean to tell me I was suppose to interpret that as not attacking men? I honestly don't see how I misinterpreted it as bashing...as you specifically called out - white males.

Let's step back here. This ad wasn't about women, or how victimized they are, so please stop twisting this into a pro-feminism agenda argument, and how bad commercial geared toward your sex made you feel. I don't disagree it happened, nor do I dismiss the way it made you feel, but that's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about THIS ad, which is directed toward men. It is due to the strides against sexism in the past that we now find what once was ok, is now not, irregardless of the audience of the sexism. This ad took a negative stance on men, essentially portraying them as majority comprised of immoral bullies. The ad could have very easily spoken up for the REAL world majority of men that (1) died in the civil war (2) fought for the suffrage movement (3) died in WWII to combat fascism and genocide (4) died and were beaten in the civil rights movement (5) work today to raise boys and girls to respect themselves and others. It could have been a positive message to men about using our strength to stand up to this kind of actions by a few, yet it took the popular feminist agenda that men are sexist bullies, and only a few of them do the right thing.

@jondspen Good..continue to do it your way...bye bye

That's crazy, I can get a decent shave for 2 months or longer by maintaining my razor blades properly

@GrantSmith We must not have the same kind of beard then

@WhereAtAtheist So what you’re saying is that it’s most likely failure by design for the soul purpose to create a constant demand.

@48thRonin It's always about the money...everything made these days appears to fall apart or stop working...I have always maintained that economic issues of all kinds would be our downfall...even at this level...a freaking razor that won't shave a beard...UGH...

@thinktwice I sold cars at a ford dealership back in the late 90’s and the sales manager told us to our faces that no one builds a vehicle to last more than 5 years. And that’s when I truly knew how the system works.

@48thRonin My Honda from 1989 died in 2017; my 2002 Toyota is still going strong with nearly 200,000 miles...

My brand new KitchenAid stove...three repairs in two years...I think there might be a message here...

@thinktwice I know people who have a fridge or freezer from the 1950 or so that is still running great today. I also know people that have purchased new fridges/freezers that don't get more than 10 years out of them...and that is if they don't get a Friday assembly line model that is constantly breaking on them. One person I know recently got a really nice new fridge, and in 3 months it needed repairs, and over the next year had the repair guy out there 3 or 4 times.

@jondspen Yeah...seems like older things lasted longer...

Wait. Gold digging is just as bad as sexual assault? God! We men are such victims!

I think this is called "false equivalency." I happen to believe, you can disagree (which I think you probably do), that "toxic masculinity" does cause some serious social and criminal problems. Whereas gold-digging, well, is also a by-product of the toxic masculinity.

Almost all sexual assaults are committed by men.
A vast majority of violent offenses are committed by men.

Gold-digging, the last time I checked, isn't really a crime or an urgent social issue....

@KenChang I would appreciate it if you don't put words in my mouth. I never equated "sexual assault" with "gold digging". I'm arguing that, if we agree that an advertisement is inclusive by its very nature (since it is directed at the general public), we should be careful about slipping political/ideological/moral lessons therein. I'm all about being great role models to children and teaching them about sexual misconducts at an early age. The problem arises when you incorporate all that into advertising a primarily male-utilized product. You could argue that the advertisement didn't say a word about all men needing to behave themselves around women, but that's how advertisements are interpreted (exactly due to their inclusive nature). That's where the tampon "analogy" came from.

@KenChang By the way, as @jondspen pointed out, since when did those corporate cunts start to give a shit about real issues? Gillette calling for an end to sexual assault reminds me of those rap artists dedicating their songs about gang-banging to world peace. There is nothing wrong about dedicating a song to world peace, you just have to be in the place to do it.

@Darius77 Yes, I agree that you never specifically equated it. But you are comparing it as something equivalent. Hence my quip on false equivalency. I fully agree with you that all advertisements are propaganda. But some are better than others. Whether it is directed at public in general about a male product or not, makes no difference.

Your problem appears to be "hypocrisy" of the corporate cunt taking moral superiority. But they always do. In any advertisement they are trying to control who we see ourselves as. So, if they are going to do it, they might as well bring a positive message, rather than "if you want to fuck more women, use our product" message. Because that's what the corporate cunts have been doing all along.

But you are upset, because you believe this is the same thing as the corporate cunts preaching to women about their moral codes. Well, they have been. For decades. And the gold-digging moral code preaching would not only be "hypocritical" but also it would add to the power of patriarchy.

I do not see THIS ad as adding to the power of patriarchy.

I am sorry if my tone was not as direct as what I am trying to say here. I do apologize for my tone. I tend to piss people off. I should try not to.

@KenChang Funny, this stat says otherwise. So not only are "Almost all sexual assaults are committed by men." wrong in the majority, they aren't even the greatest perpetrators [slate.com]

Then we have "A vast majority of violent offenses are committed by men." - but you have evidence in family and intimate relationships that "are also an area in which women are most likely to be violent, and not just in response to male aggression but toward children, elders, female relatives or partners, and non-violent men, according to a study published in the Journal of Family Violence." [time.com]

Here is another source to buttress the argument - "The results were surprising. For example, the CDC’s nationally representative data revealed that over one year, men and women were equally likely to experience nonconsensual sex, and most male victims reported female perpetrators." [scientificamerican.com]

And from that same article "For example, the common one-dimensional portrayal of women as harmless victims reinforces outdated gender stereotypes. This keeps us from seeing women as complex human beings, able to wield power, even in misguided or violent ways. And, the assumption that men are always perpetrators and never victims reinforces unhealthy ideas about men and their supposed invincibility. These hyper-masculine ideals can reinforce aggressive male attitudes and, at the same time, callously stereotype male victims of sexual abuse as “failed men.”"

Now I will agree, men are VASTLY more likely to be arrested, convicted, and jailed for violence...but let's quit looking at the stats with rose colored glasses and not holding women to the same standards. Please quite putting the pussy on a pedestal and pretending they are such helpless victims. After all, I though men and women were equal. Let's start treating the victims with the same compassion and care, regardless of sex. Let us also treat the perpetrators the same, again, regardless of genitalia just to fit a sexist agenda.

@KenChang A positive message is gonna be effective if only it is relayed through a positive platform. Promoting "global peace" would be meaningless if the one's doing it is the Supreme Leader of Iran. Who exactly is gonna watch this ad and go: "you know what? I've been a prick for the past 15 years! I really have to get my shit together"? What is next? Coca-Cola promoting a healthy diet? That's why I don't want to see advertisers bringing "positive" messages. If they are willing to go down that road, they might as well stop all lipstick and make-up advertisements as they essentially carry a "if you want more men to fuck you, use our product" message.

I don't judge the merit of something based on how it might affect a single phenomenon (patriarchy, in your case). I fundamentally disagree with the role that you attribute to patriarchy as the underlying reason for certain things (gold digging, for instance), but I don't want to go into details here.

No worries at all! It's always fun discussing things with you, I mean that!

Did you miss all the empowering Dove commercials?

@jondspen The National Crime Victimization Survey was extremely fascinating to read. Thanks for sharing!

@Darius77 @jorj I will be the first to admit that statistics can be misleading and manipulated, or just outright incomplete. It does seem to be vastly skewed pro-female by people on here and the media though. I can't understand why a site full of people who don't agree with mindless adherence to some belief (religion) swallow the anti-white anti-male agenda without any hesitation. Like I typically say, I have two daughters I want to be respected and treated with fairness...but that doesn't mean at the expense of my, my son-in-laws, or my future grand or great grand sons. Seems like there is this zero-sum game mentality that a woman can't win unless a man loses. I'm just trying to point out that in MOST cases, that is not the situation. And in the cases where it is, MOST of the time it boils down to the person's qualifications or abilities, not the sex or race, as being the deciding factor on who wins the game....which is ultimately what I think we all would agree is fair.

@jorj I agree also. I don't think we'll see it become a reasonable discussion until two things happen. One, all these old women who experienced the sexism of the 50's, 60's, and 70's die off...and Two, today's women start having their sons and grandsons experience sever social and emotional repercussion from all these bad policy decisions of today. Sad that the pendulum has to swing back and forth so much before we can put in in the center.

But Americans at least, certainly try to attach morals to consumerism. New is better, more is better, if you're credit sucks then you're not a good person...regardless of who's saying it, it's still a good message.

Corporate America is positioning itself as the new preacher of morality. I've seen examples of it from Apple, Patreon and PayPal. I expect it will become a trend.

I think the biggest problem is it takes a negative tone instead of a positive against the male sex. Why could the commercial, instead of portraying men in a negative lite, with a few standing up to write the wrongs, put the focus on the positive where MOST men do by action and thought attempt to right the wrongs? Essentially, it says (about men) that this is rampant normalized behavior for the sex, and only a few are doing the right thing, and it is on this point where I, and I think others, disagree. I think the majority of men do stand up to this type of abnormal, unacceptable behavior, and we should be proud of our strength and fortitude. Very simple change; instead of men in general being categorically portrayed in a negative light, have the same message (anti bullying, etc) but portray man generally NOT putting up with this type of behavior, which seems to be the norm in day to day interaction from my experience.

Apparently, this was a controversial topic.

I know a couple of guys whose heads exploded over this. sigh
I should have such problems to raise my blood pressure.

@GrantSmith Thank you. I literally cried. I love it! Gillette has my respect for doing this!

@SleeplessInTexas I don't watch commercial tv so I would never have seen these...reminds me of those long commercials from Thailand...heart wrenching and teaching a lesson...I cried, too!

@thinktwice Yes, I don't watch commercial television anymore so when I see commercials like this one, I am probably more emotionally affected than I used to be. I think I cried because it hit an emotional hot button for me being a mom. My son is now 27 but this did remind me of some of the hard times he went through in school anyway!