Gillette get political...
Discussion
As I said I the other thread, i am getting tired of being told how bad I am simply because I am a man. The fact I am being told by a greedy amoral money grabbing company that is more intrested in their profit margin than their own staff, is frankly taking the Micheal.
For some perspective my wife has just seen it and was not impressed with the way they are demonizing men is some kind of broad generalisation.
Gillette is now definitely off our shopping list.
For some perspective my wife has just seen it and was not impressed with the way they are demonizing men is some kind of broad generalisation.
Gillette is now definitely off our shopping list.
cookie118 said:
It’s probably not as uncommon as you think. It’s estimated that 1/5 women will experience rape or a serious sexual assault in their life. 62% of female students experience sexual violence, and sexual harassment in the workplace affects over half of uk women.
The flip side of that is that the idea that ‘it’s only a small minority’ isn’t really true. It is a widespread issue.
I think Gillette should be applauded for doing it, and I’m sure they’ll have done their cost-benefit analysis on the campaign.
Can you link what gives those stats? "62% of female students experience sexual violence" seems especially far-fetched. The flip side of that is that the idea that ‘it’s only a small minority’ isn’t really true. It is a widespread issue.
I think Gillette should be applauded for doing it, and I’m sure they’ll have done their cost-benefit analysis on the campaign.
There's no way a message like this would be approved for any other group in society, if it's snowflakey to be fed up with being told to do better by a multi billion dollar company accused of exploiting child labour because some with the same chromosome arrangement as you are
s then yep, I'm a snowflake.I will add it is phenomenal how often it seems to be the male feminists that make up this s
t seem to be the ones accused of misconduct, almost like they've got something to hideJagLover said:
Well they said they would boycott future Star Wars movies as a result of the TLJ and then Solo underperformed expectations by a couple of hundred million $, so I wouldn't necessarily say it is a few. Nor is it crusty old men as most of the channels in question have young male presenters, as is their subscriber base I would imagine.
We are in a world where many people spend longer on YouTube than they do on traditional TV and many cluster with similar folks to themselves.
Solo did badly because it was crap. Not because of some alleged boycott. Long gone are the days where film studios could hide the fact their films were crap behind paid reviews.We are in a world where many people spend longer on YouTube than they do on traditional TV and many cluster with similar folks to themselves.
You're trying to find causality where there is none. Desperately trying to find any link when it's obvious that there isn't one.
This whole thing will be forgottten in days, if not hours.
amusingduck said:
Why on earth would I want a side of identity politics with my shaving equipment?
Because SJWs are like loony religious nuts - they have to proselytize. They are strongly authoritarian in nature and just have to impose their view on everyone else. They infect entities like companies, sports organisations or hobbyist groups and then go full steam to shovel their obnoxious victimhood politics into everything the target host does. You can see the results in the Star Wars movies and Marvel Comics.Also, large corporations seem to give too much weight to the opinions of a small but incredibly vocal and aggressive minority on social media. Some 'activist' in Gilette will have pushed this and management will think that they are catching a wave of popular opinion. Just wait for all the online media sites to start gushing support for their 'brave' move.
captain_cynic said:
Solo did badly because it was crap. Not because of some alleged boycott. Long gone are the days where film studios could hide the fact their films were crap behind paid reviews.
You're trying to find causality where there is none. Desperately trying to find any link when it's obvious that there isn't one.
This whole thing will be forgottten in days, if not hours.
Many Hollywood movies are cr*p. Every single Transformers and Pirates movie after the first one as one example. It doesn't stop them being commercially successful. Many franchises are also virtually critic proof as well, Star Wars certainly should be.You're trying to find causality where there is none. Desperately trying to find any link when it's obvious that there isn't one.
This whole thing will be forgottten in days, if not hours.
You think there is no connection between popular Youtubers calling for a boycott and then movies underperforming. I rather doubt it. Why do you think "go woke, go broke" is so popular as a slogan if it appeals to only a tiny minority?
JagLover said:
Lotobear said:
...Gillette - the best a mangina can get
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCx0NeffRfI
captain_cynic said:
Solo did badly because it was crap. Not because of some alleged boycott. Long gone are the days where film studios could hide the fact their films were crap behind paid reviews.
You're trying to find causality where there is none. Desperately trying to find any link when it's obvious that there isn't one.
This whole thing will be forgottten in days, if not hours.
Solo was actually decent enough (though not outstanding) ... it suffered from the fallout of the crapshow that was The Last Jedi as people simply didn't feel hyped to go watch it. The Force Awakens was generally well received (I thought it was crap though) and that helped Rogue One.You're trying to find causality where there is none. Desperately trying to find any link when it's obvious that there isn't one.
This whole thing will be forgottten in days, if not hours.
If you don't make good movies with a beloved saga, then future films will pay the price from disgruntled consumers. That's capitalism in action.
cookie118 said:
AshVX220 said:
It isn't so much the message that gets me, it's the lack of an equal message against female bullying of other females and males.
It would imply that all those negative attributes are absolutely rife everywhere, when the reality is very different. Most men live by the values endorsed by the advert with, I would imagine, only a small minority that don't.
It's the relentless preaching and making men all seem worthless and tarred with the same brush recently that gets most of our backs up.
It’s probably not as uncommon as you think. It’s estimated that 1/5 women will experience rape or a serious sexual assault in their life. 62% of female students experience sexual violence, and sexual harassment in the workplace affects over half of uk women.It would imply that all those negative attributes are absolutely rife everywhere, when the reality is very different. Most men live by the values endorsed by the advert with, I would imagine, only a small minority that don't.
It's the relentless preaching and making men all seem worthless and tarred with the same brush recently that gets most of our backs up.
The flip side of that is that the idea that ‘it’s only a small minority’ isn’t really true. It is a widespread issue.
I think Gillette should be applauded for doing it, and I’m sure they’ll have done their cost-benefit analysis on the campaign.
Boydie88 said:
Can you link what gives those stats? "62% of female students experience sexual violence" seems especially far-fetched.
There's no way a message like this would be approved for any other group in society, if it's snowflakey to be fed up with being told to do better by a multi billion dollar company accused of exploiting child labour because some with the same chromosome arrangement as you ares then yep, I'm a snowflake.
I will add it is phenomenal how often it seems to be the male feminists that make up this st seem to be the ones accused of misconduct, almost like they've got something to hide
https://www.safeline.org.uk/sexual-harassment-in-the-workplace-is-found-to-affect-over-half-of-uk-women/There's no way a message like this would be approved for any other group in society, if it's snowflakey to be fed up with being told to do better by a multi billion dollar company accused of exploiting child labour because some with the same chromosome arrangement as you are
s then yep, I'm a snowflake.I will add it is phenomenal how often it seems to be the male feminists that make up this s
t seem to be the ones accused of misconduct, almost like they've got something to hidehttps://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com...
https://www.nsvrc.org/sites/default/files/publicat...
j_4m said:
otolith said:
Doesn't bother me at all. They're fair points.
Not really fair, there's some ridiculous straw manning of 'masculine men' (whatever they are) as slathering, violent neanderthals that can barely keep their base desires in check. You can sum up the whole advert with the simple philosophy "don't be a to people".JagLover said:
Many Hollywood movies are cr*p. Every single Transformers and Pirates movie after the first one as one example. It doesn't stop them being commercially successful. Many franchises are also virtually critic proof as well, Star Wars certainly should be.
You think there is no connection between popular Youtubers calling for a boycott and then movies underperforming. I rather doubt it. Why do you think "go woke, go broke" is so popular as a slogan if it appeals to only a tiny minority?
Remember another company that was going to be boycotted massively by (I imagine) a lot of the same people who are going to be boycotting Gillette?You think there is no connection between popular Youtubers calling for a boycott and then movies underperforming. I rather doubt it. Why do you think "go woke, go broke" is so popular as a slogan if it appeals to only a tiny minority?
https://www.vox.com/2018/9/24/17895704/nike-colin-...
cookie118 said:
https://www.safeline.org.uk/sexual-harassment-in-t...
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com...
https://www.nsvrc.org/sites/default/files/publicat...
Already a problem with the Guardian one in the first line "Nearly one in 10 female students who responded to a study of sexual violence in higher education said they had been raped. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com...
https://www.nsvrc.org/sites/default/files/publicat...
I'd argue you're far more likely to respond if you are a victim of what you perceive to be an assault.
"What it found was shocking: 62% of students and graduates have experienced sexual violence as per the definition used by Rape Crisis. Groping, harassment, unwanted touching, coercion, sexual assault, rape – all commonplace, it turns out, in UK universities."
By that definition, I'm a multiple victim of sexual violence from women.
JLC25 said:
Remember another company that was going to be boycotted massively by (I imagine) a lot of the same people who are going to be boycotting Gillette?
https://www.vox.com/2018/9/24/17895704/nike-colin-...
The article is actually fairly meaningless in assessing the impact of a boycott, if any. https://www.vox.com/2018/9/24/17895704/nike-colin-...
If you remember in my first post I said it was a balance between the positive media coverage and the target consumer of the company involved.
Edited by JagLover on Tuesday 15th January 13:49
Boydie88 said:
Already a problem with the Guardian one in the first line "Nearly one in 10 female students who responded to a study of sexual violence in higher education said they had been raped.
I'd argue you're far more likely to respond if you are a victim of what you perceive to be an assault.
"What it found was shocking: 62% of students and graduates have experienced sexual violence as per the definition used by Rape Crisis. Groping, harassment, unwanted touching, coercion, sexual assault, rape – all commonplace, it turns out, in UK universities."
By that definition, I'm a multiple victim of sexual violence from women.
The definition of "harassment" is very wide for Feminists as well and can simply mean "being asked out by a man I don't fancy"I'd argue you're far more likely to respond if you are a victim of what you perceive to be an assault.
"What it found was shocking: 62% of students and graduates have experienced sexual violence as per the definition used by Rape Crisis. Groping, harassment, unwanted touching, coercion, sexual assault, rape – all commonplace, it turns out, in UK universities."
By that definition, I'm a multiple victim of sexual violence from women.
JLC25 said:
Remember another company that was going to be boycotted massively by (I imagine) a lot of the same people who are going to be boycotting Gillette?
https://www.vox.com/2018/9/24/17895704/nike-colin-...
Maybe look at Nike's current stock price? rather than a piece from a few weeks after?https://www.vox.com/2018/9/24/17895704/nike-colin-...
JLC25 said:
Remember another company that was going to be boycotted massively by (I imagine) a lot of the same people who are going to be boycotting Gillette?
https://www.vox.com/2018/9/24/17895704/nike-colin-...
Funny story, but when I was living in the US, I was out and about not long after the whole Nike thing kicked off and I saw some old boy who had sewn US flags over the Nike emblems on his trainers. Now, I don't know for obviously if it was because of the Nike Boycott, but the timing of me seeing him would suggest so! https://www.vox.com/2018/9/24/17895704/nike-colin-...
untakenname said:
Similar to the Lexus advert where two females steal a new Lexus and then go around joyriding, apparently it was ok as the victim was a man?
O/T. Seen that advert a few times, what they do is clearly beyond the pale yet is condoned as OK, the sneering at the end of the advert is particularly bad. Dishonest, and nasty with it. WTF are Lexus thinking?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff