Really? No threads about the Gillette ad yet?

[jardiniere]

Sorry, somehow I missed this reply earlier.



Allow me to clarify...because I'm really not conflating anything.

We're talking about catcalling...and while I don't know the official definition....I'm talking about a situation where a man and woman come across each other in public, or perhaps a place of business, where they're doing something other than socializing...and one "hits on" the other.

cat calling
noun a shrill whistle or shout of disapproval, typically one made at a public meeting or performance. • a loud whistle or a comment of a sexual nature made by a man to a passing woman.
verb [no object] make a whistle, shout, or comment of a sexual nature to a woman passing by: they were fired for catcalling at women.

This can be as innocuous as attempting to begin a conversation "hey there" or more directly expressing interest like as in saying something flirtatious or complimentary.

No. No it can't.

Hopefully that clears it up....because I'm not really talking about any other kind of situation. It's one briefly touched on in the commercial.



Well then I suppose it's important to understand there's no formula for this sort of thing. What one woman might find offensive...another might find funny or flirtatious. What might work for one guy will come out awkward or intimidating coming from another.

There's really only one way for a guy to figure out what works for him....only one way to get any good at it....and that's to do it over and over again, mostly failing repeatedly.

There's no one way to do this.

Since the last poster I asked didn't answer, I'll ask you....do you think women should be restricted the same way? Do you think it's wrong for them to approach a guy in public?

Please answer honestly, don't just say that the same rules should apply to women because it'll sound sexist or hypocritical if you don't. If you honestly think that it's ok for women but not men....say so and explain why.

While you're at it....tell me if you also think the same about gay men. Can they hit on men in public? This has happened to me a few times in my life...so I'm curious what you think.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

No, we're not saying it's automatically wrong.

We're saying it's not automatically right, that it often isn't right, and that men ought to be aware of that and judge the person and the context before engaging in behaviour which is - as noted - threatening, intimidating, etc.

I would agree with that statement...which is why I'm not crazy about the ad.

If something's not automatically wrong, then it doesn't require a cultural mandate that "if you're a 'good' man, the expectation is you should step in to stop other men from doing it, and openly admit that it's the result of a culture of toxic masculinity"


If the actions being depicted were ones that fell in the category of "automatically wrong", then I'd have no problem it.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

cat calling
noun a shrill whistle or shout of disapproval, typically one made at a public meeting or performance. • a loud whistle or a comment of a sexual nature made by a man to a passing woman.
verb [no object] make a whistle, shout, or comment of a sexual nature to a woman passing by: they were fired for catcalling at women.

If that's the case, what happened in the ad wasn't catcalling.

Saying "C'mon smile" or "Nice!" when a woman walks by is hardly a "comment of a sexual nature"

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Normally this guy can be on the obnoxious side...but I agree with him on this video

If you search on YouTube for
Gillette Gets WOKE and Goes BROKE!

He's makes some interesting (and comical) points about the ad.
(can't directly link it here since there's a bad word or two)

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I like this commercial because it mostly agrees with my feelings on the subject.

Consequently, ... I can really ONLY IMAGINE why someone wouldn't like it.

I've already explained why I dislike it...and the reason isn't because I'm advocating for rape, sexual assault, harassment, or anything of that nature. Nor is it anything to do with any sort of sentiment along the lines of "I'm just ticked by my societal position of being superior via being male is being challenged and I don't like !"


...I assume that IS what you're trying to imply about those of us who don't like the ad, right?

 

[A_Thinker]

...I assume that IS what you're trying to imply about those of us who don't like the ad, right?

Why are you assuming anything about me ?

The only thing I've ever said about negative reaction to the ad ... is that some men don't like to be told what to do ...

 

[A_Thinker]

Gillette Gets WOKE and Goes BROKE!

Gillette dominates the market ... and has 750 millions customers world-wide. That's more than twice the total population of the US. I don't see them going broke any time soon ...

 

[A_Thinker]

Normally this guy can be on the obnoxious side...but I agree with him on this video

If you search on YouTube for
Gillette Gets WOKE and Goes BROKE!

I looked up this video ... and what do I find ???

My favorite Vegan wack-job ... OK, not really, but he is majorly into controversy. Even Vegans consider him to be a bit whacked ...

In summary, he's a twenty-something Vegan who believes all meat-eaters are murderers of sentient life, ... but somehow, he and his wife own a dog who can only eat meat ... and they bought the dog while they were Vegan.

He's good for a laugh ...

 

[All Englands Skies]

I've already explained why I dislike it...and the reason isn't because I'm advocating for rape, sexual assault, harassment, or anything of that nature. Nor is it anything to do with any sort of sentiment along the lines of "I'm just ticked by my societal position of being superior via being male is being challenged and I don't like !"


...I assume that IS what you're trying to imply about those of us who don't like the ad, right?

Because "Social Justice" types are using more and more "witch trial" tactics day by day.

Basically, if you do not agree with this ad and think its a gross stereotype (as the "toxic man" is pretty much portrayed as the norm/status quo/majority view in this ad, while the "brave" men, are the few who stand up to it) that means you're one of the "toxic men", regardless of if you agree with what the "Toxic men" are doing or not.

That means the only other option left on the table is you agree with the ad's preaching, basically admitting most men are "toxic" in order to prove you're not "toxic".

By making this point, I am now a "toxic man" to those people.

To be honest, my post is a bit rhetorical, I know the minds of the "SJW" Fanatics, like any other fanatic, won't be changed. They have "an answer for everything" and move the goal posts all the time.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I looked up this video ... and what do I find ???

My favorite Vegan wack-job ... OK, not really, but he is majorly into controversy. Even Vegans consider him to be a bit whacked ...

In summary, he's a twenty-something Vegan who believes all meat-eaters are murderers of sentient life, ... but somehow, he and his wife own a dog who can only eat meat ... and they bought the dog while they were Vegan.

He's good for a laugh ...

Oh, I preemptively said he's normally pretty obnoxious lol. I know of him simply because I watch a lot of fitness and nutrition content and his videos will occasionally pop up in the "recommended list" on YouTube.

As far as feeding a pet meat...I know a lot of vegans who do that simply because trying to make some omnivorous and carnivorous animals live on a plant based diet is animal cruelty.

That being said, in his nutritional videos, he does reference a lot of valid scientific data to make his case (even if he takes the low road with how he debates people).

...and, when looked at from a scientific standpoint. Josh Axe and Eric Berg telling people with heart conditions that they need to ignore their cardiologist and eat more red meat and eggs is more damaging than any obnoxious thing vegan gains can say about consuming animal products.

...but all of that aside, I thought he made some valid points and echoed a lot of my sentiments about the Gillette ad.

 

[durangodawood]

....Saying "C'mon smile" or "Nice!" when a woman walks by is hardly a "comment of a sexual nature"

Maybe.... but for sure its a super idiotic thing to say to a passing stranger.

 

[comana]

If that's the case, what happened in the ad wasn't catcalling.

Saying "C'mon smile" or "Nice!" when a woman walks by is hardly a "comment of a sexual nature"

What is the purpose behind saying those comments to a woman, who you have never met, as she walks by though?

 

[A_Thinker]

Oh, I preemptively said he's normally pretty obnoxious lol. I know of him simply because I watch a lot of fitness and nutrition content and his videos will occasionally pop up in the "recommended list" on YouTube.

As far as feeding a pet meat...I know a lot of vegans who do that simply because trying to make some omnivorous and carnivorous animals live on a plant based diet is animal cruelty.

That being said, in his nutritional videos, he does reference a lot of valid scientific data to make his case (even if he takes the low road with how he debates people).

...and, when looked at from a scientific standpoint. Josh Axe and Eric Berg telling people with heart conditions that they need to ignore their cardiologist and eat more red meat and eggs is more damaging than any obnoxious thing vegan gains can say about consuming animal products.

...but all of that aside, I thought he made some valid points and echoed a lot of my sentiments about the Gillette ad.

Yeah, ... I used to watch a lot of fitness videos also ... and caught a lot of Richard "Vegan Gains" stuff.

If I recall, his antics included "mocking" a YouTube fitness guru ... after learning that he was diagnosed with testicular cancer, ... brandishing a large knife and saying that wishes that he could just "slit the throat" of another YouTuber, meeting his wife over the internet ... and traveling to Belgium to bring her back to Canada, condemning other people for having children, etc.

He's also presented a YouTube diatribe against women where he says that he considers most of them to be gold-digging resource suckers that will make a man's life hell ...

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Maybe.... but for sure its a super idiotic thing to say to a passing stranger.

Agreed, but "saying idiotic things" is hardly a precursor to any sort of criminal activity, nor is it something that should warrant the "it's other mens' jobs to hold men responsible for this sort of deviant activity" response.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

What is the purpose behind saying those comments to a woman, who you have never met, as she walks by though?

To flirt (in a tacky way)...but if "everything a guy could possibly do to get noticed or get the attention of a woman" is equated with "a quest for sexual activity", then Gillette might as well had a scene where a guy in the office says "You know, Sandra from accounting is cute, I'm going to ask her out for dinner" and then another male co-worker steps in puts his hand on his chest and says "Not cool, man!"

 

[comana]

To flirt (in a tacky way)...but if "everything a guy could possibly do to get noticed or get the attention of a woman" is equated with "a quest for sexual activity", then Gillette might as well had a scene where a guy in the office says "You know, Sandra from accounting is cute, I'm going to ask her out for dinner" and then another male co-worker steps in puts his hand on his chest and says "Not cool, man!"

Whether or not the street scene in the commercial seems overdone, all this has served to open a conversation.

I saw that scene as one friend reading the other friend's mind and stepping in to stop him from making a fool of himself by approaching that woman in a way that was inappropriate. That was my take away at least.

Asking a woman co-worker on a date is hardly comparable to chasing after a stranger on the street. The office scenario is unlikely be seen as a threat but being approached on the street by a strange man almost certainly will be.

 

[Foxfyre]

I'm pretty shocked that this hasn't made it onto here yet.

I liked it. The only part that feels a bit "iffy" to me is that I cannot really decipher why those two boys are fighting at the bbq. If it is just horseplay and rough housing, I'm cool with that. If it is using violence to solve a conflict, I very much have a problem with that.

Otherwise, 100% agreement for me.

I'm surprised at how difficult it has been for some men to take a moment and reflect on how they treat women. More than a few just seem to be all up in arms about an advert that suggests grabbing womens' butts or speaking condescendingly towards them is not some inaliienable right.

I've been on this forum long enough to know there will be some opinions on it so...let's here it!

I guess I have mixed emotions. Grown up women have always been able to handle pretty much what inappropriate guys handed out. But I have lived a very long time now and lived and worked as a grown woman before women's lib/rights movements and political correctness and can honestly say I have been subjected to very little of that.

Yes I have been teased. Yes there have been inappropriate comments, unwanted advances, etc. But the smart woman handles it, sets the guy straight usually without introducing a lot of toxicity into the situation, and everything was fine. Every now and then there is a total jerk you have to set back on his heels, but they are pretty rare.

For women to support a multi-billion dollar industry to make themselves appealing, attractive, pleasing to the opposite sex and then put them down for responding to that? I just don't get it. And for women to be so fragile they can't handle an occasional inappropriate remark, an off color joke, or whatever just doesn't sit well with me or other strong women who are secure in their own skin.

We are not talking real sexual harassment or assault that nobody should condone anywhere. I am talking about guys just being guys. I want men to be able to be men without having to worry about every aspect of their speech, eye contact, physical demeanor. I want them to feel free to be friends with and mentor women and truly treat women as equals without worrying that they might commit some infraction that would brand them as sexist and evil usually resulting in some punitive action.

So while the message in that ad was probably well intended, again I have mixed emotions. While I believe all people should treat others with respect, I am a one-woman wrecking ball out to destroy the evils of misplaced political correctness tyranny, and that includes a lot of nonsense about interaction between men and women.

 

[Moral Orel]

To flirt (in a tacky way)...but if "everything a guy could possibly do to get noticed or get the attention of a woman" is equated with "a quest for sexual activity", then Gillette might as well had a scene where a guy in the office says "You know, Sandra from accounting is cute, I'm going to ask her out for dinner" and then another male co-worker steps in puts his hand on his chest and says "Not cool, man!"

Chris Rock has a bit about how every nice thing a guy does for a woman is a sexual advance. "Let me get that door for you... how about some [explitive deleted]?". The problem with what you just said though is that no one said guys shouldn't try to sleep with women, you were responding to a conversation about the definition of catcalling, and people have been saying catcalling is wrong because it invokes a negative emotional response. You can't extrapolate that to say people are against all sexual advances.

A woman feeling intimidated in a catcalling situation is just a conditioned response to people hollering at her. It doesn't matter if you're the sweetest guy in the world, and the words you choose are completely innocuous. So many ladies have had so many negative experiences with guys shouting at them on the street that the underlying similarities in all catcalling situations cause the same negative reaction.

One of the oldest experiments in behavioral psychology was a group of guys making some poor little orphan afraid of a bunny rabbit. They gave him a fluffy white bunny, startled the bejeebers out of him, and then he was afraid of bunnies. But that's not all. They found out he was afraid of all white fluffy things. One of the psychologists put on a Santa beard, and he was terrified of that. Sadly, the first kid they traumatized was adopted before they "fixed" him, so he was screwed up for life. But they were able to reverse it on a later kid.

The moral of that story is that any situation involving a strange man suddenly talking to a woman in public is going to invoke that negative emotional response from all the times that someone was being a jerk about it. It doesn't matter that most men are nice fellows. There are enough men that aren't nice fellows out there to have created this negative emotional response in the vast majority of women.

And sure, it may be irrational to feel afraid in those situations because they very rarely lead to actual physical violence, but that doesn't matter. It's likely that ladies will feel afraid, irrationally or no, so don't do things that will likely make ladies feel afraid. I tell all sorts of jokes, even really dark humor. But I don't just blurt out rape jokes to just anyone, even though there's zero risk of being raped by me, it's still going to invoke a negative emotional response in a lot of people.

 

[jardiniere]

If that's the case, what happened in the ad wasn't catcalling.

Saying "C'mon smile" or "Nice!" when a woman walks by is hardly a "comment of a sexual nature"

"C'mon, smile" is harassment. Why the everloving f should women ever be commanded to do anything by a stranger on the street. The idea that a man should think that's perfectly OK is toxic.

*says the woman who is very content with her resting b face, thank you very much, and doesn't think anyone should be commenting on her appearance or demeanor when minding her own business. Stop interrupting women.

 

[Sparagmos]

Strength without justice may be tyranny, but justice without strength is meaningless.

It's actually an act of aggression to enforce any sort of rules on someone, as you're limiting what they're able to do and implying consequences if they don't limit those actions.

You didn’t answer my first question. And don’t you subscribe to a religion that imposes all kinds of rules on people? Are you an anarchist Mormon?