Gillette, the manufacturer of razors and cream for men’s shaving, recently ran a TV commercial that was not even an ad; it was a political diatribe against men. Fox News reported:
The ad, which debuted Monday, begins with “a compilation of actions commonly associated with ‘toxic masculinity,'” per a press release — actions including online bullying, men laughing at misogynistic television shows, or a boss mansplaining his female colleague’s idea, among others.
The ad then shifts and suggests that “something changed” not long ago – a reference to the #MeToo movement – and shows clips of men defending others from bullying, or stopping friends from harassing, hurtful behavior.
“We believe in the best in men,” a narrator says. “To say the right thing, to act the right way. Some already are. But some is not enough. Because the boys watching today will be the men of tomorrow.”
Normally you might think that this would be something to be addressed elsewhere like in a college seminar or on NPR, but somebody, somewhere, and with many Gillette officials certainly involved, let this horse out of the barn. And the consequences for Gillette could be devastating if this continues. After all its customers are, well, men.
The reaction has been strong and swift. Gillette has been inundated with phone messages and emails deriding the ad with irate customers threatening to buy shaving supplies elsewhere. And in the super-competitive razor market including low-cost, mail-order companies like Dollar Shave Club, Gillette may have fatally shot itself in the foot.
This advertisement is the latest installation in the War on Men being carried out by the communist/feminist left in America. The ad is so bad that it even shows ‘evil’ men barbecuing meat whom we are supposed to somehow infer are exploiters of both women and animals. (For some unknown reason barbecuing is now being picked upon as “toxic masculinity”. What’s next? Model railroading?)
Gillette is a big, highly-respected company. Forbes reports it at #32 on its list of the world’s most valuable brands, with annual sales of $6.6 billion.
Interestingly Gillette is headquartered in ultra-liberal Boston, Massachusetts which may have much to do with the ad choice.
There are many forces acting on Gillette just as those same forces are acting on all of corporate America.
This is the same corporate America that is considered to be a very desirable place to work; it is the elite of the business world. These corporations work their employees hard and demand obedience but the pay, benefits, pension, perks and opportunity for advancement can be very alluring.
Thus even people who say they “hate corporations” often go to work for corporations. This is how millions of ‘hippies’ from the 1960s ended up cutting their hair, shaving, dressing up and going to work for The Man in the corporations.
But this attractive work environment has turned many corporations into politically-correct playgrounds. Far from the old stereotype of colorless men in gray flannel suits, all types of people today work in corporate America from conservatives and straight arrows to environmentalists, feminists, leftists, etc. These latter groups certainly contributed to the advertising campaign questioning the masculinity of Gillette’s very own customers.
For instance many in the Snowflake generation have entered corporate America in recent years, and this is certainly having an effect. The lady Snowflakes often are angry feminist shrews indoctrinated into the most radical agenda of perpetual indignation while the men are weak, submissive, soy-sipping girly-boys who have been beaten down by womanist supremacy since birth. This produces a perfect storm for political correctness.
Will the Gillette ad campaign doom the company?
Well, the Dollar Shave Club immediately posted on its website ‘Welcome to the Club’, a sideways jab at Gillette. But the long-term damage to Gillette is uncertain. Nikitas3.com recommends that Gillette heed a recent poll that said overwhelmingly that corporate ads should stop preaching politics.
There are two forces at work here – the ad is making Gillette the most talked-about company in America… for a few days at least. But the ad is simultaneously driving customers away.
Gillette’s response to the ad controversy will seal the deal. If it cuts its losses and admits its mistake it will recover. If it is browbeaten into continuing on this outrageous path Dollar Shave Club may become the new standard bearer for the industry.
Why is Pope Francis Encouraging Breast Feeding?
Just when you thought that feminism has reached maximum inanity at Gillette, it has spread its ugly tentacles even further internationally. Breitbart News reports:
Pope Francis told young mothers gathered Sunday for the baptism of their infants not to be afraid to breastfeed their children during the ceremony because “the Lord wants it.”
The Christian calendar marks the first Sunday after January 6 as the feast of the “Baptism of the Lord,” commemorating the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, and the pope traditionally performs a number of baptisms on this day.
Commenting on the crying babies, the pope said in his brief homily that some of them must have been crying because they were hungry.
“To you mothers I say, if they cry because they are hungry, nurse them,” he said. “The Lord wants this.”
… Pope Francis has been a vocal advocate of breastfeeding in church and has often repeated that mothers should feel no shame in feeding their children in public.
And of course we are all supposed to think that the pope is just promoting good motherhood, and that we pro-life conservatives should naturally support this idea.
Sorry, but that is wrong. This is just another way for this radical left-wing pope to push his anti-Christian and anti-motherhood agenda but couched in faux-Christian sentiment.
Of course we conservatives support good motherhood, including natural feeding, and feeding babies when they are hungry. But the idea of nursing a baby from the breast in public is not part of our idea of what good motherhood is.
Certainly public nursing is OK as a last resort if the baby is hungry and the breast is covered up. In general, however, we conservatives suggest that nursing be done away from public view, perhaps in a ladies room or another private place.
But this idea of potentially exposing the breast in public is part of the left’s agenda to co-opt and corrupt the very idea of motherhood. And while the pope is not saying that mothers should expose their breasts, particularly in church, we know that that is what the militant feminists are surreptitiously wishing for.
These radicals love stripping down in public protests and otherwise offending us more modest folks. And we also have seen this in the feminist agenda with women demanding the right to breast-feed their children in public even with the breast exposed.
In fact this is really part of the leftist agenda of public nudity. It is not part of the pro-life agenda. And to promote breast feeding in the church is doubly reprehensible.