Welcome to Thunderdome

Speak for yourself. I don't need a public service announcement to not rape.

GORDON wrote: Speak for yourself. I don't need a public service announcement to not rape.

Got it. Nothing sparks conversations, changes, or debates.

This isn't a conversation that's not being had. We don't need to pull our little boys aside and "teach them to not rape." The message is well and truly out there. The rapists are broke brained. A PSA doesn't fix that, and only insults everyone else.

We're probably at an impasse.

As I always have, I reserve a hearty, "Go fuck yourself" at anyone who directs blanket statements like that to anyone, especially me. Gillette lost a customer, here. I'm positive they don't care, but fuck them.

GORDON wrote: This isn't a conversation that's not being had. We don't need to pull our little boys aside and "teach them to not rape." The message is well and truly out there. The rapists are broke brained. A PSA doesn't fix that, and only insults everyone else.

It's not about rape, it's about a whole bunch of different things. And those conversations are not being had universally.

I've seen a bunch of macho, inappropriate behavior in my life, and a whole bunch of people doing nothing or even enabling it. And it still happens.

Progress remains to be made.

Well be sure to step up, next time you see it, now that you've seen the PSA.

GORDON wrote: Well be sure to step up, next time you see it, now that you've seen the PSA.

I've tried beforehand. Boy do men not like it.

TheCatt wrote: It's not about rape, it's about a whole bunch of different things. And those conversations are not being had universally.

I've seen a bunch of macho, inappropriate behavior in my life, and a whole bunch of people doing nothing or even enabling it. And it still happens.

Progress remains to be made.

This isn't wrong. However, painting all men with the same brush isn't going to solve it. You're telling everyone that ALL men are the issue and "masculinity" is a bad word.

Pardon the bad video, but this seems really relevant:

TheCatt wrote: It's not about rape, it's about a whole bunch of different things. And those conversations are not being had universally.

Men are having those conversations with their sons.

Leisher wrote: You're telling everyone that ALL men are the issue and "masculinity" is a bad word.

I'm not saying that. I'm saying a large number of men are complacent about other men's behavior, and a significant number of men treat women/people poorly. It's like Gordon's police argument. If 1% of men are bad, but 40% know and do nothing, those 41% could all do better.

Also, a lot of behavior that was considered masculine 10, 20, 30, 40 years ago is considered bad, and probably should have been then, but morality evolves. 50 years ago it was masculine to run your house, beat your wife if she "neeeded" it, etc. Which is why the ad focused on "toxic masculinity" not "masculinity"

Vince wrote:

TheCatt wrote: It's not about rape, it's about a whole bunch of different things. And those conversations are not being had universally.

Men are having those conversations with their sons.

Some, or many, sure.

TheCatt wrote: I'm not saying that.

I know YOU aren't. Gillette is though.

TheCatt wrote: I'm saying a large number of men are complacent about other men's behavior, and a significant number of men treat women/people poorly.

I don't disagree with that, however I also agree with two points regarding it that you may not:
1. Numbers are exaggerated, particularly if you start to go by country. Like plastic waste, the numbers in the U.S. are probably drastically different from other parts of the world.
2. You can absolutely remove "men" from your sentence and replace it with "women", and remove the one instance of "women" and replace it with "men". Nobody gives a fuck about that.

TheCatt wrote: It's like Gordon's police argument. If 1% of men are bad, but 40% know and do nothing, those 41% could all do better.

As Gordon says, "oh snap". I disagree with Gordon's argument because it completely ignores a lot of extenuating circumstances, such as they need to know about the bad one's activities, superiors who protect the guilty, fear of their lives/careers, etc. I would say the same about applying it here.

People might be unwilling to stop something mainly due to fear. Fear of breaking up a family, fear for their lives, fear of being alone, etc.

We can only affect the people in our lives and that we're exposed to:
-I've never hung out with a rapist, that I'm aware of, and would never tolerate it. Pretty sure a lot of rapists don't go around telling their friends and family that they rape people.
-I've jumped between a man and woman getting physical at a bar, among other places (that one's memorable because it led to a punch and a fight and an arrest).

TheCatt wrote: Also, a lot of behavior that was considered masculine 10, 20, 30, 40 years ago is considered bad, and probably should have been then, but morality evolves. 50 years ago it was masculine to run your house, beat your wife if she "neeeded" it, etc. Which is why the ad focused on "toxic masculinity" not "masculinity"

And had they made a "toxic femininity" commercial to pair with this one, I'd shut up.

I mean, if they really wanted to address the issue and be honest about it, shouldn't the commercial have featured mostly black guys? Whose prefered music genre completely disrespects women? Whose culture sees women, except mom, as nothing more than a means to an end? Whose culture sees 70% of their children in single mother households?

How about Latino men? Those cultures still very much are male dominated, and adhere to values and "toxic masculinity" from 50 years ago.

How about Asian men? Where a lot of the women are completely subservient.

Go back and look at how that commercial plays out. As they show all the bad behavior, look at how many are black (1) versus white (the rest). Then look at how the numbers change when it starts showing men doing "the right things". (Hint: The number of blacks skyrockets and the number of whites plummets.)

Point being, it isn't an honest ad.

Leisher wrote: Gillette is though.

I did not construe it that way.

Leisher wrote: ignores a lot of extenuating circumstances, such as they need to know about the bad one's activities, superiors who protect the guilty, fear of their lives/careers, etc. I would say the same about applying it here.

No, it does not. Those extenuating circumstances, fearing losing your jobs/careers, etc, ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM.

And had they made a "toxic femininity" commercial to pair with this one, I'd shut up.

Go pitch it. But it's still a lame excuse.

Leisher wrote: Whose prefered music genre completely disrespects women? Whose culture sees women, except mom, as nothing more than a means to an end? Whose culture sees 70% of their children in single mother households? Latino... Asian...

Try Indian men.

Leisher wrote: Go back and look at how that commercial plays out. As they show all the bad behavior, look at how many are black (1) versus white (the rest). Then look at how the numbers change when it starts showing men doing "the right things". (Hint: The number of blacks skyrockets and the number of whites plummets.)

I don't see race.

TheCatt wrote: No, it does not. Those extenuating circumstances, fearing losing your jobs/careers, etc, ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM.

Oh horsepussy. They are and aren't. And what's your fix?

"Brian is dead. He got killed trying to stop that girl from getting gang raped. Sucks, but what a great example for his 4 kids..."

Either put solutions out there or stop expecting people to be able to do the right thing.

TheCatt wrote: But it's still a lame excuse.

Again, horsepussy. That's not what I'm doing and you know it. Stop being Malcolm and try having discussions.

TheCatt wrote: Try Indian men.

I skipped them because they're so heavily represented in that ad.

TheCatt wrote: I don't see race.

Whatever you say Malcolm.

Leisher wrote: Oh horsepussy. They are and aren't. And what's your fix?

"Brian is dead. He got killed trying to stop that girl from getting gang raped. Sucks, but what a great example for his 4 kids..."

Either put solutions out there or stop expecting people to be able to do the right thing.

I think changing culture is part of the solution. I'm guessing sexual harassment in the workplace is down over time, because culture is improving. I like how you ignore any possibility of incremental change. Same with Gordon. It's like how if we cannot solve everything, why bother.

Leisher wrote: Again, horsepussy. That's not what I'm doing and you know it.

It was ENTIRELY what you were doing. "Men are a problem, but what about women? Why don't we talk more about the women problem?"

Leisher wrote: I skipped them because they're so heavily represented in that ad.

I didn't notice, I don't see race

TheCatt wrote: I like how you ignore any possibility of incremental change.

Show me where I said that. (In fact, I pointed out how a certain culture is still stuck in a culture from 50 years ago.) Show me how this ad gives us the possibility of incremental change. Please educate me how putting ALL men into one box brings about this incremental change for ALL men to behavior better, yet not for all men to look upon themselves as a problem or for others to see men as the problem.

TheCatt wrote: It was ENTIRELY what you were doing. "Men are a problem, but what about women? Why don't we talk more about the women problem?"

No. I'm pointing out that Gillette is simply pandering. You can make this ad and pretend to care because it attacks men, and they're fine to attack. You can selectively make whitey the bad guy in most of scenarios because it's ok to attack whitey. You CANNOT make a similar ad about women because that is not socially acceptable, and that fact alone sabotages the conversation before it gets started.

TheCatt wrote: I didn't notice, I don't see race

I'm not even sure there was one. I think they were all on tech support calls.

Leisher wrote: I'm not even sure there was one. I think they were all on tech support calls.

Now I have to call you out for being racist.

Leisher wrote: how me where I said that.

You repeatedly go to extremes (rape) or just say that that's how culture is.

No. I'm pointing out that Gillette is simply pandering. You can make this ad and pretend to care because it attacks men, and they're fine to attack. You can selectively make whitey the bad guy in most of scenarios because it's ok to attack whitey. You CANNOT make a similar ad about women because that is not socially acceptable, and that fact alone sabotages the conversation before it gets started.

Maybe you're overly sensitive.

TheCatt wrote: Now I have to call you out for being racist.

Is it racist when it's true?

TheCatt wrote: You repeatedly go to extremes (rape) or just say that that's how culture is.

I wasn't the one who brought up rape. I'm also not the one who brought culture into it, Gillette was.

Maybe you're overly sensitive.

Go get Gillette to do an ad about gold digging whores and prove me wrong. Hell, go on The View and get those women to agree with you that getting pregnant intentionally to trap a man is something women have been doing forever and is really shitty behavior. Once those things happen I'll say I'm being overly sensitive.

Leisher wrote: Hell, go on The View

Well, now I know you're too sensitive.

STOP OBJECTIFYING WOMEN!
Also I still think black people should do better at policing themselves, and stop doing crimes. It's just an innocent suggestion and shouldn't anger anyone.