Is fat shaming really a bad thing in American culture? Is it? Are those commercials that have dumbed-down a person's diabetes risk "shaming"? If they are, how is that bad? Sometimes people need to be told to ****ing quit eating and hit the gym, and there are many who need to be told in more direct ways.

And, is being beautiful and caring for your man's needs really a bad thing? Should women who have put the work in to be skinny and beautiful be shamed for it instead of rewarded?

Back when Gillette didn't suck and made sharp razors:

https://c1.staticflickr.com/7/6205/6...08c2b9ee_b.jpg

I didn't buy any, though I haven't bought anything other than a Gillette razor in decades.

But I'm not the target market here. They're trying to hook a younger generation who cares deeply about social issues and haven't developed strong brand loyalty yet. As you said, they're not going to lose people from this because people either like the product or don't at this point. Raising awareness and brand recognition among younger people is the goal, and the more discussion about it, the better they see it.

Here's a graph of how many people have searched for "Gillette" on Google over the past 15 years. Yeah, I think they're happy.

<script type="text/javascript" src="https://ssl.gstatic.com/trends_nrtr/1709_RC01/embed_loader.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> trends.embed.renderExploreWidget("TIMESERIES", {"comparisonItem":[{"keyword":"gillette","geo":"US","time":"2004-01-01 2019-01-24"}],"category":0,"property":""}, {"exploreQuery":"date=all&geo=US&q=gillette","guestPath":"https://trends.google.com:443/trends/embed/"}); </script>

I haven't used their products for a few years now. That doesn't mean that I want some company preaching to me about how as a man I am a problem and I need to fix my masculine ways.

I expect telling me why I should spend my money on your product or service to come from companies. I expect messages of individual improvement to come from church.

They're using social outrage to target a generation who hate's capitalism......so that they can make more money.

Yep. It's ironic all around when you really think about it.

Understood - I should have clarified, why would anyone of average (or above) intelligence be upset about this or any commercial?

I'm not complaining about any those things. I'm pointing out that you're complaining about one ad with a negative men's stereotype to a woman who is bombarded with ads telling them how imperfect they're supposed to feel. Not exactly the best way to make a point. I don't like the Gillette ad but I totally get women laughing off the outrage over it.

For anyone who actually cares on the "business sense" part of all of this, this article is pretty fascinating.

https://www.adweek.com/brand-marketi...ct-with-women/

In short, based on online conversations (like this one), conversations about "Gillette" have historically been about 56% by men and about 64% by people age 35+. However, if you look at conversations about "shaving," it's only 38% by men and 25% by people age 35+. In other words, they were severely missing out on the market of young women.

And that group has reacted very positively to the ad.

So basically, you're ok with female stereotypes that make many perfectly fine women believe they are less of a woman, but outraged at an ad that tells men they're not manly enough. And no, I'm not offended by these ads, just as I wasn't offended by a Gillette ad I disagreed with. I just understand the double standard.

Thats something I spoke about last week. I mentioned that Gillette would gladly sacrifice a few older customers if it meant drawing in a younger customer. It's just business 101. Razor category is a unique category that's all about customer lifetime value. Gillette sells you the first razor and you might have someone buying replacement blades for 50+ years. And they are under heavy attack with this young audience because shave clubs are stealing a ton of this market share. So they dont care about what older people like us think as much as we'd like to believe they do.

Why? Because Gillette's tagline for the men's grooming products is "The Best a Man Can Get." They aren't calling into question being masculine. They are calling into question being an asshole. So for this brand, its on point for them to ask - is this, the example of some asshole men, the best we can get? Or can we be better, and try to make the assholes better too? It doesn't make sense for them to ask if this is the best a woman can get, because a woman's best isn't their brand identity. They're "staying in their lane," if you will.

Now, what's Venus' tagline? I can't even think of one. More like a bunch of jingles or the 80s song, I'm your venus, I'm your fire, your desire. So why would the Venus brand ask a question of their female customers if they haven't historically been implanted as the image of how a woman should act?

Do you get the reason why this ad/message/question fits for Gillette, but maybe not another brand?

Do you get that Gillette sells shaving supplies to women as well as men? The best a man can get is only one side of their business.

Gillette
 

Exactly. It’s only one side of their business. That’s why they didn’t condemn behavior from the other side of their business. Because that side of the business never used the tag line, Venus...the best a woman can get.

The best a man can get IS Gillette. That’s their thing. They own it from a branding perspective. So now they see in society that not all men are really behaving the best way a man can get. So they are telling the best of us to continue leading by positive example and call out those who aren’t.

You asked why the ad was only about one side of their business, but pretty sure you answered that for yourself.

EDIT: and if you didn’t know, Venus is the female brand of Gillette razors.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

so, it's about money.

always is....LMAO

I didn't say you were complaining about anything. I asked if responding to observations about how advertising directed at women induces shame with 'what are you complaining about' was a road you wanted to go down.

You assert that there is a rich history of female-directed advertising that induces shame. I'm not necessarily refuting that.

But first, do you, in turn, acknowledge that this shame inducement towards women is usually more subtle, more subjective, more a factor of reading into the subtext? That it's more that the advertising touts high standards without actually pointing out how you don't measure up, while the Gillette ad is more overt and direct?

And second, do you in turn acknowledge that there have been concerted efforts to criticize and counter these shame-inducing messages insofar as they 'hurt' women, largely without controversy or complaint.

Why then would criticism, however mild, of a more explicit message directed at men be excused by the 'shameful history' of implicit messages directed at women, if they were properly subject to criticism.