Gillette


#123

It’s not inoffensive.

It’s sexist, and it’s racist.

Also, I really don’t need morality lessons from some multinational.


#124

On a side note and purely observational, I have followed some threads on twitter regarding the commercial and about 80% of those defending it are women.


#125

The issue is whether it’s impossible to offend upwards. As white men appear to have been offended by the advert, that seems not to be the case. Unless their perceived offence is fake.


#126

“upwards” meaning what?

The prison population is overwhelmingly male. Same for workplace deaths, combat deaths, deaths by violence, suicides, deaths of rough sleepers, etc.

Then consider the men paying to support their children they are prevented from actually seeing - whether by a court order or just an ex-partner who refuses to cooperate with a court. . .

Also consider the fact that women have outnumbered men in higher education since the 1970s, that a disturbing proportion of primary school aged boys are being medicated for ADHD, and that white working class boys in the UK have that country’s worst educational outcomes and nobody gives a toss (pointing it out makes one ‘racist’), and so on and so on. . .

Also, women have more reproductive options than men, and paternity fraud is common yet never prosecuted - a bit like false rape accusations really, even those that result in the suicide of the accused (sometimes the dead accused is a minor. . . but never mind, he might have gone on to cat call so it’s all good). . .

Oh, and also consider that throughout the western world mutilation of a little girl’s genitals will result in prosecution. Do it to a little boy though and the state can’t be arsed getting involved. Apparently all you need to do to properly sex the children before you cut them. Easy when you know how, even with gender fluidity practically the state religion. Oh, and object to this bizarre state of affairs and you’re a ‘misogynist’, ‘anti-semite’, ‘islamophobe’, etc.

Then there’s the whole racial aspect, in which introspection and empathy is a purely one-way street. Only white people had any agency throughout history, and all white people alive today are collectively responsible for historical sins committed by a small minority of deceased white people.

The whole thing would be a joke were it not destroying lives and civilizations.


#127

You’ve managed to draw many issues from my use of the word “upwards”.

What I was referring to was the concept that people can only offend down some arbitrary hierarchy of privilege.

I can’t think of any other response. Stay chilled. Life’s good.


#128

I was just emphasizing the arbitrary nature of the ‘hierarchy’ by mentioning a few of the more egregious double standards that make a mockery of it.

Men are not ‘privileged’. Whites are not ‘privileged’.

No response was necessary.


#129

I believe you’re both on the same side, but detecting sarcasm over the interwebz is not 100% accurate.


#130

That’s why you should add a :smirk: after you sarcasm.

But of course, there’s the risk of someone thinking you are attacking them with your smirk… :smirk:


#131

I wasn’t being sarcastic in any way. I was providing a straight-up response.


#132

Everybody is privileged, or not, to varying degrees. I agree that to state that an entire identity group is privileged is ridiculous. It may be more likely to be privileged, perhaps.


#133


#134

Still is more likely to be privileged. I’m a gambling man and I know who I’d bet on.


#135

I had a moment of confusion. I thought it was @yyy and not you the one who had posted that :smile:


#136

If @yyy were ever to post something like that, I would eat my cow bell. :grin:


#137

xD


#138

Now that’s a clear case of creamy-beige cow privilege. Most cows can’t even afford bells! :no_no: