Mens Rights Thread

Pawwed Rig

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

The parks here are actually interesting in that there are playgrounds every 300 metrs (5-10 minute walk) or so. So, it's not really like a park and more of a family place I guess? Honestly, there's no doubt people would be giving weird looks to a twenty something guy sitting near a playground. It;s seen as masculine to be part of the child's life and, tbh, there are some top notch fathers here.

Sorry but still not sure what your point is

Reviews and Books Galore

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Sorry but still not sure what your point is

Don't worry about it, there is no point. Just a random observation from somebody waiting for the summer break to be over.

iptba

Fears of hidden steroid abuse by males

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/fears-of-hidden-steroid-abuse-by-males-942975.html

iptba

UPDATE: How’s Gillette Doing Since Its ‘Toxic Masculinity’ Campaign? Very, Very Badly.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/50122/update-hows-gillette-doing-its-toxic-masculinity-james-barrett

Calhoun

iptba wrote: »

https://www.dailywire.com/news/50122/update-hows-gillette-doing-its-toxic-masculinity-james-barrett

I don't think its directly related. The prices of the product is way to high people have been looking for alternatives for years.

As i said on another thread, i think they were flaggin in sales and decided they would go for broke with this ad to see if they could cash in on the woke message. The problem is they didn't understand their audience and with P&G's track record it was so blatant that this was not something they are sincere about.

There was an article they did with the washington post i believe where they said they are ok to take the hit so they could make this stand. Realistically the cash grab failed but that was ok as it gave them a potential out because they could say "our customers are misogynist".

Problem they have is that the stock market doesn't give two ****s about morals, they only care about the green. I would expect a downsizing to happen in Gillette and be interesting to see if the head honcho will be in place in a year or so.

Silentcorner

Calhoun wrote: »

I don't think its directly related. The prices of the product is way to high people have been looking for alternatives for years.

As i said on another thread, i think they were flaggin in sales and decided they would go for broke with this ad to see if they could cash in on the woke message. The problem is they didn't understand their audience and with P&G's track record it was so blatant that this was not something they are sincere about.

There was an article they did with the washington post i believe where they said they are ok to take the hit so they could make this stand. Realistically the cash grab failed but that was ok as it gave them a potential out because they could say "our customers are misogynist".

Problem they have is that the stock market doesn't give two ****s about morals, they only care about the green. I would expect a downsizing to happen in Gillette and be interesting to see if the head honcho will be in place in a year or so.

You are correct, the write down has been coming for a few years, they've been very protective of the damage done to their sales, the ad is only 6 months old so the damage will really be felt over the next 6 months...I think they are looking at a 6-9% market share fall...costing them billions....this is catastrophic in any CEOs thinking....they clearly feel they won't win any of that market share back...it was a spectacular miscalculation that marketing students will be studying for years to come.

Ideology has no place in the boardroom...I get the sense this won't be the only disaster we see over the coming years, hollywood is starting to feel the financial effects of a toxic culture at boardroom level.

silverharp

didnt their ceo say something along the lines of it as worth doing the advert even if it hurt sales. I hope the shareholders are in agreement with that lol

Silentcorner

silverharp wrote: »

didnt their ceo say something along the lines of it as worth doing the advert even if it hurt sales. I hope the shareholders are in agreement with that lol

In any sane world his reputation is in tatters....it's a ruthless world that high in the corporate environment, the big bucks they get paid come at a price!

Hobosan

iptba wrote: »

But indeed, just another award aimed at helping females. It looks like it is a Europe-wide competition.

https://www.meet-and-code.org/ie/ie/award2019

https://www.meet-and-code.org/ie/ie/about

I just realised something while reading your post.

Of the thousands of YouTube vidoes I've watched with regard to fixing networking issues, learning graphic design software, troubleshooting bugs or even guitar lessons, etc, I can't think of a single one in which a woman was giving the lesson.

The thumbnail rarely hints at the gender of the person doing the tutorial either, so it's not like I'm avoiding them.

So, whatever about women being under represented in IT, they are even more under represented in sharing their tech knowledge on YouTube.

To argue that women don't have an equal opportunity in this area would be delusional. All you need is a computer, an internet connection, a microphone and a voice box.

Huntergonzo

It was disappointing to see Gillette jump into bed with those far left, white men hating feminist creatures but they did and now they have to lay in it.

I used to use Gillette razors, never really bothered shopping around until their advertising team somehow thought it would be a good idea to tell me how rotten I was for being the wrong gender and colour.

So I switched to Wilkinson Sword and to be honest they're a better razor, they're cheaper and to the best of my knowledge they don't absolutely despise me. So even if Gillette tries to back track at some point in the future, there's no need for me to ever go back to them, I found a better product, thanks Gillette.

It really was an extraordinary, baffling blunder by Gillette to absolutely eviscerate their own customers and expect them to stay loyal. Who in their right mind green lit this genius idea?? :-)

KrustyUCC

Gillette don't seem to be too concerned

Gillette CEO: Losing customers over #MeToo campaign is 'price worth paying'

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/gillette-ceo-losing-customers-over-metoo-campaign-is-price-worth-paying

Madness from a company

Apparently just because "we were losing share, we were losing awareness and penetration, and something had to be done," Coombe said, adding they decided to "take a chance in an emotionally-charged way."

Big bloody mistake

Huntergonzo

KrustyUCC wrote: »

Gillette don't seem to be too concerned

Gillette CEO: Losing customers over #MeToo campaign is 'price worth paying'

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/gillette-ceo-losing-customers-over-metoo-campaign-is-price-worth-paying

Madness from a company

Apparently just because "we were losing share, we were losing awareness and penetration, and something had to be done," Coombe said, adding they decided to "take a chance in an emotionally-charged way."

Big bloody mistake

When you make a massive mistake you really only have 2 options:

a) admit it and immediately back track to try and limit the damage as much as possible

or

b) take a leaf out of underpants gnomes book. Phase 1 = collect underpants, Phase 2 = ?, Phase 3 = profit

Gillette has chosen option B, lets see how that pans out.

Silentcorner

KrustyUCC wrote: »

Gillette don't seem to be too concerned

Gillette CEO: Losing customers over #MeToo campaign is 'price worth paying'

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/gillette-ceo-losing-customers-over-metoo-campaign-is-price-worth-paying

Madness from a company

Apparently just because "we were losing share, we were losing awareness and penetration, and something had to be done," Coombe said, adding they decided to "take a chance in an emotionally-charged way."

Big bloody mistake

So, they manipulated everybody in the hope of winning market share...by everybody I mean everybody, those who loved the ad and those who didn't...it was never about "Toxic Masculinity"...it was a faceless corporation making a completely desperate attempt to win back market share...they were applauded across media for their stance....so what price was worth it?...has "toxic masculinity" declined since the ad? Sales are clearly suffering (anyone notice how discounted Gillette blades have been since Jan?) and will continue to suffer, I believe they will lose over €5 Billion in Sales over the coming few years.

They wouldn't be the first company that was losing market share and turned to advertising to grow a company, it is done day in and day out...they are the first most obvious example of how damaging a toxic managerial culture can set a $57 Billion Dollar brand up in flames...now, anyone who has worked in a pressured environment knows how tough it can get when Sales are in decline, decisions have to be made about ordering, transport, head counts, advertising etc..you need a strong talented management team to navigate tough times, you know people who have earned their positions through merit...ideology has no place in this kind of environment!!

There was no need to take a mallet to what they describe as masculinity, I can only imagine what the talk is like in the advertising industry after this, some company lost that contract to a radical feminist!!

I admit, I am fascinated by what Gillette have done here, i haven't witnessed that kind of stupidity from a Global Brand before...they lost (potentially) between 6-9% market share from ONE ad....it's actually hilarious when you think about it!!! What a shower of idiots!!!

Huntergonzo

Huntergonzo wrote: »

It was disappointing to see Gillette jump into bed with those far left, white men hating feminist creatures but they did and now they have to lay in it.

I used to use Gillette razors, never really bothered shopping around until their advertising team somehow thought it would be a good idea to tell me how rotten I was for being the wrong gender and colour.

So I switched to Wilkinson Sword and to be honest they're a better razor, they're cheaper and to the best of my knowledge they don't absolutely despise me. So even if Gillette tries to back track at some point in the future, there's no need for me to ever go back to them, I found a better product, thanks Gillette.

It really was an extraordinary, baffling blunder by Gillette to absolutely eviscerate their own customers and expect them to stay loyal. Who in their right mind green lit this genius idea?? :-)

I did the same and i find them better, they last me longer.

...Ghost...

Huntergonzo wrote: »

It was disappointing to see Gillette jump into bed with those far left, white men hating feminist creatures but they did and now they have to lay in it.

I used to use Gillette razors, never really bothered shopping around until their advertising team somehow thought it would be a good idea to tell me how rotten I was for being the wrong gender and colour.

So I switched to Wilkinson Sword and to be honest they're a better razor, they're cheaper and to the best of my knowledge they don't absolutely despise me. So even if Gillette tries to back track at some point in the future, there's no need for me to ever go back to them, I found a better product, thanks Gillette.

It really was an extraordinary, baffling blunder by Gillette to absolutely eviscerate their own customers and expect them to stay loyal. Who in their right mind green lit this genius idea?? :-)

I switched to Lidl razors and they're grand considering I have sensitive skin. Even cheaper than WS.

It wasn't just Gillette though. P&G were behind this and they have a long list of brands I have boycotted and will continue to boycott.

Huntergonzo

...Ghost... wrote: »

I switched to Lidl razors and they're grand considering I have sensitive skin. Even cheaper than WS.

It wasn't just Gillette though. P&G were behind this and they have a long list of brands I have boycotted and will continue to boycott.

I tried Lidl razors, to be honest they didn't work great for me, cut the face off me. But if they work for you then by all means have at it.

I had a look at the list of their P&Gs products and while they certainly are well known brands I generally don't use any of them anyway, the only one I was using on a regular basis was Gillette. By and large the cheaper Lidl and Aldi brands do just fine (except razors of course).

Sleepy

Silentcorner wrote: »

In any sane world his reputation is in tatters....it's a ruthless world that high in the corporate environment, the big bucks they get paid come at a price!

People at that level of business don't live in a sane world though. The CEO will be given a golden parachute on his/her way out the door and will be in another CEO position elsewhere in a few months.

iptba

(UK)
Volkswagen and Philadelphia cream cheese ads banned over gender stereotypes

London (CNN Business)An advertisement juxtaposing male astronauts with a woman sitting by a stroller, and another depicting two hapless dads, are the first casualties of a British ban on gender stereotypes in advertising.

The ads, for Volkswagen and Philadelphia cream cheese, were investigated by the UK Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) after viewers complained they perpetuated gender stereotypes.

New rules that came into force in June prohibit depictions of gender that "are likely to cause harm, or serious or widespread offense."

A second commercial for Philadelphia cream cheese showed two dads looking after their children at a restaurant with a conveyer belt.

The men become so distracted by the food that they lose sight of their babies, who end up circling the restaurant on the belt. "Let's not tell mom," says one, after rescuing his child. Over 125 viewers complained.

"We acknowledged the action was intended to be light-hearted and comical and there was no sense that the children were in danger," the ASA said in its decision.

"We considered, however, that the men were portrayed as somewhat hapless and inattentive, which resulted in them being unable to care for the children effectively," they added. "We did not consider that the use of humour in the ad mitigated the effect of the harmful stereotype."

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/08/14/media/uk-adverts-banned-gender-stereotypes-scli-gbr-intl/index.html

iptba

Relatively popular tweet
https://twitter.com/jamesconlon_/status/1166406970007592961?s=11

iptba

Huntergonzo wrote: »

It was disappointing to see Gillette jump into bed with those far left, white men hating feminist creatures but they did and now they have to lay in it.

I used to use Gillette razors, never really bothered shopping around until their advertising team somehow thought it would be a good idea to tell me how rotten I was for being the wrong gender and colour.

So I switched to Wilkinson Sword and to be honest they're a better razor, they're cheaper and to the best of my knowledge they don't absolutely despise me. So even if Gillette tries to back track at some point in the future, there's no need for me to ever go back to them, I found a better product, thanks Gillette.

It really was an extraordinary, baffling blunder by Gillette to absolutely eviscerate their own customers and expect them to stay loyal. Who in their right mind green lit this genius idea?? :-)

Gillette ‘Shifting Spotlight from Social Issues’ After Anti-Masculinity Ad Disaster
https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/08/23/gillette-shifting-spotlight-from-social-issues-after-anti-masculinity-ad-disaster/

Huntergonzo

iptba wrote: »

Gillette ‘Shifting Spotlight from Social Issues’ After Anti-Masculinity Ad Disaster
https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/08/23/gillette-shifting-spotlight-from-social-issues-after-anti-masculinity-ad-disaster/

Haha ye I seen that, no direct admission of making a mistake and no trace of an apology, this is even more pathetic on their behalf. Trying to get people to just forget that about their far left feminist ads.

But anyway look, I won't be buying their products again, I don't need to, I found a cheaper and better product, so that's it for me really.

Blueshoe

They lost 8 billion over that. Their CEO or company president was out saying that it didn't really matter because they were highlighting an important issue. Lol.
Yeah right

Silentcorner

Blueshoe wrote: »

They lost 8 billion over that. Their CEO or company president was out saying that it didn't really matter because they were highlighting an important issue. Lol.
Yeah right

8 billion is only the value of the non cash write down, a massive one at that, which has been coming now for a number of years...but this is going to cost Gillette well over $15 billion over the next few years, the brand name is in the dustbin....in an industry where they (as in company rivals) fight over every single % of market share, this could well be the biggest corporate f##k up since globalisation kicked off in the 80s...

This is the problem when you promote people into positions of power beyond their capabilities, it has very real consequences, especially if those people are being promoted because of the ideology they identify with, you cannot reason with radicals....and remember, feminism is hard left ideology it does not mix well with free market economics.

They knew instantly that they had a problem, it took them over 8 months to correct themselves....that is incompetence of the highest order, that's before you get into giving the job to a radical feminist, you know, the man hating movement we are drenched in these days...

Blueshoe

Silentcorner wrote: »

8 billion is only the value of the non cash write down, a massive one at that, which has been coming now for a number of years...but this is going to cost Gillette well over $15 billion over the next few years, the brand name is in the dustbin....in an industry where they (as in company rivals) fight over every single % of market share, this could well be the biggest corporate f##k up since globalisation kicked off in the 80s...

This is the problem when you promote people into positions of power beyond their capabilities, it has very real consequences, especially if those people are being promoted because of the ideology they identify with, you cannot reason with radicals....and remember, feminism is hard left ideology it does not mix well with free market economics.

They knew instantly that they had a problem, it took them over 8 months to correct themselves....that is incompetence of the highest order, that's before you get into giving the job to a radical feminist, you know, the man hating movement we are drenched in these days...

Personally I will never buy another Gillette product again.
They are a private company only interested in profits. Who are they to preach down at men. Their customers!

Huntergonzo

Silentcorner wrote: »

8 billion is only the value of the non cash write down, a massive one at that, which has been coming now for a number of years...but this is going to cost Gillette well over $15 billion over the next few years, the brand name is in the dustbin....in an industry where they (as in company rivals) fight over every single % of market share, this could well be the biggest corporate f##k up since globalisation kicked off in the 80s...

This is the problem when you promote people into positions of power beyond their capabilities, it has very real consequences, especially if those people are being promoted because of the ideology they identify with, you cannot reason with radicals....and remember, feminism is hard left ideology it does not mix well with free market economics.

They knew instantly that they had a problem, it took them over 8 months to correct themselves....that is incompetence of the highest order, that's before you get into giving the job to a radical feminist, you know, the man hating movement we are drenched in these days...

I mean it was a terrible idea to begin with, they hired a man hating 3rd wave feminist to direct an ad which preeches about how horrible all men are (but especially white of course!) and never even shows any of their razors.

And this ad was designed to increase razor sales among men!!!

It's actually hilarious, I mean I know nothing about marketing, but surely it goes without say that shíting all over your target market ain't a great idea.

Huntergonzo

Blueshoe wrote: »

Personally I will never buy another Gillette product again.
They are a private company only interested in profits. Who are they to preach down at men. Their customers!

Don't forget that Gillette is owned by Proctor & Gamble, who have a whole host of overpriced products that are worth avoiding.

Silentcorner

Huntergonzo wrote: »

I mean it was a terrible idea to begin with, they hired a man hating 3rd wave feminist to direct an ad which preeches about how horrible all men are (but especially white of course!) and never even shows any of their razors.

And this ad was designed to increase razor sales among men!!!

It's actually hilarious, I mean I know nothing about marketing, but surely it goes without say that shíting all over your target market ain't a great idea.

I am getting a good laugh out of this myself, not because a feminist f##ked up, but the complete madness of it all...Proctor and Gamble pride themselves in being a very successful marketing company....one of the biggest in the world, this ad was a radical feminists fantasy of how she define's masculinity, I'm surprised she didn't include men murdering puppies...radical feminists creatively only have two gears, men are horrible bas#t#rds and vaginas are great...after that they've nothing to add...

PS, there is a huge distinction between feminists and ordinary women who are not drinking the kool aid.

Huntergonzo

Silentcorner wrote: »

I am getting a good laugh out of this myself, not because a feminist f##ked up, but the complete madness of it all...Proctor and Gamble pride themselves in being a very successful marketing company....one of the biggest in the world, this ad was a radical feminists fantasy of how she define's masculinity, I'm surprised she didn't include men murdering puppies...radical feminists creatively only have two gears, men are horrible bas#t#rds and vaginas are great...after that they've nothing to add...

PS, there is a huge distinction between feminists and ordinary women who are not drinking the kool aid.

"I'm surprised she didn't include men murdering puppie"

Haha sure maybe she did, just didn't make the final cut.

Here listen I love women, some of the most important people in my life are women, but the psychopathic feminist cult does not speak for them, nor do they speak for any normal person.

Calhoun

Did this ad campaign really do them damage? Yes and no, while i believe their product was already in decline and this ad campaign was an insincere and capitalistic play trying to dial into what they thought would get them lots of praise and sales.

However they forgot 1. who their audience was, 2. they are proctor and gamble who have a fairly bad human rights record, and finally the people they aimed this ad campaign at would never have bought it from them anyway.

So why did they do it? Its actually quite smart, with things on the way down they would have known the stock revaluation ect would be coming so they put this out to either try and boost numbers or if it went wrong they could blame sexists on the numbers.

They forgot however that wallstreet doesn't see in any color but green and so this may have done them more damage long term than anything else.

Silentcorner

Calhoun wrote: »

Did this ad campaign really do them damage? Yes and no, while i believe their product was already in decline and this ad campaign was an insincere and capitalistic play trying to dial into what they thought would get them lots of praise and sales.

However they forgot 1. who their audience was, 2. they are proctor and gamble who have a fairly bad human rights record, and finally the people they aimed this ad campaign at would never have bought it from them anyway.

So why did they do it? Its actually quite smart, with things on the way down they would have known the stock revaluation ect would be coming so they put this out to either try and boost numbers or if it went wrong they could blame sexists on the numbers.

They forgot however that wallstreet doesn't see in any color but green and so this may have done them more damage long term than anything else.

I'm sorry to be this dismissive of your view, but there was absolutely nothing smart about this strategy, they were losing market share to smaller smarter competition so I can understand trying something new and they felt they were out of options, that much i can get.

There is nobody who isn't aware of how divisive public discourse is these days and they chose to attempt to use this discourse to connect with a new demographic....there is no way they didn't consider the 750 million male customers they already had (altho it is thought that women buy 30% of the blades for their partners), when you deliberately pick a side in a toxic culture we are witnessing, there is no way back....

This won't be the last of these kinds of debacles, it will however be the biggest, they have probably lost nearly 75 million customers, and the way retail operates, this is only starting to hurt their factory sales.

They knew instantly they had a big big big problem, those male customers are the type that spend a lot of time on youtube (which they would have known), Youtube gave them an instant barometre of how the ad was being received, forget about mainstream media which all reported glowingly on the ad (remember, Proctor and Gamble are one of the largest buyers of ad space globally) they were getting an horrific message from Youtube and they chose to ignore.

The ad could have gone with the same message with a bit of subtly and creativity, but radical feminists are known for either!

The CEO (Gary Coombe) will go down in infamy as will Kim Gherig, the radical feminist who got the gig because of an industry initiative that would allow women win contracts were not winning!

It is a clusterf##k from start to finish...