The new Gilette ad that has been doing the rounds on the internet has been creating quite a stir. I don’t need to describe it, but in broad strokes it asks men for self-reflection on their overt displays of masculine behaviour, and the consequences it may have on others. it could best be categorized as a “social awareness” statement. There’s no attempt to sell their product line in this ad.

Not surprisingly many are appalled (or perhaps faux-outraged) by the ad. They see it as an attack on their traditional sense of masculinity and unwelcome intrusion by social idealists running a campaign under a corporate banner. The ad makes references to typically ‘western’ cultural attitudes that “boys will be boys”, “win at all costs”, “take them down attitude” and domination over others. TV shows that promoted this kind of behaviour such as Married With Children, the ad argues, further reinforced and normalized this type of behaviour.

I personally have no issue with the ad. I think it’s effective piece of advertising that asks a particular group to reflect on their own behaviour or questions their position in society – and let’s face it – men are on the top of the pile in most aspects of society.

Though we need to ask, why are the certain groups so up in arms about it? Does it cut a bit too close to home? Is it an affront to masculinity? When David Morrison General of the Army gave a steely but impassioned speech towards ‘dickhead’ behaviour he was applauded by both sides and received positive news coverage and encouraged discussion. It possibly gave rise to his Australian of the Year award in 2017. Given that these types of incidences would occur with more surety in a male dominated environment should not detract from the overall message. Summed up, if you’re contributing to malevolent behaviour towards women then you need to re-assess yourself. You are accountable for your actions.

Now, when a multi-national company takes a similar move, and with perhaps some trepidation to their brand, it becomes a ye olde internet shit fight. I can see both sides of the argument to this. One hand a brand is trying to ‘right the wrongs’ on the other hand it can come across as moralistic and preachy. And to quote a phrase from the NRA some might say that they should “stay in their own lane” and stick to the business of selling razors. Coming from a skin care company also begs the question of what is the motive if ruling out a profit angle. Perhaps it generates discussion but does raise the spectre of grandstanding or virtue signalling. The company is trying out their new ‘social awareness’ clothes though they tread the line of a negative impact and increased cynicism toward their brand. There is also the real possibility that backlash can cause a boycott of the company’s products because the products they sell are bought by many that they might inadvertently offend.

To those who oppose the message usually do so under a number of argued points
1) Authority: I’m a man and I don’t need to be preached down
2) Appeal to higher cause: Why don’t you look at X,Y,Z as a more pressing concern
3) Interference: This is the way men are and trying to feminise us is emasculating.

You’d think that most people would be able to ponder some of the messages raised. There is nothing wrong about holding yourself to a higher standard. Being able to restrain yourself from behaviour that makes others uncomfortable. These are the sorts of qualities we like to instil in the next generation and ought to be self evident.

Are there aspects of the ad I disagree with? Yes. I think kids playing rough and tumble games is normal behaviour.
As men we typically like humour that’s a bit rough around the edges. I’m a bit old school in that I enjoy the non PC humour of Married With Children [which seems to be spoof referenced in the ad]. When guys chat with each other it’s often quite blunt and to the point, non politically correct and often vulgar. This is just the way it is. The problem is when no self imposed boundaries are maintained and it causes the sorts of anti social behaviour and self-entitlement as seen in the advert when directed to other people.

But we also need to recognise and play to our strengths without using them to subjugate others. Men are naturally stronger and are able to sustain more physical work than women. It’s not a sexist remark, we’re just built differently. We are also traditionally more attuned to leadership roles (though not exclusively). Men are also seen as the protector in a family and should put themselves in the line of danger when required. But this no justification to use these qualities to blow off steam or in an about-turn to oppress or intimidate others. As men we need to conduct ourselves with integrity.

Does it make me a hypocrite to slightly backtrack. I don’t think so. Though I think in wider circles it may give men an opportunity to question and reel in the ways they conduct themselves. Those that aren’t willing to do so are probably the ones that are the most inflamed by the ad. In a weird sense the target to which the ad applies to the most will likely be those that will shun the message, while those that are moderate are able to appreciate the ad for the points raised though probably won’t be the prime target for the message.

Whether this well meaning social activism translates into a misadventure for Proctor and Gamble in regards to sales or share price is yet to be seen. It’s a bold move to call out an entire gender, even though it is squarely directed at “some”. The ad is a small but necessary stepping stone towards changing parochial attitudes that have been fused together for decades if not centuries. It’s not since the advent of the internet that social change has been so effective and timely.

Right now there’s been a lot of butt hurt crusaders on internet forums threatening to take their money elsewhere. Though if anything, a seed is planted and the conversation has started and that’s probably a good thing.