As of this writing most, if not all, have at least heard, if not seen, the viral Gillette advert with the tagline, the best a man can get… so before analyzing this ad let me preface it by saying that men are emotional but not in the way a woman is. Women tend to cry when frustrated in their goals; men get angry. Anger is an emotionally centered and largely useless means of achieving a goal, unlike a girl’s crying which can crumble a man’s spirit in a New York minute; so a more constructive and effective means must be adopted by men. Based on this significant fact let us men resolve to work with our God given nature and not to get angry over this obvious value-signaling of Gillette …and by extension Proctor & Gamble which owns Gillette; let’s do what men do, that is, get even.
Primarily, adverts in all media have for some past decades stopped featuring the product hyping its characteristics, advantages and benefits. Indeed, since at least the late 1960’s, (curiously coinciding with the Decade of Revolution), adverts have tended to focus on emotions and impulses; remember the margarine commercial that said, It’s not nice to fool Mother Nature! This was an embryonic approach to the emotional and budding environmental movement. Since then Madison Avenue has seen fit to tie products to contemporary issues of the day and most of these are emotional by design. The Virginia Slims cigarette ad campaign, (You’ve come a long way, baby!) of the 1960’s was the perfect illustration of this, until fickle and emotional public opinion turned on them and found smoking to be the next PC platform from which to rail.
Make no mistake, Gillette is not the only razor company to use emotionally based anti-masculine marketing to perversely market to men, the other major competitors have also featured such PC ads though not with as much of an in-your-face approach. Indeed, most competitors have pulled their, mild by comparison adverts, in light of the fallout of Gillette’s ad. Don’t mistake, however, that this push-back of the public is a black cloud over P&G, Gillette and others. This controversy has once again made Gillette’s products front and center in the mind of consumers, so while the initial negative reaction of boycott may have a temporary effect, in the long run the mindless and short-memory consumers will associate razors with Gillette and overtime most men will mindlessly cue up to buy Gillette razors. In effect, this is an overwhelming win for P&G and a positive for the ad agency that produced it.
The same can be said of the Internet, most especially YouTube and this Gillette video. YouTube, as well as, P&G are encouraged by the thumbs down as much as the thumbs up ratings because it translates to views which mean more revenue for the concerned parties. BTW, this applies to all YouTube videos, as well as comments in general so in future do not, repeat do not, rate anything on YouTube whether negatively or positively.
The best approach then is to discard, without fanfare, all Gillette products and boycott all P&G products which include Tide detergent, Crest toothpaste, Old Spice cologne and many other things, (I leave the research to you). This will impact their wallets and is the only language they understand.
Getting Down to Business
So let’s analyze this anti-man zeitgeist of toxic masculinity that pervades society to see the subtle, as well as, the not so subtle detailed hate-mongering against males. First, it is bad enough that government is swiftly becoming a Nanny-State that dictates laws to protect us from ourselves; we don’t now need a commercial corporation telling us that masculinity is toxic for our own good. Second, boorishness among men exists but it is the exception and is effectively squashed by the average male(s) in the vicinity, perhaps even with the threat of resorting to violence should the offender continue. Oh! Violence it is the typical male recourse, the feminist might say; but some folks only understand that others will stand up to another’s attempted dominance only as the final recourse. According to the subject advert everyman is responsible for toxic masculinity by the mere fact of being a man. The constant mantra of “boys will be boys” by an unending line of barbecuing dads is evidence of this. In essence, the ad is saying males, by the very nature of having an extra pound of flesh twixt your legs; you are not only potential deviants but actual perpetrators of offenses against society at large but especially against women and children. It further implies that all men are Neanderthals who effectively need reeducation. Overall this whole “Toxic Masculinity” issue treats males as defective females who need rehabilitation to conform to female behaviors, which is feminization. If you doubt this one only need look to the school system, both public and secular, to see evidence of it. For instance, when a boy is disruptive, as many boys are by nature, the education system recommends drugs, which has the effect of making him docile and pliant. Meantime, such chemical intervention will negatively impact his life from that point forward. Boys have excess energy, this is their nature. Sometimes this is exacerbated by sugary diets, which should be looked at first before resorting to medical and chemical interventions. It always amazes me how contemporary teachers, even with classroom assistants, can’t handle an average group ratio of 17 children, but in past years Sister Mary Margaret could manage a class of 60 kids, where you could hear a pin drop. What’s up with that? Could this be a product of our neurotic teachers of today simply not being able to cope? Naw… it’s just that Johnny needs Ritalin to turn him into a neurotic zombified mess! I guess misery loves company.
Who has the Most Influence of Boys Today?
According to the APA, “traditional masculinity ideology” helps limit “males’ psychological development, constrain their behavior, result in gender role strain and gender role conflict, and negatively influence mental and physical health.” According to the APA, “traditionally masculine” men have built a system of masculinity around bullying rather than civilizing, around stolidity rather than emotional maturity. Thus, it is the fault of men that young boys are growing up to become toxic males.
Statistics say otherwise:
- 76% of public school teachers are females
- 80% of social workers are females
- Divorce rates of over 50% ensure a large number of children being raised in fatherless homes
- 70% of inmates grew up in one parent, (generally Mom), homes
- 70 % of “gang members, high school dropouts, teen suicides, teen pregnancies, and teen substance abusers come from single mother homes.
What is not reported is the numbers of those divorced homes, better called families, are the direct result of 1st and 2nd Wave Feminism which told women they could have it all. Further, of the intact families the husband must often work extra hours or extra jobs to pay expenses and is therefore not home enough to influence his boys as a role model. Essentially, it is easy to see the delusion of toxic masculinity is not from too much male influence but from not enough. Boys don’t know how to properly act as men without positive male role models. Additionally, with the sour grapes attitude of divorced women the picture presented to children is from largely female authorities with the female perspective of Daddy being one of illusionary storybook toxic male bad guys.
What the Future Holds
Make no mistake; this is not the largely humorous Battle of the Sexes our parents joked about, but a direct assault on men as husbands, fathers, heads of families and spiritual directors for their wives and children. So it is easy to extrapolate what this new spirit of the war on men will bring to the future. Boys will be turned into compliant feminized Lambda males; gender-bending will be the norm, (according to some there are as many as 23 genders… funny there are only two differentiating chromosomes determining gender; XX and XY); with the encouragement of Big Pharma more and more boys will be relegated to a drug stupor for life; and finally, those diagnosed with toxic masculinity, even mature men, will be determined to be psychotic at best, and criminal at worst with medical and legal consequences that effectively is a form of acceptable castration.
Indeed, the American Psychological Association has recently stated that:
“Traditionally masculine” men have built a system of masculinity around bullying rather than civilizing, around stolidity rather than emotional maturity. Thus, it is the fault of men that young boys are growing up to become toxic males.
The main thrust of the subsequent research is that “traditional masculinity”—marked by stoicism, competitiveness, dominance and aggression—is, on the whole, harmful. Men socialized in this way are less likely to engage in healthy behaviors.
On this basis, the heroes of 911 who rushed in to save lives of others without regard for their own did not engaged in healthy social behaviors. What an outrage… it is no wonder the psychiatric profession is looked on with such incredulity and disdain by many, many folks.
The Obvious Answer is…
For fathers and male family heads of today it is important that we raise our kids, most especially boys, in preparation for life’s slings and arrows. We do no kindness in mollycoddling our boys. They must learn early and well that actions have consequences. They must learn that they are members of a family and therefore have duties and responsibilities to that family; in this way they will be trained in how to manage a future family and kids and also be members of a healthy society. They must also learn that they must participate in chores, tending pets and other animals, learning skills, physical and social, associated with men and paying nominal rent even in their first after school job … this is known as shifting for yourself and is a largely a neglected aspect of family these days. This imparts true manliness as they will be aware that when on their own no one owes them a living, which I’m sorry to say many kids today, even in college, seem to think. Sternness on the part of Dad does not indicate a lack of love, in contrast the opposite is true for boys’ in particular, and they quickly realize that such action on Dad’s part does indeed demonstrate love, even when the child is initially frustrated in not getting his own way. This is not to say that the onus is only on the father of the family. The mother also has an obligation to allow her husband to discipline the children as he sees fit. The mother has the majority of the time with the children and can enforce her influence and discipline at that time, but when dad is around he must be freely allowed to act accordingly with his children without interference. When parents disagree in front of the kids it presents a crack into which children will place a wedge; and children are quick to recognize this crack and exploit it. It also behooves her to give her husband her full support in his disciplining of the children because kids really do dread the cry of Mom, “wait until your father gets home”, which will get instant cooperation. The way of the world, most especially today, demands such action on the part of parents. Parents today often forget that their responsibility is not just providing a roof and board for their young’uns but mainly to pass on the Faith; civilize, correct and guide their children to responsible adulthood. After all this is what parents are called to do and not to be friends and pals to their kids. To do otherwise, relinquishes the parent’s role to a keeper of the State’s Human Resources. The above advice is key to countering the agenda of the New World Order in dismantling the nuclear family and usurping the role of the traditional masculine father. If ignored the future holds more gender-bending, more adolescent children of twenty-nine and thirty years of age, and more lambda men with no backbone. Indeed, it could mean an end to the sanctity of marriage and family altogether.
So don’t rant and rave, make a dramatic return of your razor to Gillette or get angry, it accomplishes nothing. Instead take a proactive stance by raising your kids the way your Grandad did … with tough love.
Richard of Danbury, D.S.G.