Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Gillette Is Not Wrong
Is the new Gillette razor ad a radical feminist attack on masculinity – the commercial embodiment of a woke sensibility? I was prepared to think so. But having watched it twice, I find a lot to like. The ad has been panned by some conservative commentators. With all due respect, I think they are falling into a trap. They seem to have accepted the feminist framing. Feminists see culture as a Manichean struggle. It’s women versus men. Women are benign and men are malign. For society to progress, men must change. We must extirpate “toxic masculinity.”
Understandably, this rubs conservatives the wrong way. I’ve risen to the defense of masculinity many times myself. But is the Gillette ad really “the product of mainstream radicalized feminism—and emblematic of Cultural Marxism,” as Turning Point USA’s Candace Owen put it? Is it part of “a war on masculinity in America,” as Todd Starnes argued on Fox News?
Conservatives stripping off their coats to get into this brawl are like the man who, seeing a barfight unfold, asks “Is this a private quarrel or can anyone join in?”
Let’s figure out what the fight is about before taking sides.
There were a couple of undercurrents in the Gillette ad that suggested feminist influence – the term “toxic masculinity” should itself be toxic – but overall, the ad is pretty tame, even valuable. I have no idea if it’s the best way to sell razors, but as social commentary, it’s not offensive. “The Best Men Can Be” begins by showing men looking the other way as boys fight, shrugging “boys will be boys.” It shows men laughing at a comedy portraying a lout pantomiming a lunge at a woman’s behind. It shows kids teasing a boy for being a “freak” or a “sissy.” These are followed by more uplifting images of men breaking up fights, interfering with men who are harassing women, and being loving fathers to daughters. We hear a quote from former NFL star Terry Crews, saying “Men need to hold other men accountable.” These images didn’t strike me as a reproof of masculinity per se, but rather as a critique of bullying, boorishness, and sexual misconduct.
By reflexively rushing to defend men in this context, some conservatives have run smack into an irony. Imaging themselves to be men’s champions, they are actually defending behavior, like sexual harassment and bullying, that a generation or two ago conservatives were the ones condemning. Sexual license, crude language, and retreat from personal responsibility were the hallmarks of the left. It was to epate la bourgeoisie that leftists chanted “Up against the wall, [expletive]” on college campuses. Liberals were the crowd saying “Let it all hang out,” “If it feels good, do it,” and “chaste makes waste.” Feminists were the ones eyeing daggers at men who held chairs or doors for them, and insisting that a “woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.”
The left won that cultural battle. Standards of conduct for both sexes went out the window. Whereas men had once been raised to behave themselves in front of women — “Watch your language, there are ladies present” – they were instead invited to believe that women deserved no special consideration at all.
As I’ve written many times, the MeToo movement may conceive of itself as a protest of “traditional masculinity,” but that’s only because memories are short. It’s actually a protest against the libertine culture the sexual revolution ushered in. Some men are behaving really badly – harassing women, bullying each other, and failing in their family responsibilities. Some women are too, though the MeToo movement doesn’t acknowledge that aspect of things. But these behaviors are not “traditional.” They’ve always existed, of course, but they went mainstream with the counterculture, which is now the culture. In any case, everyone, left and right, who values decent behavior should be able to agree that encouraging men to be non-violent, polite, and respectful is not anti-male. It’s just civilized.
Conservatives should applaud that aspect of the Gillette message. Progressives, in turn, should grapple with the overwhelming evidence that the best way to raise honorable men is with two parents. We may wish it were otherwise, but fathers — as disciplinarians, role models, and loving husbands — are key to rearing happy, healthy, and responsible sons, as well as self-confident, happy, and high-achieving daughters.
That’s the cultural reform we so badly need. Any corporate volunteers? Apple? Google?
Published in Culture
If I may make a suggestion: I think you might agree with my book. https://www.amazon.com/Sex-Matters-Modern-Feminism-Science/dp/0451498399/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1547774598&sr=8-1&keywords=mona+charen+sex+matters
My dad used to joke that he wouldn’t want to get a Bowflex after watching their commercial. The before picture would show a guy with a hairy chest and the after was a shaved chest, to show off the new definition. Dad’s joke was that home gyms make you lose your chest hair.
Mona, I read it and enjoyed it. (Library copy. ;) )
You and I agree about sex, and many other things — most things, probably.
SHUT. THE HELL. UP.
Trouble is feminists say they’re all for positive masculinity, but then the examples they can think of are not particularly masculine at all.
My Grandpa served on a Destroyer Escort (U.S.S. Cronin) in World War II. He said that every morning one of his fellow sailors would shave with a straight razor on-board a rocking ship like it was nothing.
I watched a video on how to do it. Learning is a big headache. There is no way in hell I’m going to do that now. A young person would save a hell of a lot of money though over their lifetimes.
Yeah, I’m tired of that crap, too.
Well, according to the moderators at this here forum, saying someone is not a conservative constitutes a personal attack. So I infer that they think non-conservatives are an enemy camp.
I need to check out Schick!
How in the world do you equate NeverTrumpers with caving into feminists?
Me too! I think that this might be the first time we have been in agreement with each other!
Oh come on. Please document your argument.
Please provide a hyperlink to the Gillette commercial.
Yeah, but this isn’t that kind of website, so you might want to take that off-line ;)
I saw some watch company had another ad about manhood. Kind of a response to Gillette
That’s just a little dust in my eye.
Woodworking does that to you.
That needs way more likes.
Why are you not buying Harry’s?
Agreed. It doesn’t “just follow”.
Harry’s got there ahead of Gillette. Both are busy trying to be “more woker than thou.”
Here we go again. Why am I not being told these things? You know I don’t have TV and so don’t see all these ads. How am I supposed to keep up with what I’m supposed to be boycotting?
Happy to oblige!
(Harry’s ad was arguably much worse than Gillette’s.)
Well, as a good capitalist, I’ll continue to buy Harry’s products because I like them. And I’ll ignore the nonsense.
I stopped buying Harry’s because they began to devote a percentage of their profits to at least one explicitly anti-2A group. See
https://www.harrys.com/en/us/social-mission?utm_source=penpal&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20180227_social_mission_sp_us_quick_update_01, which includes
http://therepresentationproject.org/guns-toxic-masculinity/ as one of the groups they say they’re giving money to.
As I told them in an email, if they’d said they were giving their own money to groups I disagree with, I wouldn’t care. That’s at least indirect. But they intentionally began to funnel profits to these groups I’m opposed to, so I gave up on ’em.
I quit shopping at Safeway because some of the employees vote Democrat.
I get your point, Spin, but here the owners of the company began to direct profits to these groups. That’s a big difference in kind than employees at Safeway voting in ways I don’t like. Like I said, if the two founders began spending their own money on these groups, I wouldn’t care. But they’re directly using part of my dollars to give to these groups.
Brothers in arms? :)
That’s racist.
United Way gives a % of charitable donations to Planned Parenthood automatically (or did before being outed). Regardless of how you divvy up your money.
When my employer used them for charitable donations, I wouldn’t donate.