That recent Gilette ad is fascinating and reveals what feels like culture's collective confusion over what gender is supposed to be. The ad starts by showing a sequence of 'bad' masculine actions - boys fighting, guys catcalling women, or shaming each other for crying. (Cont-)
-
-
This list is Gilette's example of how men 'should' behave. In this list, three (four?) feature men in the role of "protector of women" - that a man's job is to protect a woman from other men. Another two feature men using their physical strength to stop fights. (cont)
Show this thread -
Only one shot on this list features something that seems feminine - peacefully resolving a fight. Gillette tells us it's bad when men show dominance over women, but then show shots of men acting as protector for women implicitly too weak to do it themselves
Show this thread -
Gillette isn't truly challenging masculinity, it's just redirecting it - it still uses the appeal to strength, power, and physical intimidation as being inherent to maleness - "Men need to hold other men accountable." It's stroking the war game urge in a socially acceptable way.
Show this thread -
Maybe this is all fine, but it does make me feel like Gillette - and the society it's so carefully catering to - is confused about what it means for a man to be 'good to a woman'. Both the bad and good worlds provided as contrast in this ad seem to remove agency from women.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.