Harry Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 1 hour ago, Mel81x said: I think it might actually be worse than Gillette's but that's debatable. I think the reason the PETA ad fails more is that it was trying to promote a Vegan lifestyle and I don't hate eating vegetables but that ad just made me not want to touch a vegetable for a bit. They're pretty different animals imo. One is just stupid and low brow. The other is a bit preachy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IgnisExcubitor Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 Saw that PETA ad yesterday. By far the worst thing I've seen for a long, long while. But it still didn't trump their daft 'words hurt' tweet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subscriber nudge+ Posted January 18, 2019 Subscriber Share Posted January 18, 2019 2 hours ago, Mel81x said: If you thought the Gillette ad was a cracker you should go see the PETA ad for going vegan and improving 'male' performance that was released just one day after Gillette went out with their ad. Thought I wouldn't post it what the hell. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sL38scvWFno What the actual fuck is that?... Although that's PETA after all so it's not surprising... They also ran this ad a while ago: Makes it look like the two guys were having a threesome with the chicken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subscriber Mel81x+ Posted January 18, 2019 Subscriber Share Posted January 18, 2019 Just now, nudge said: What the actual fuck is that?... Although that's PETA after all so it's not surprising... They also ran this ad a while ago: Makes it look like the two guys were having a threesome with the chicken Im very curious who their partner for marketing and advertising is because whoever it is deserves the axe like yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subscriber nudge+ Posted January 18, 2019 Subscriber Share Posted January 18, 2019 1 minute ago, Mel81x said: Im very curious who their partner for marketing and advertising is because whoever it is deserves the axe like yesterday. They've always been a bunch of insane weirdos; I wouldn't be surprised if they come up with those ingenious ideas by themselves... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subscriber Mel81x+ Posted January 18, 2019 Subscriber Share Posted January 18, 2019 3 minutes ago, nudge said: They've always been a bunch of insane weirdos; I wouldn't be surprised if they come up with those ingenious ideas by themselves... I just went back and looked at the image you posted. How has no one come out and gotten outraged by that monstrosity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subscriber nudge+ Posted January 18, 2019 Subscriber Share Posted January 18, 2019 5 minutes ago, Mel81x said: I just went back and looked at the image you posted. How has no one come out and gotten outraged by that monstrosity? I guess it's because nobody takes PETA seriously as they always depended on shock factor to make their point... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cicero Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 19 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said: There's a black guy in the commercial in that whole "boys will be boys" shite their criticising - then they show black and white men having their "epiphany" moment. Not sure I agree with the idea that this was targeting a particular race at all. I also take issue with the idea they've "emasculated" anyone. Is it because they've used the phrase "toxic masculinity?" Because that's a stupid phrase and I generally think people who say that are idiots, but it's sort of just a meaningless phrase. But other than that, it's more critical of parents who stand by their kids bullying & people who are sexist. Ultimately the political message it seems to be sending is "Teach your boys to be kind. Also shave with a Gillett razor." I'm not sure that the absence of kindness equates to masculinity, or that encouraging kindness equates to emasculating groups of men. I honestly think the people most offended by this ad are reading waaaaaaaay too far into this, it's honestly a bit hilarious. As with Nike and Kaepernick, Gillett's in no danger of losing the majority of their target market - this will blow over and people will forget about being irritated by this ad. And of course it's hypocritical, it's a big corporation pretending that it cares about anything other than it's own profits. As if they give a fuck about any social cause What Gillette views as toxic masculinity, we are all guilty of. Asking a girl to smile? Wanting to get a girls number? Are we in their eyes wrong with society? Aside that, this treatment towards women suggests this behavior represents the Male norm, hence the backlash. The black heroism looked forced. Can't see it being coincidental. First we have Terry Crews speaking out against sexual assault. We then have a black guy intervening a white guy when he said that girl should smile. What a hero. A white guy then looked to have wanted to talk to a girl before a black guy came and told him not cool. Even with the two kids fighting, there's a black child peacefully sitting on the bench away from the fight. It's just a very, very, very bad ad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6666 Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 This is what the director came up with when doing an advert directed towards women... Slightly different tone. No "be a better woman and stop nagging and stop being so insecure"... Strange that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted February 8, 2019 Share Posted February 8, 2019 This article very succinctly articulates the concerns expressed in this topic... https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.economist.com/open-future/2018/08/17/the-dangers-of-illiberal-liberalism#ampf=undefined Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Artful Dodger Posted February 8, 2019 Share Posted February 8, 2019 1 hour ago, Harry said: This article very succinctly articulates the concerns expressed in this topic... https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.economist.com/open-future/2018/08/17/the-dangers-of-illiberal-liberalism#ampf=undefined I'm pleased to see it being called the right thing, an argument between Liberals and no so Liberals. It's nothing to do with left/right, while many 'Liberals' may profess to be of the left they barely spend any time concerning themselves with what left wing politics is primarily about; the economy. I try not to get to involved, I find those who throw around terms like snowflake, cuck etc to be generally be oddly angry, entitled, and probably sexually suppressed given the sexualised nature of their insults, bigots barely worth communicating with such is their idiocy. However, I find the use of terms like gammon as being equally risible, perhaps not racist in its origin but a puerile and stupid term used by people not able to communicate their argument intelligently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted February 8, 2019 Share Posted February 8, 2019 A corollary from that article I think is there are a shit ton of people that find the more extreme elements of either side of politics equally detestable and so feel apathetic and lack a political party they can really get behind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inverted Posted February 10, 2019 Share Posted February 10, 2019 I think a lot of pseudo-political feelgood bullshit is really the most powerful tool for the status quo you can find. Middle-class people tend to divert their honest intentions into concerns about sexual positivity, representation within media, political power being held by women and racial minorities, etc etc. From the point of view of those who hold the actual power in society - that is, economic power - these are really gifts. Honest people expending their efforts on these kinds of trivial issues is the dream scenario, because it essentially gives the ruling class a chance to rehabilitate itself in the eyes of would-be progressives. Major corporations can become the heroes by diversifying their board rooms, heartless conservatives like Hillary Clinton can secure fanatical support just by being a woman, soulless movie-making machines can become champions of progress by casting a majority-black cast whilst black artists working outside the Hollywood system get ignored, and this tactic can be repeated ad nauseam. Capitalism is so survivable because it is a fundamentally two-faced system. On the one hand it rolls with the tide and creates a cultural sphere that can accommodate almost any kind of change of mood in society. It might seem like you're struggling to make this side of the system change, but really its point is to be adaptable and responsive to public sentiment. It might put up a pretend fight, but it doesn't really care. On the other, it has a dogmatic side - it won't willingly negotiate the rights of the propertied classes to dominate the political sphere, to siphon-off wealth and move it freely around the globe, and to destroy any organised labour power. These sorts of legal and economic issues are its real concerns, and to get any progress in these areas means really ripping off the mask and asking fundamental questions about how our societies are run. There have been rare moments in history where capitalism was forced to concede ground on these fronts - like the 1950s - but they are exceedingly rare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 20 hours ago, Inverted said: I think a lot of pseudo-political feelgood bullshit is really the most powerful tool for the status quo you can find. Middle-class people tend to divert their honest intentions into concerns about sexual positivity, representation within media, political power being held by women and racial minorities, etc etc. From the point of view of those who hold the actual power in society - that is, economic power - these are really gifts. Honest people expending their efforts on these kinds of trivial issues is the dream scenario, because it essentially gives the ruling class a chance to rehabilitate itself in the eyes of would-be progressives. Major corporations can become the heroes by diversifying their board rooms, heartless conservatives like Hillary Clinton can secure fanatical support just by being a woman, soulless movie-making machines can become champions of progress by casting a majority-black cast whilst black artists working outside the Hollywood system get ignored, and this tactic can be repeated ad nauseam. Capitalism is so survivable because it is a fundamentally two-faced system. On the one hand it rolls with the tide and creates a cultural sphere that can accommodate almost any kind of change of mood in society. It might seem like you're struggling to make this side of the system change, but really its point is to be adaptable and responsive to public sentiment. It might put up a pretend fight, but it doesn't really care. On the other, it has a dogmatic side - it won't willingly negotiate the rights of the propertied classes to dominate the political sphere, to siphon-off wealth and move it freely around the globe, and to destroy any organised labour power. These sorts of legal and economic issues are its real concerns, and to get any progress in these areas means really ripping off the mask and asking fundamental questions about how our societies are run. There have been rare moments in history where capitalism was forced to concede ground on these fronts - like the 1950s - but they are exceedingly rare. I deeply lament the fact that economic and social issues are grouped together on the same political spectrum of left vs right. It seems particularly bad to me in America (which unfortunately is very influential on politics everywhere else) for example where abortion seems to be a debate deliberately kept running for decades by conservatives to retain the allegiance of middle class white Christian voters. Meanwhile this party enact economic policy that undoubtedly screws these people, and elect conservative justices who pander to this base on such social issues whilst also passing insidious determinations such as Citizens United, basically abolishing limits on political donations and enabling individual political influence to be openly in direct proportion to individual wealth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluebird Hewitt Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 https://news.sky.com/story/amp/waitrose-apologises-for-selling-racist-chocolate-ducklings-after-criticism-11688611 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subscriber nudge+ Posted April 9, 2019 Subscriber Share Posted April 9, 2019 Just now, Bluebird Hewitt said: https://news.sky.com/story/amp/waitrose-apologises-for-selling-racist-chocolate-ducklings-after-criticism-11688611 Shouldn't it be posted in the Generation Snowflake thread instead?... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluebird Hewitt Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 19 minutes ago, nudge said: Shouldn't it be posted in the Generation Snowflake thread instead?... Probably should have in fairness. Didn't think of that. @Stan, @Harvsky, @Cannabis, any chance one of you could move my post to the Generation Snowflake thread please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator Stan Posted April 9, 2019 Administrator Share Posted April 9, 2019 3 minutes ago, Bluebird Hewitt said: Probably should have in fairness. Didn't think of that. @Stan, @Harvsky, @Cannabis, any chance one of you could move my post to the Generation Snowflake thread please? Done. As if you tagged Cannabis though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluebird Hewitt Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 2 minutes ago, Stan said: Done. As if you tagged Cannabis though. Cheers. I forgot that Nudge could have done it as well mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Tommy Posted September 11, 2019 Moderator Share Posted September 11, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cicero Posted September 11, 2019 Share Posted September 11, 2019 What if I identify myself as a woman? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
True Blue Posted September 12, 2019 Share Posted September 12, 2019 19 hours ago, Tommy said: I understood that women want equality with men, how does this help? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluewolf Posted September 12, 2019 Author Share Posted September 12, 2019 Even though it all seems a bit silly and forced at the moment with things like Ghostbusters with an all female cast and Oceans 26 or whatever it was with an all female cast and then meddling with Dr Who and putting in a female lead and now things like this with the Monopoly etc.. give it another 10 years and it will be the norm and everyone will wonder what all the fuss was about.. and I appreciate that most things in the past have been male led and there are some out there that want to sit on a keyboard all day bashing out their latest protestations on any given subject but people need to remember there have been some great females throughout history that led the way for fairer sex long before all this nonsense started kicking off.. Can't people take inspiration from them and their achievements rather than bemoaning their own poor choices or lack of ambition to change their own circumstances?? What about people like Amelia Earhart for example, look what she achieved in a so called male dominated environment??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Gonzo Posted September 12, 2019 Share Posted September 12, 2019 2 minutes ago, Bluewolf said: What about people like Amelia Earhart for example, look what she achieved in a so called male dominated environment??? Did they ever find her body? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluewolf Posted September 12, 2019 Author Share Posted September 12, 2019 1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said: Did they ever find her body? Not as far as I am aware... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.