As everyone and their mother knows, Gillette released a commercial earlier this month which targeted toxic masculinity and the ways in which it harms society, namely women. Of course, it has become an extremely controversial topic of discussion in recent weeks, with some praising the boldness of the act and others ridiculing the company for unfairly going after men.
I would definitely be part of the former camp, albeit with a fair sprinkling of caution. I am known for my “meninist” viewpoints, and with that in mind, I do not subscribe to the idea of going too far with the #metoo movement, of which the commercial references by name.
However, I believe the Gillette commercial tackles the issue of toxic masculinity in a respectful and tactful way. The fact is, men are fed spoonful after spoonful of inherently sexist and emotionally damaging rhetoric from early childhood, and it has contributed to the culture of double standards we live in today. This needs to change. Men need to do their part in making society better, and it starts and ends with eliminating the expectations of what we are “supposed” to be.
It certainly is out of place for a corporation with no real ties to progressivism to make such a controversial commercial, and they almost certainly did so to emulate the success of Nike’s Colin Kaepernick ad, but I believe nonetheless in the necessity of its airing. I am not the only one who thinks so either.
Gillette’s North American brand director, Pankaj Bhalla, responded to the overwhelmingly shocking decision to boycott Gillette’s products by conservatives, stating, “We expected debate. Actually a discussion is necessary. If we don’t discuss and don’t talk about it, I don’t think real change will happen,” Bhalla said as Heather Kelly of CNN reported. To me, corporations with no personal stock in this debate might be the key to that real change.
It is one thing for CNN and Huffington Post to comment on toxic masculinity; they are liberal outlets with a confined audience. People who follow entities like Fox News, though, will be well-insulated from the discussion and could easily avoid even thinking about it. Having this discussion enter every-day life without it being politically charged is critical to making a difference, as this way, sexist and emotionally suppressive behavior can never be passed off as normal to young boys.
I understand why innocent men are tired of constantly being reminded of what their less respectable counterparts are doing to women and even other men. I see why people just want to be left alone.
In a perfect world, we could do that, but it has been shown that there is also a considerable, unjustified backlash on the topic of toxic masculinity from men who feel they should not be questioned in their actions. This arrogance and backward way of thinking has no place in the future, and if we have to flood the airwaves with this message, so be it.
It is sad it takes the prospect of financial gain for companies to engage in this type of discussion, but I will take it. With it slowly being proven to be profitable, I expect more of these “stunts” in the future. It may not be done out of altruism, but it will become more and more unavoidable with time and will hopefully help shape our society for the better.
With these renewed talks on toxic masculinity, Gillette has ingrained itself into the problem at hand. Marlene Towns of The Hill said, “Interestingly enough, despite the controversy (or, in fact, because of it) one’s reaction to the Gillette spot has itself become a barometer by which to gauge the very existence of toxic masculinity.”
This showcases a resounding success by Gillette in both making themselves (and other companies in the future by extension) a part of social justice and giving an important issue a platform outside of angry-rant tweets and memes. If this does not prove exactly why Gillette’s commercial belongs, I do not know what ever will.