The differences between men and women is an aspect of society that should be celebrated instead of vilified. Yet, modern culture has declared war on this biological fact–setting society on a course whose destination blurs the lines between male and female.
Emboldened by political correctness and the urge to virtue-signal, Gillette perfectly illustrates the move to a genderless society. Casting condemnation on the traditional male, stereotyping men as aggressive and demeaning to women and calling to change traditional male behaviors to lessen the effect of what they refer to as “toxic masculinity” is a misguided crusade. Femininizing men is not a good thing. In fact, better masculinity is how we change society.
Ambition, aggressiveness and the urge to compete cannot simply be removed from male genes, nor should they because these traits are not as inherently destructive as Gillette seems to suggest. Masculine traits, harnessed to their fullest potential, breed the men who become the leaders and heroes we admire the most. Gillette’s willful shaming of men who healthily exercise these traits is the symptom of the larger societal problem: the campaign against the traditional male himself. 
Painting masculinity as flawed and in desperate need of change is alienating the very men Gillette is trying to hold as an example.
The patronizing campaign, according to Robert Gearty of Fox News has “been criticized for delivering an insulting message that assumes misogyny is rampant among men.” Assuming the worst in men is no way to enact change, and blanket disapproval of the masculine is meant to enflame tensions rather than alleviate them. Gillette ignores the obvious fact that a man can vent his aggression through typical male activity such as football or hunting without encouraging boys to become bullies. Gillette refuses to acknowledge that men can and should find women attractive without being guilty of sexual harassment.
Men are living in a society that demonizes their nature, forcing them to be afraid of the potential repercussions of simply interacting with the opposite sex. The Economist cites a study conducted in 2017, showing how the definition of sexual harassment has become an umbrella term in recent years.
According to this study, 20 percent of men ages 18-30 believe simply offering to buy a woman a drink is a form of sexual harassment. These absurdities will only intensify as more and more men grow up in the culture condemning their nature to the degree Gillette desires.
The issue of emasculating men is a threat to a healthy and traditional society, but when addressing the seriousness of the issue, it is important to consider Gillette as the messenger. At their core, Gillette is a corporation motivated by selling products to a target demographic–not some champion of social justice as some progressives cast them.
Forbes writer Charles Taylor addressed this issue and said, “While corporate social responsibility appeals can be effective, corporations must be sensitive to the potential of consumers being skeptical of their motives, or not wanting to be told how to behave by a profit-motivated company.”
For Gillette, all publicity is good publicity, and this advertisement was designed to spark controversy and become a polarizing issue. Politics sell, and Gillette could be hoping to capture a share of the success Nike had with the Collin Kaepernick ad campaign, which made the business over 6 billion dollars in additional revenue.
Gillette is willing to worship at the altar of political correctness and condemn men for their biological instincts, all for the sake of making money off free exposure is disgraceful. Before Gillette can be granted the role of the great arbiter of morality, as some progressives are overly hasty to do, motivations must be assigned and considered for the corporation’s actions.
The moment Gillette entered the political arena is the moment they stopped being a just razor company and started being an actor. With clear intentions, Gillette won many allies by expressing a certain worldview. However, making a stance opens up criticism from those who disagree. Gillette deserves every ounce of backlash this commercial has produced because it was designed with the specific purpose of inciting rage on the opposing side.
Propagating the notion that men becoming more like women as a societal necessity is a ridiculous one. It is an asinine belief that must be reversed before additional harm to men is done.
We are already living in a time where young men are becoming afraid of their masculinity and are encouraged to believe something is inherently wrong with their innate traits. No longer should society actively seek to confuse the men of tomorrow, as the commercial suggests, “boys will be boys,” and that is perfectly fine.