The real problem with that false equivalency, is that the statistics prove the left hand side false in it's starting premise:
During 2012-15, the rate of white-on-white violent crime(12.0 per 1,000 white persons) was about four times higherthan black-on-white violent crime (3.1 per 1,000). The rate of black-on-black violent crime (16.5 per 1,000 black persons) was more than five times higher than white-on-black violent crime (2.8 per 1,000). The rate of Hispanic-on-Hispanic violent crime (8.3 per 1,000 Hispanic persons) was about double the rate of white-on-Hispanic (4.1 per 1,000) and black-on-Hispanic (4.2 per 1,000) violent crime. As with violent crime, the rates of serious violent crime and simple assault were higher for intraracial victimizations than interracial victimizations.
https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rhovo1215_sum.pdf
Nope, I'm not saying it doesn't deserve to be talked about.
But what I get from most of the protestations over the Gillette ad are simple but-what-about-isms, as if you can't call out the bad behavior of some men, without addressing every single other social in the same breath. How does the fact that some men are abused by women negate the fact that much larger number of women are abused by men?
Let me answer that, it doesn't. If you are really concerned about the number of men abused by women, then please open a shelter to help them out. Though, there are some shelters right here in Indy that do in fact help abused men. The Julian Center is one such place and it is one that I wholeheartedly support and have done volunteer work with. So I encourage everyone on the forum, regardless of gender, orientation, political inclination, and favorite sports team to open your wallets and support the fantastic work they do. https://www.juliancenter.org/donate/
Back to the fragile male egos and the Gillette ad. If you don't like getting preached to by a cynical corporation, then do something about it. Volunteer, join the Big Brothers or other such groups, help out the Boy Scouts, become a foster family, work with many of the groups out there trying to end the school to prison pipeline. What I'm seeing instead is that because some of you feel targeted by the ad and other such statements, you want to shut down any discussion and hide in a corner. If you don't like the conversation, get out there and change it. Prove that they are wrong about most men.
I will tell you what won't work to convince anyone... *****ing and moaning about a Feminist anti-male agenda and complaining that no one is highlighting all the terrible things that women do. That simply will get you ignore or lumped in with the (hopefully) small percentage of men who are being called out.
As to the point of comparing this to the anti-gun rhetoric that is thrown around, my point above applies just the same. We can sit here and complain about anti-gunners making up lies and violating the constitution, but if all we do is sit here and complain about it, they'll win. We need to get out there and contact our congressmen and senators, work to recruit pro-gun candidates for whatever party you are member of, take family members/neighbors/co-workers to the range and teach them that shooting is fun hobby and how to be safe. If we do that, we'll convince most people that we are right and the anti-gunners are wrong.
Is your response to anti-gun lies to point out that knives are just as dangerous and why isn't anyone trying to ban them? I hope not, since that doesn't do anything but make things worse.
A guy named King Camp Gillette was the founder of the company in 1901. Interesting enough he was against capitalism. A liberal over a century ago...
[FONT=&]“King Gillette had always been an opponent of capitalism. He wrote a number of books promoting a socialist utopia, beginning with "The Human Drift" (1894), in which he declared competition to be the root of all evil. He even presented plans for efficient, pollution-free cities contained in single gigantic, glass-domed, beehive-like communal complexes. Gillette hoped that these would replace the monstrous, sprawling cities that the Industrial Revolution had created.”
[/FONT][FONT=&]“King Gillette's social engineering efforts never made much headway. In addition, his personal fortune was ruined by the stock market crash of 1929, patent battles, and corporate infighting. Gillette died a frustrated man in 1932.”[/FONT]
He did die a broke man! That should be a lesson to any young socialists!"I'm going to create beautiful, pollution-free utopian glass-domed cities! Eh, screw it. Let's just make razor blades and shave cream."
He did die a broke man! That should be a lesson to any young socialists!
His ideas for razor improvement lived on managed by those better equipped to handle the business. In other words “capitalists”! The company is now owned by Procter and Gamble.I know I can google it, but how did Gillette rise from the ashes to become the giant it is today?
.
I know I can google it, but how did Gillette rise from the ashes to become the giant it is today?
.
When abusing their men, women were pulling the beards to get them in close for a punch...Men, being unable to strike back and seeking a solution, went to the Indigenous men of this nation for an answer....The answer was a clean shaven face....Gillette heard of this and capitalized on it to bring peace to the sexes....
And now you know....The rest of the story.....
You river dwellars are so smart. Also you're a fine figure of a man.
Aye.
.
Just went to get some lunch. On the way home, there was a pickup truck with a sticker in the rear window that said, "Ditch the *****! Let's Go Hunting!"
That seemed disrespectful towards women. So I shot him. Am I doing this right?