#gillette

What if toxic masculinity is the reason for climate change?

How does this article get past Forbes’ editorial? The opening line in Carolyn Centeno Milton’s piece described that most people would think women would be more likely to use eco friendly canvas shopping bags than men.

Several years back, the UK Environment Agency did a study on the effectiveness of alternative packaging solutions to HDPE (conventional plastic bags) in terms of lowering environmental impact. It said,

The paper, LDPE, non-woven PP and cotton bags should be reused at least 3, 4, 11 and 131 times respectively to ensure that they have lower [impact] than conventional HDPE carrier bags that are not reused.”

So if conventional biodegradable plastic shopping bags are reused to throw out garbage that means 6, 8, 22 and 262 days are required for the alternatives to have a lower environmental footprint. So if one has 10 canvas shopping bags which aren’t used for rubbish disposal they need to be used everyday for 6 years each!

Everyone that CM knows has a stockpile of these enviro alternatives because one forgets, does impulse shopping or requires more bags than initially thought. So is it toxic masculinity or the realities and practicalities of our day to day lives?

Furthermore if consumers can’t use plastic shopping bags to throw away rubbish they’ll need to substitute it with plastic bin liners from aisle 7. Net impact on the environment – zero. In reality it’s probably more as the plastic bags sold at supermarkets are thicker and less biodegradable than what they replace but if it has “eco friendly” written on the side, you’re “woke”!! Job done! Yay!

Dr. Aaron Brough of Utah State University conducted the study to see if there is correlation between toxic masculinity and climate change. His assumptions run the line that men see environmentalism as more feminine and get triggered to make ecological choices if threatened.

The study went as far as to see whether men would select a more feminine looking Walmart gift card with floral print (which was labeled a gender threat card) or a plain one without as a sign of masculine preferences.

The study went so far as China to further its findings. BMW China put forward two ads on the same car; one pushing ecology, the other safety. Had Brough visited China and lost 8 lives in the back of a single Beijing taxi ride he would understand the imperative of those favoring safety. Nothing to do with toxic masculinity. A sign of fragility. A toxic male, by his logic, should favour less safety.

To flip the argument on its head, countless numbers of Tesla drivers have posted YouTube videos showing complete faith in the auto pilot system which has killed numerous owners. Should we take it some Tesla buyers show toxic stupidity to film themselves playing card games, pretending to sleep and massaging the passenger in their quest to be ecological?

If the BMW China study proved anything, the German maker will clearly sell more cars if they focus on safety over the environment. It has nothing to do with toxic masculinity. This trend would be supported by an equal number of women, especially mothers with kids.

Centeno Milton closes on Brough’s comments,

“We need to overcome our unhealthy judgements of gender incongruence. And men need to be confident in their self-identity and decide to live a sustainable lifestyle without caring what other people think.

Funny that, I thought I was just shopping. Little did I know that the inner white supremacist and toxic male in me was driving me to destroy our ecosystems. Note to self – pick floral Walmart gift cards and pester the dealer at BMW to run through the emissions stats on video so CM can upload proof CM fits Brough’s stereotypes to overcome gender incongruence. Unfortunately CM is willing to bet the dealer won’t know the emission number but will know how many airbags the car has.

The only people adding to warming the planet are those producing needless hot air like Brough. So unsettled must climate science be to have such studies funded in the first place. It rates up there with CM’s local paper discussing the stress on pets caused by climate change.

Gillette razor cuts ongoing

Gillette at Priceline is still on discount. Schick remains full price. Interested to see the next set of numbers from P&G. It is doubtful that it will derail the group by any stretch but the management commentary will be interesting to see how they deflect the campaign. Perhaps better to look at Schick’s parent Edgewell Personal Care to see if they got a free bump.

Gillette cheaper than Home Brand

A month after the Gillette toxic masculinity campaign, it seems that apart from all the Gillette razors remaining discounted vs Schick product at full price, even Gillette shaving foam is selling at a discount to the low cost generic Woolworths Home Brand. Talking about a shaving cut.

”We see the good in men”

The Egard watch company took the opposite view of the Gillette campaign. So much for equality!

The cost of Gillette’s virtue signaling?

Before the ads, Gillette wasn’t on sale and Schick was. Now it’s reversed. One store maybe but the timing seems coincidental.

Love, Sex & War

Love, Sex and War. Changing Values 1939-45

In the process of researching the backdrop to publishing the important memoirs of a family member that served in WW2, CM stumbled over some fascinating data with respect to infidelity/adultery during wartime, one of the topics that surfaced in his letters. Suffice to say reading John Costello’s ‘Love, Sex & War‘ there are some eye-opening statistics to come from the book. One wonders whether these toxic men, supposedly laying their lives down to protect the women at home, possibly fathomed this into the equation when they enlisted.

Costello notes,

There were the notorious ‘war-brides’ called ‘Allotment Annies’ who hustled departing soldiers into marriage to collect the twenty dollars a month the US Government automatically allotted to servicemen’s wives. With a private’s pay rising to fifty dollars a month for overseas service, some greedy ‘Annies’ took on four, five, and even six husbands. These unscrupulous women made bigamy a business, and in return for V-mail letters to GIs overseas they lived very well off the pale blue-green Government cheques. Some, with the financial acumen of actuaries, specialized in airmen, anticipating that their higher mortality rates would increase their chances of collecting the ten thousand dollar jackpot Government insurance cheque issued if their husband was killed in action.

Elvira Taylor achieved national notoriety as the ‘Allotment Annie’ who operated out of Norfolk Virginia and specialized in sailors. She managed to snare six live ones and was about to hook a seventh when she was arrested as a result of two of her ‘husbands’ starting a fight in an English pub when they showed each other her picture as their ‘wife.’ When they had been cooled off by the military police, they joined forces to expose the duplicitous Elvira, who was discovered by checking the navy pay records to have contracted four other bigamous marriages.

When it came to divorce, Costello went on to write,

One out of every three American servicemen were married by the end of the war. There was a doubling of petitions for divorce by 1945 when, for every hundred couples getting married, thirty-one were legally separated…The wartime divorce phenomenon afflicted British servicemen to the same increasing degree. The number of adultery petitions filed after 1942 rose by a hundred per cent each year above the 1939-42 average. The final twelve months of the war also saw a spectacular eightfold jump in the number of husbands who were suing for divorce on the grounds of adultery. By 1945, two out of every three petitions were being filed by men, whereas until 1940 female petitions had been in the majority.

So much for the patriarchy we hear about incessantly. To think of those brave souls that laid down their lives for those who were only interested in their deaths.

Gillette Lecture Series – 2

What was Gillette saying in Lecture 1 about it being high time men deal with toxic masculinity? Is this picture what it really meant when it supported the #METOO movement? Hypocrites.