Can someone please explain the uproar over this controversial new Gillette ad? That request is, of course, rhetorical. Having watched the ad in question, it appears to me the so-called controversy is a lot of hoopla, fueled by a rush to unnecessary outrage. I came to the Gillette commercial late. By the time I watched it for the first time, much of the fury had already bubbled over, and I approached the ad prepared to be put on my heels. Frankly, when I watched it, I was a little disappointed – the ad itself didn’t live up to the controversy. For those unfamiliar – which at this point, I’m sure are few – the razor company released a short film titled We Believe, which takes aim at problematic behaviours such as bullying and harassment. It quickly sparked the anger of some – a brief look at comments on the ad’s YouTube page describe it as “demonizing,” “hate speech,” and even “sexist.” During my time as a communications and religious studies student at the University of Calgary, one of the lessons I learned is to take a text – ranging from religious writings to speeches to music to, yes, advertisements – and look critically and objectively at what it says. Not the preconceptions I’ve heard, not the notions about the text I’ve been imparted. The literal words and, in some cases, images that comprise the text. Having watched the Gillette commercial multiple times now, here’s the message: Don’t be a bully. Treat women – in fact, treat everyone – with respect. It is an advertisement aimed at Gillette’s primary customers – men – asking them to literally and figuratively look in the mirror and ask how they can be the best version of themselves. That’s it. Growing up, that same message was imparted to me by my parents, extended family, teachers and pastors. When did that become controversial? Nowhere in the commercial is it even implied that all men are evil, or that it is no longer permissible to be male. The commercial – while calling out problematic behaviour committed by men – is not a broad attack on masculinity. Anyone who says otherwise is, in my opinion, acting in bad faith. There are legitimate objections one can raise to the advertisement. As discerning consumers, one can ask whether it is ethical for a corporation to profit off a moral message. But I don’t think one can take issue with the message itself. The whole episode is indicative of where we are as a society. In today’s hyper-partisan, hyper-divisive context, the battle lines are clearly drawn and we race to outrage as a first resort. That approach does not seem healthy. While there are absolutely issues that warrant anger, I hope we can all learn to wait, listen and evaluate before making a rush to judgment.
