Gillette..be the best men you can be...

[wazzickle]

Another argument often used by those who fight against civil rights.

Go on then. Run around outside in a busy city centre, exercising your freedom to swing your fists wildly. See what happens. After a while you will hit someones jaw. Hence the expression 'your freedom to swing your fists ends at my jaw'. Freedoms cannot be absolute. They just logically cannot, because they impinge on others. That's just reality. That's not an argument against civil rights. Lol, btw. Your freedom to own guns is fine up until the point where it threatens others' freedom not to die. Which it does. And one freedom is clearly morally superior to the other. You can't have both.

[TeePee]

Go on then. Run around outside in a busy city centre, exercising your freedom to swing your fists wildly. See what happens. After a while you will hit someones jaw. Hence the expression 'your freedom to swing your fists ends at my jaw'. Freedoms cannot be absolute. They just logically cannot, because they impinge on others. That's just reality. That's not an argument against civil rights. Lol, btw. Your freedom to own guns is fine up until the point where it threatens others' freedom not to die. Which it does. And one freedom is clearly morally superior to the other. You can't have both.

Uh, would you like to read your statements before you post them? You have the freedom to swing your fists around. You don't have the freedom to punch people. 'your freedom to swing your fists ends at my jaw', is the quote you picked. I agree.

I have the right to own firearms. I don't have the right to shoot people. My freedom to own firearms ends when I use them to attack someone.

Logical consistency and rationality are important to those who care about civil rights.

[Bonebreaker777]

Of course it would... and does. Lots of women-focussed ads play on stereotypes.
Only difference is that men (currently) respond better to being told by their peers and elders that what they're doing is not cool. Women's ads tend to be more encouraging toward good behaviour rather than berating for the bad.

Wouldn't know as I don't watch TV or adverts but I wouldn't mind to check some out, if you would be so kind to suggest or link. Women-focused ads that is.

You'd be surprised. Many homes now lack a decent father figure, especially in America (where this ad is mostly targeted) and among certain ethnic groups. In to this gap steps Gilette, a brand long associated with shaving and manliness stuff... same reason that Lynx ad was so popular.

I 100% agree with that. A man, who leaves a family behind, just because he wants to and can't be bothered to support and provide, is not a man in my eyes. Can be a man in someone else's, but to me a man takes always responsibility of those he cares for.

It's your choice to shave. It's not her choice to bleed.
If you don't like the blade tax, get an electric... not that 20% on a £10 pack of razors once every couple of months is going to leave you starving, or anything.

Glad you attached a number to it - according to the BBC website, women end up paying roughly the same > use 22 tampons and/or towels per cycle and tampons and towels cost 13p per unit = £2.86 monthly. If a man can pay that so can women. Also wouldn't say my social circle is too forgiving if I neglect shaving myself for a week (basically missing out on a weekend, semi-forced to do every week). Would get non-stop comments from women mostly, at work and home. I could choose not to, but I rather be left alone so I do it every week. Done it even when my back was injured, rather than listen to comments like 'did the cat eat your razor' and such

I think he was talking about the protection that sanitary products provide... which, incidentally, covers a lot more than just period bleeds.

Know more than one woman, who uses it for the blessed side effect of not having any periods. Regardless if they're in a partnership or not.

Great. Let's shun them as unclean then, or whatever the Bible said to do....!!
To me, it's no different to getting a nosebleed or having a cold - There should be no shame in it, but you still don't go leaking all over the shot, and you clean up any spillages... To that end, society does not really give you a choice.

I would like to see you sit in a cafeteria, on one side some person is free-bleeding, on the other somebody is having a nosebleed. The nose-bleeding person will almost always go to the toilet, leaving those around mostly unaffected. Can't say the same thing about the other person. This situation is hypothetical, as I haven't experienced it exactly as I've described but I've had nearly the same, only without a person having a nosebleed. Funny enough, mostly women found it uncomfortable being in the room as soon as they've found out of what is going on and why does it smell funny in there. True, it never happened ever again.

That's society, though - Values change, standards change, definitions change, but the basic message is always 'don't be a [censored]". It's been that way for millenia. You're still supposed to Be A Man and all that, it's just that the definition of A Man is currently outdated and we haven't bothered to collectively figure out what it means to be A Man in modern society yet...

Should be easy and hardly complicated: work hard, don't lie, be honest, don't ask or beg needlessly, have your actions speak for you and so on.

It's quite simple - Real men wear Brut™ aftershave. That's all you need to know!

I've always thought that overusing self-grooming products is not very man-like but that's only my opinion. Never used aftershave in my life.

[wazzickle]

Uh, would you like to read your statements before you post them? You have the freedom to swing your fists around. You don't have the freedom to punch people. 'your freedom to swing your fists ends at my jaw', is the quote you picked. I agree.

I have the right to own firearms. I don't have the right to shoot people. My freedom to own firearms ends when I use them to attack someone.

Logical consistency and rationality are important to those who care about civil rights.

People shooting other people is one of the main reasons for and consequences of people owning guns. The right to bear arms - even if used responsibly by any one person - will be and is abused by people. What about tanks? Or ricin? If tanks and ricin were legal, I would totally be a responsible tanks and ricin owner. I'd keep them locked up in a cupboard, in a separate place from the tank ammo and ricin distribution capsules, just in case someone wants to break in (I haven't throught through the part about how long it would take for me load up my tank or set up the ricin thing, but no matter), or hunt animals (weeeeeeeeee) or go to a tank-and-ricin range. The fact that other people use tanks and ricin to kill other people is nothing to do with me. Why should I be punished for other peoples' bad behaviour? The constitution in my house says I can own tanks and ricin and if you or any tyrannical government tries to take them away I'm going to form a well-regulated militia! The NTRA is too powerful! Yeeeeeeha! You liberals ain't gonna take my tanks and ricin away!

[philehidiot]

I've got myself a slant bar and, using the finest Japanese steel for blades, I pay about £4.50 for 5 blades each of which last a week. The only difficulty is getting that quality of steel in the UK (Kai blades). The rest of the time I use the sharpest but most brutal Japenese steel available which is far easier to get (Feather blades) which costs me about £9 for 30 blades. Each of which last a week. The handle is about £30. There's an additional cost for the higher quality shaving cream you need to ensure your skin remains intact but it's still WAY cheaper than this multiblade "my penis is bigger" fusion power stealth nonsense.

If you have a lot of time to shave I'd definitely sod the whole disposable thing off and get a straight edge or seven. Costs a lot in initial investment and a lot of time spent stopping bleeding but to do it properly like your grandfathers used to with modern technology is so satisfying. There's something satisfying about the ritual of sharpening / stropping a blade so it glides through.....everything and getting the prep just right. Certainly far better than spending a fortune on these multiblade farces which seek to destroy your skin as, in order to function, each blade must be angled more and more aggressively.

[TeePee]

People shooting other people is one of the main reasons for and consequences of people owning guns. The right to bear arms - even if used responsibly by any one person - will be and is abused by people. What about tanks? Or ricin? If tanks and ricin were legal, I would totally be a responsible tanks and ricin owner. I'd keep them locked up in a cupboard, in a separate place from the tank ammo and ricin distribution capsules, just in case someone wants to break in (I haven't throught through the part about how long it would take for me load up my tank or set up the ricin thing, but no matter), or hunt animals (weeeeeeeeee) or go to a tank-and-ricin range. The fact that other people use tanks and ricin to kill other people is nothing to do with me. Why should I be punished for other peoples' bad behaviour? The constitution in my house says I can own tanks and ricin and if you or any tyrannical government tries to take them away I'm going to form a well-regulated militia! The NTRA is too powerful! Yeeeeeeha! You liberals ain't gonna take my tanks and ricin away!

Plenty of people own tanks and poisonous chemicals. Many tanks are legal to use on the road. I'd love to own a Ferret, but they're expensive and it's more money than I want to spend on a hobby. Not sure what your point is?

[philehidiot]

People shooting other people is one of the main reasons for and consequences of people owning guns. The right to bear arms - even if used responsibly by any one person - will be and is abused by people.

Sorry but this is utterly incorrect. I am a gun owner. I meet many other gun owners. I was deafened by a chap with an AR-15 just this week. There are about half a million privately owned firearms in the UK. If the main reason for owning them was to shoot others then:
1) there would be a load more murders as >250,000 gun owners would be killing people.
2) I would not keep my guns unloaded and the ammunition stored in such a way that it's incredibly inconvenient to quickly load them. Last time we went shooting, I had to spend the previous evening making them ready as they are stored in a manner which makes them unusable.
3) The main consequence of owning guns is holes in paper.
4) The VAST majority of firearms offences are committed by people who have no right to own a weapon. They own them illegally as the legal process would not allow them to do so. These people would own a firearm regardless of the law.

[wazzickle]

I've got myself a slant bar and, using the finest Japanese steel for blades, I pay about £4.50 for 5 blades each of which last a week. The only difficulty is getting that quality of steel in the UK (Kai blades). The rest of the time I use the sharpest but most brutal Japenese steel available which is far easier to get (Feather blades) which costs me about £9 for 30 blades. Each of which last a week. The handle is about £30. There's an additional cost for the higher quality shaving cream you need to ensure your skin remains intact but it's still WAY cheaper than this multiblade "my penis is bigger" fusion power stealth nonsense.

If you have a lot of time to shave I'd definitely sod the whole disposable thing off and get a straight edge or seven. Costs a lot in initial investment and a lot of time spent stopping bleeding but to do it properly like your grandfathers used to with modern technology is so satisfying. There's something satisfying about the ritual of sharpening / stropping a blade so it glides through.....everything and getting the prep just right. Certainly far better than spending a fortune on these multiblade farces which seek to destroy your skin as, in order to function, each blade must be angled more and more aggressively.

Or just don't shave. So much easier and cheaper than both these options. Plus you get to call it a boycott when your razor company cynically decides the market is such that they'll make more money positioning themselves on one side or the other.

[wazzickle]

Plenty of people own tanks and poisonous chemicals. Many tanks are legal to use on the road. I'd love to own a Ferret, but they're expensive and it's more money than I want to spend on a hobby. Not sure what your point is?

If you haven't got my point already I doubt I can get you to see it

[TeePee]

If you haven't got my point already I doubt I can get you to see it

All I've got so far is that you didn't know people could own tanks, and find them really scary... It's OK. Just because they own a tank doesn't mean they're about to invade Chekoslovakia...

[wazzickle]

I did not know that anyone could go and buy a tank without restriction. That is indeed news to me.

[wazzickle]

Look, it's very simple. Your freedom to own guns directly results in more murder. Freedom to own guns or tanks or ricin or whatever does not trump other peoples' right to live. Therefore you should not have the right to own a gun just by virtue of you being an american.

[Bonebreaker777]

All I've got so far is that you didn't know people could own tanks, and find them really scary... It's OK. Just because they own a tank doesn't mean they're about to invade Chekoslovakia...

Czechoslovakia, if you wouldn't mind, please. Bad enough it is broken now (meaning two actually broken countries), let at least write it right :-D

[TeePee]

Look, it's very simple. Your freedom to own guns directly results in more murder. Freedom to own guns or tanks or ricin or whatever does not trump other peoples' right to live. Therefore you should not have the right to own a gun just by virtue of you being an american.

My right to own a gun comes from my right to defend myself, which is a human right. It has nothing to do with being an American. My gun ownership has improved the right of others to live in safety.

By your logic, it should be illegal for people to wave their arms above their heads, just in case they might punch someone...

[Bonebreaker777]

...I am a gun owner..

Do you enjoy it?

[wazzickle]

My right to own a gun comes from my right to defend myself, which is a human right. It has nothing to do with being an American. My gun ownership has improved the right of others to live in safety.

By your logic, it should be illegal for people to wave their arms above their heads, just in case they might punch someone...

If waving your arms around your heads killed people it shouldn't be a right.

I have no idea why we're having this argument. Are either of us going to change our opinions on this?