So, this was in my mailbox today....

[Tab]

So, this was in my mailbox today (snail mail, I mean). A cursory glance and I gave it to my wife to figure out and she immediately handed it back to me.

3x More Female Suitors


Bromances vs. Romances


Happy 18th (44% more lipstick stains)


3x less epic fails (he he!)


Label page (and 110% more steamy something)


Interior shot


The label was addressed to the "x household, or current resident". Since it was generic I was a little thrown, but then I realized it was probably targeted for my son, who will be 18 next year (so they're a little early).

This wasn't a cheap promotion, $-wise, but somewhat ethically cheap, methinks. It's hard to judge. This is just what 18-y/o's will respond to, but someone who's 50 like me can't imagine getting one of these when I turned 18 (best I could imagine is a postcard from AARP saying, "see you in 32 years".

It wasn't until I opened it that I saw it was a razor, and found it listed on the "3x less epic fails" side - free razon inside.

[GTurck]

1. Very bad....

advertising idea. Not even minimally creative and certainly morally suspect in using a sexual come-on.

[Nevernose]

2. They get their mailing info from the Selective Service registration

I got free razors more than twenty years ago right after I registered for the draft.

These days I teach kids 16-19 or thereabouts, and they're always amazed that they start getting expensive free razors on their birthdays. I can't prove it's selective service that's selli the names, but it seems most likely to me.

I think it's an effective advertisement. There's one thing above all others that eighteen year old boys think about, and it ain't college or sports.

[Tab]

6. Um, probably not

just because you don't have to register until you're actually 18 (and I'm pretty sure he hasn't). That's not to say he's not on some other government list somewhere.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

3. Ad men continuing to perpetuate the double standard in society.

way to go Gillette ...

[Enrique]

4. yes very heavy handed

but at least he got a free razor out of it.

[HardTimes99]

5. Blatantly hetero-centric, latently misogynistic, and just a general

all-around Ugh!

"Not for sensitive men"? - Not sure if this qualifies as subtle homophobia, but still double-Ugh because it implies there's something wrong with men who are sensitive. My response: Shakespeare was "sensitive," for fuck's sake. Beethoven was "sensitive."