I'm sure they will gain more overall customers because they are owned by Proctor & Gamble. As I mentioned originally, there will be plenty of women and white knights who jump at the chance to support a company who decided to tag along onto the #metoo movement.

To me, that is part of the reason why I dislike this commercial so much. Not just because of it's huge and sweeping generalizations (practically every scene has one), but because their ad department had to know that an edgy commercial would do the same thing for them as it did for Nike. Does anyone think that the majority of actual corporate level people at Gillette/P&G give two fucks about #metoo? I know I don't.

It's just an ad targeted at a huge group of people that are easy to take potshots at currently. I find it little different than attack ads run by fucktards that want to condemn all Muslims for the act of terrorists or fundamentalist jihadists. The most screwed up thing about that analogy is that, realistically, there are largish groups of Islamic people that actually will cheer and throw celebrations when there is a terrorist attack. Yet you would be hard put to find large swaths of men out in the streets cheering on the effects of so called Toxic Masculinity.

Yes, we as men need to speak out. We need to support the evolution of mankind away from barbarism. But we don't need to succumb to propaganda that tries to purport that a man seeing a pretty lady walk past shouldn't attempt to say hi or introduce himself to her because that is bad. This ad, with one of the sweeping generalizations I mentioned earlier, would have you think that it is HORRIBLE for a man to do that and that a 'responsible' man would body check that guy. Because men should never try to meet women, only remain passive and allow the woman to come to them. I say fuck that, it is wrong to catcall women, but there is nothing wrong with going up and saying hi. This ad (and some other internet videos) would have you think it's the equivalent of throwing the lady down in the middle of a crowded walkway and having your way with her.

The ad could have been better, there were moments like the Terry Crews scene that I agree with, but they took the easy way out and just slammed men in general.

First, that video is f*cking awesome. She's awesome, her dad was awesome for encouraging her, her coach was awesome for having the wrong initial stance but having the integrity to reevaluate and come around, and her boyfriend at the time was awesome for laying a nice body check on the prick that tried to kick her out of the race.

I've saved the video in order to show it to my 4 year old daughter at some point in her future, when she can appreciate it. The world is full of people who want to tell us what we can't do. It's up to us (with plenty of support from friends, family, etc.) to prove those people wrong.

Michael Buffer announcing ...

Award for "Body Check of the Century" goes to ...

Tom "The Mack Truck" Miller
for totally wrecking John Duncan Semple

>> ^ponceleon:
I'm just not seeing the justification for putting him in a coma.

The cop didn't decide to put the kid into a coma. I'm pretty sure no one feels that putting him in a coma is justified. The coma was an unintended and unforeseeable consequence. An accident. Indeed, a tragic accident.

The full-tilt body check, however, was not an accident. That's what must be justified.

And I'm with several of the other commenters here - there's simply not enough shown in the video to develop an informed opinion.

I have a close friend who is a state trooper. If I have learned one thing from conversations with him its this: as an officer you treat every situation as potentually life threatening where there is cause to believe it is.

The man was believed to have stabbed someone? Take him down fast, and stay on him to unsure the safety of myself and others. The officer in my opinion did the right thing. He knocked the guy down fast ans immediately moved in to put the guy in cuffs. Its unfortunate that the officer misjudged his body check, but from the video I'm not inclined to believe that brutality was the intent.

Normally I'm pretty disgusted by the brutality videos I see on here, but let me play devil's advocate for once.

It looks like there's about a two second delay between the man stopping (surrendering?), and him getting body-checked by the cop. Considering that the cop had to have been running after him at full tilt, I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that it was going to happen. It's certainly tragic that the man was injured so badly, but by that point the cop was already committed to a tackle on a fleeing suspect, and throwing your arms up at the last second isn't some kind of magic ward against harm, is it? "Oh hey guys, I was just joking with that whole running away bit!", when the time scale is more like, "Oh hey guys-" *BAM*

I think this video more properly demonstrates why you don't run from the cops. Ever. Even if you're innocent, running is only going to end with something very physical getting done to your ass soonest, even if only to stop your running. I don't think the police chief was "covering" for this guy at all, but rather making the same conclusion.

It might not appear that way to the folks who assume that every cop-related piece of violence makes them automatically guilty (though there are plenty of the guilty ones already).

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
>> ^joedirt:
Big straw man.. "given the alternative"
I could point to 100 internet videos right now showing taser use and in every case it was never the situation where you might draw down on a suspect. It is a convenience tool now used for compliance. Yes, they can be safe and useful and save lives in certain situations, but the majority of the use ends up being lazy or "bad" cops using it for sadism or efficiency of results or just for compliance.

Failing to comply to an officer is a sure fire way to be detained and/or shot with a high voltage electric probe...or a gun. As most any lawyer will tell you, you can avoid the crime but you can't avoid the ride. There is a difference between police brutality and police powers of aresting.
Your argument is actually the straw men in this case as it is the lawful responsibility for a person to abide by the lawful requests of an officer. Any diviation from this results in a use of force by the officer to be determinded by his discresion...and when you are putting yourself at someones discression expect to experince pain and/or humiliation.
I don't know what your would rather when people are being hostile or standoffish with the police. Would you rather them have to call 4 other officers with feather dusters and tickle a person into submision? If so, none of us would get any protection because the police officers hands would be so tied because of their inability to reasonably enforce the laws.
I understand the problems you have though, I too also worry about police abusing their powers. That is the subject of a different conversation though. In short, if you act in unlawful defiance of an officer expect a hard body check to the floor at minimum and a cold electric probe in your flesh at a maximum.


this

>> ^joedirt:
Big straw man.. "given the alternative"
I could point to 100 internet videos right now showing taser use and in every case it was never the situation where you might draw down on a suspect. It is a convenience tool now used for compliance. Yes, they can be safe and useful and save lives in certain situations, but the majority of the use ends up being lazy or "bad" cops using it for sadism or efficiency of results or just for compliance.


Failing to comply to an officer is a sure fire way to be detained and/or shot with a high voltage electric probe...or a gun. As most any lawyer will tell you, you can avoid the crime but you can't avoid the ride. There is a difference between police brutality and police powers of aresting.

Your argument is actually the straw men in this case as it is the lawful responsibility for a person to abide by the lawful requests of an officer. Any diviation from this results in a use of force by the officer to be determinded by his discresion...and when you are putting yourself at someones discression expect to experince pain and/or humiliation.

I don't know what your would rather when people are being hostile or standoffish with the police. Would you rather them have to call 4 other officers with feather dusters and tickle a person into submision? If so, none of us would get any protection because the police officers hands would be so tied because of their inability to reasonably enforce the laws.

I understand the problems you have though, I too also worry about police abusing their powers. That is the subject of a different conversation though. In short, if you act in unlawful defiance of an officer expect a hard body check to the floor at minimum and a cold electric probe in your flesh at a maximum.

kinda cool I guess, but you shouldn't body check a cop no matter how dickish they are. Now he can say he was attacked. I can see the headlines now, "Cop in fight for life as mob of protesters attack". Next time around he will have friends and riot gear, good job.

>> ^Farhad2000:
Biba is hella cute!


Biba is not only cute, but has a fantastic body. check it out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IflCLUXQdqA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1dOPGue02w

I try to give police the benefit of the doubt when it comes to situations like this, but in this case the only thing in the policeman's own report that might necessitate such an action, was clearly not true in the video. The cop claimed the cyclist tried to run him over, the video clearly shows the cyclist trying to avoid hitting him as opposed to trying to run the officer over. The only charge the officer cited not related to him knocking him off the bike, was obstruction of traffic. Assuming the cyclist did do something that obstructed traffic, the officer never made any signal to the cyclist to stop beyond body checking him into the curb. So in this case going by the officer's report and the evidence in the video I'd say this was completely 100% unwarranted.

Tags changed from "fox, reporter, youtube, drunk" to "youtube,osu,body check, football fan" by gold star member joedirt.