Ergard Watches / YouTube screen shotErgard Watch Company CEO Ilan Srulovicz (Ergard Watches / YouTube screen shot)
Editor’s note: The following was written by Ilan Srulovicz, the CEO and founder of Egard Watch Company, explaining why his company produced an ad to counter Gillette’s recent commercial on masculinity.
The story behind making the video is interesting. I made the ad completely alone. The voice in the video is mine and the editing is my own.
I was told by most people around me and in my company that making this video was a terrible idea and could not only hurt my brand but me personally as the CEO.
I used my personal funds on the video because I was worried about the backlash.
The main feedback was, “This will draw attention away from women’s issues,” “The political climate right now won’t support a film like this,” “Ask yourself why no other company is doing it,” etc.
I considered releasing it anonymously but after some thought, I realized an individual releasing the message wasn’t going to have the same impact as a company doing it. I decided to risk it and post the video
I think what put me over the top is a quote I heard that says all actions come out of either love or fear. Releasing it anonymously felt like fear. Putting my company on the line for a message I believe in felt like love.
I went with love.
I created the video for a few reasons. I believe the statistics in the video are widely ignored or dismissed. I have tried to bring light to them myself in the past and had a difficult time having them acknowledged as an issue.
The Gillette ad rubbed me the wrong way. I, like the overwhelming majority of men, am absolutely disgusted by sexual assault, rape, bullying, so why throw it in my face as if my “gender” as a whole is toxic? Using terms like “toxic masculinity” is using too broad a stroke to address specific issues — issues which I agree very much need to be addressed, especially after all the crazy stuff we’ve seen in Hollywood.
I am not against Gillette trying to start a conversation about assault, but I do have an issue with how they went about it.
Masculinity can be a beautiful thing, just like femininity. We need to start celebrating each other, not tearing each other down
I also feel that suffering needs to stop being a competition. It shouldn’t be “women vs men.” There are areas where men have it terrible in society. It’s OK to look at those areas and acknowledge it, while also understanding that women have it terrible in other aspects of society. Neither one has to dismiss the other.
We are so polarized. It’s all about “taking sides.” I am guilty of it myself because it’s all we are fed all day long, but I don’t want to be a part of that anymore. None of us, no gender or race, has exclusivity on being terrible or wonderful. Individuality is the measure of a person, not the “identity” or “category” to which you belong.
I can’t blame Gillette for their ad because that message is the norm. It has become pervasive. I can even understand how they believed full well this ad was a great idea and would drive tons of sales. Maybe it will in the end with all the attention it received. We have become so obsessed with defining each other based on these factors that we no longer even communicate properly.
My belief is that if you want to “make men better,” as Gillette claims it wants to do, then the best way to do that is to show the best of us, not the worst. When I see a man risking his life running into a burning building, it makes me want to be better. When I see a father who will stand by his kids no matter what, it makes me want to be better. When I see a soldier putting everything on the line to preserve my freedom, I want to be better. That’s what a man is to me and they represent a far greater majority of men than what Gillette portrayed a man to be.
I don’t feel I want to be better when an ad starts off with “toxic masculinity” or a bunch of boys bullying each other and portraying men as caricatures of sexual deviants. I simply close off.
Call me triggered, say I “missed the point” but it was my visceral response to seeing it.
Lift me up if you want to see a change in me, don’t tear me down. These are the messages companies need to be showing and celebrating if they really care about change.
I really hope that the video I made gets to a point where it draws enough attention that larger companies start realizing there is a market in promoting positive messages for men.
I feel the same for women as well. I strongly believe that ads celebrating women and empowering women are both beautiful and necessary. It’s not just men who feel this way about what’s going on and many women have reached out to express the importance of positive messages for their kids, husbands, fathers, etc.
I wish the video I made was the norm from companies, not the exception.
Ilan Srulovicz is the CEO and founder of Egard Watch Company.
The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by the owners of this website.
Waring parents use Facebook as a weapon in family law cases
Waring parents using Facebook as a weapon in family law cases have lost custody of children and been warned they could even face criminal charges.
A father won custody of his two children last year after their mother posted on Facebook: “Quick question, does anyone know if you can hire a suicide bomber for a family function?
“Not my family, for an entire lot of low life scum.”
The mother was found to have falsely claimed it was the father who had been unreasonable and had refused to see his kids.
In another case, a wife was granted maintenance of $3560 a week despite her husband claiming he was impecunious after his Twitter account revealed he had bought a $171,000 luxury car, flew first class overseas and drank Dom Perignon.
“There are examples of many people shooting off their mouths and embarrassing themselves and jeopardising their cases,” family law specialist Jason Walker of Gadens Lawyers said yesterday.
He said he advised his clients to be “sensible” because once somethi ng was posted online it was almost impossible to remove it. Court orders regularly now ban the use of social media in connection with the case.
Some parents have come close to being prosecuted for breaching the strict family law rules that prohibit the identification of anyone involved in a court case by posting details on social media.
One father secretly filmed his ex-wife picking up their young daughter in a car park as the child was crying and posted it on Youtube believing it would bolster his case for custody. It is not known whether it worked.
In another case, a Facebook post allegedly placed by the daughter of warring parents criticised her mother, who the court said was “an advocate for domestic law reform”. The father and his associated companies were banned by the court from broadcasting anything to do with the dispute.< /o>
‘We are seeing judgments starting to mention social media a lot more’.
“People need to be very careful as their social media posts could result in a criminal charge,” President of the Law Council of Australia, Arthur Moses, SC, said.
“Emotions often run very high in family law matters but it is vital for people to make measured and rational decisions, especially when it comes to posting on social media.
“When posting information online all people must be aware of the potential legal ramifications and the impact this could have on cases, and on children involved in these matters.”
Contempt of court carries a jail sentence of up to five years.
In November last year, one father was placed on a nine-month good behaviour bond after he posted a video, created a Facebook page and posted photographs and commentaries of his two children, aged four and two involved in a high-profile case.
Justice David Berman said the man also set up a petition calling for the re-trial of the children’s mother. Details of the trial cannot be reported.
“He gave an interview which resulted in an article being published an online newspaper on in early 2018 and in the print newspaper on later the same month 2018 and set up an online petition calling for the mother’s re-trial,” the judge said.
“Further videos were posted of both children.”
The judge said the father had not realised at the time the impact his posts would have on the children.
Another mother was last year granted full custody of her three children aged 13, 10 and seven, after their father, who claimed the mother had been manipulating the children, posted on Facebook.
“Over my dead fn body will these weak gutless heartless uneducated fuks continue this child abuse n attemts to kill me watch this space?!,” he posted complete with spelling errors.
Family law specialist Antonella Sanderson said it was obvious the judges were getting more and more frustrated.
“We are seeing judgments starting to mention social media a lot more,” Ms Sanderson of Family Law Matters said.
“I tell my clients, if you want to rant, don’t post, ring me.”
Two men arrested last year allegedly part of a secret underground network helping women abduct their children and hide after bitter Family Court disputes have been charged with aiding and abetting the illegal publication of Family Court proceedings through social media posts.