More than 50% off on a good pack of razor blades. Free shipping on prime of course.
CamelCamelCamel.
Fixed thanks !
Raauuullll!
Manual and not powered. This one is power
Power I think is just the branding, not that it's a powered razor
Power is the battery powered one which vibrates for a closer and nicer (imo) shave. Not that the heads differ at all…
it should be good, all fusion handles are compatible with all fusion cartridges.
Wonder if these are the ones made in Germany.. listing says so but picture says otherwise
Still boycotting since 2019. Schick for life, baby!
Who are the snowflakes again?
You’re welcome to shave your face with Gillette razors and drink your Bud lite beer and watch your Disney groomer movies. Meanwhile the rest of us well keep our dignity intact by voting with our wallets and NOT spending our money on products of companies who hate us.
You used to drink Bud Lite? That explains the lost brain cells.
Yawn 😴
Please. Never review a game too. Your brain is drain.
companies who hate us
Yeah it must suck to be hated ey, imagine hating a certain group of people, I mean why would people live their lives full of hate.
"Hate" who exactly? Their ad targeted certain behaviour. Presumably you identify with that behaviour or condone it?
I don't think you know what snowflake means. What exactly are you implying?
Actually I do. The far right are always at pains to point how about things like 'cancel culture', but always seem to be the first get triggered, sook and start boycotting things, or worse banning books.
Having said this, both the far left and right certainly have more in common with each other than those at the centre or slight left or right, see Horseshoe Theory
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory
My theory is also that those holding the levers of power deliberately make us fight culture wars, so that we forget we should be fighting a class-war together.
The impoverished redneck in the middle of nowhere has more in common with the blue-haired single mother in the city, than they do with the CEO of a company or the political class.
@SupeNintendoChalmers: OK, that's a lot of words to not answer the question.
Do you think that choosing to not buy things from businesses who's message you don't agree with is an emotional overreaction?
@Ghos7: In short, yes. It's a childish, irrational response, but I guess it's all relative to the overall maturity of an individual.
For example, for myself
Scenario 1
Big shoe company regular and systematically is found to have been using slave labour, I'll boycott the crap out of it.
Scenario 2
Razor blade company creates an add that appears (for some) to hurt the fee fees of a male snowflake. As a fellow man, I wouldn't boycott this, and would tell the other bloke to drink some concrete, and harden the F up.
@SupeNintendoChalmers: How do you know it hurt his "fee fees"?
Is it hard for you to comprehend that people can act from principles and not emotions?
Also, you shifted the goalposts in your poorly constructed analogy.
@Ghos7: Depends on the messaging. What part of the Gillette messaging got up your nose? They did NOT target men, they targeted behaviours most often associated with male ignorance or obliviousness.
@Igaf: If you don't think they were targeting men then why did you specify "male ignorance or obliviousness"?
If they're just targeting behaviours "most often associated" (ie.not exclusively associated) with males then why were there no examples of women doing these things? I thought everybody accepted that females can't relate to anything that they don't see specifically targeted at women with female representatives?
If the same ad was made targeting violent crimes and the only ethnic group shown was the one that commits violent crimes at the highest rate per capita, would you say this was not targeting that particular race?
It really doesn't depend on the messaging. Making a rational decision and adhering to that decision are not markers of an emotional overreaction.
If you don't think they were targeting men then why did you specify "male ignorance or obliviousness"?
Seriously? That you can't tell the difference is not surprising in the least. IF you'd bothered to follow the debate you'd already know the answer. Did you see yourself in the Gillette ad? Do you disagree that the behaviour in the ad was not commonplace, certainly common enough to warrant being called out?
If they're just targeting behaviours "most often associated" (ie.not exclusively associated) with males then why were there no examples of women doing these things? I thought everybody accepted that females can't relate to anything that they don't see specifically targeted at women with female representatives?
Your own obliviousness is ironic. Your lack of appreciation of what happens in the real world is symptomatic of your demographic. You thought…?. No you didn't THINK, something which is obvious in most of your comments here. You wrongly presumed something because you chose to, just as you chose to be offended. Why that is is for you to ponder but the irony of rw offence juxtaposed with their hyperventilated anti "wokeness" is quite striking, if not hilarious at times. The reason Gillette picked men's behaviour is obvious. (Some) men do the same things to other men, but many more do it to women, sometimes completely casually and without malice.
If the same ad was made targeting violent crimes and the only ethnic group shown was the one that commits violent crimes at the highest rate per capita, would you say this was not targeting that particular race?
Or sex, say? Would you be butt hurt if the obvious was pointed out there also? Violent crime in the USA you're presumably talking about? Very complex issue, far to complex for discussion herel, and for you judging by your narrow-minded comments.
It really doesn't depend on the messaging. Making a rational decision and adhering to that decision are not markers of an emotional overreaction.
Agree. So your "rational decision" was based on the claim that all men - including you - were being targeted and accused of such behaviour? Odd that millions of men - including those of us who recognised some of our own ignorant transgressions - didn't have the same reactions as you is it not?
@Igaf: Hahaha! Wow, that's quite a vitriolic word salad!
At least you had the courage to admit that your standards on applying stereotypes are totally subjective. That's all I need to know about you.
@Ghos7: Your comprehension is a good match for your massively under-developed EQ. Understandable if you've yet to reach maturity but it tends to come with the demographic in my experience. Humour me though. What part of my response to your last sentence above regarding 'rational decisions' did you not understand?
It's self-evident that opinions are almost invariably subjective, just as uninformed and ideologically blind opinions are highly unlikely to reflect either rationality or balance, the latter in particuar. Yours are exemplars.
No answers to my questions? Common trait of your ilk when called out. It's easy to parrot unjustifiable childish garbage, much more difficult to defend it.
@Igaf: You're about as third as smart as you think you are. Your inability to contain your anger indicates that you are the one who has low EQ.
It's instructive that you've used the word opinion where I was talking about objective standards. It confirms my earlier point. I don't argue with people who don't have objective standards as they are only ever at the whim of their emotions.
Best of luck navigating life!
@Ghos7: That's your standard line apparently. Time for some new material. You clearly believe that it usually works to shut down people who see through your tosh but anyone who has dealt with your demographic will actually simply shrug it off as yet another example of your struggle with rationality.
You might want to look up the definitions of anger and disdain (or contempt - take your pick) and learn how to recognise the difference.
"Objective standards"? Lol you're a classic regurgitator of buzz terms you have no understanding of. Whose standards? How were they developed and by whom? Yet another concept you need to research. Your comments here are completely subjective opinions based on your own obviously limited EQ (and possibly IQ), your irrational ideological bias and limited life experience.
@Igaf: Hahaha! "I wasn't having trouble containing anger, disdain was the emotion I was having trouble containing!!" Thanks for conceding that you have low EQ.
Any more own goals you want to kick?
@Ghos7: You have as bad a case of comprehension and straw man invention as I've seen. Quite an achievement given the inanity and wilful ignorance of most pandemic and global warming deniers I've come across. From the little I've read of your comments you appear to think you're better than them, despite displaying very similar traits. I can tell you 'objectively' (word used according to your erroneous rules) that based on my sampling you're actually about average among those demographics. Your reaction to being challenged is ironic, but again quite typical. You need to ramp up the rhetoric and hyperbole to move into the upper tier of rw outrage.
Still having trouble with my simple questions?
@Igaf: Is hurling disdain at someone on the internet after sifting through their old posts on a bargain website high EQ or low EQ?
@Ghos7: You wanted an answer? Apologies I thought it was simply another vain attempt at a straw man insult. The subjective "truth" (lol) is that it depends. I have a good memory for rw ideologists on Ozbargain, including the bloke who upvoted you. Your comments get the scorn they deserve.
Those questions still vexing you?
@Ghos7: Interesting "fact" about (many) domesticated cats. Unlike ideologists they're usually very discerning. You can try and feed them garbage but they'll usually walk away. Like ideologists they will however regurgitate garbage and leave others to clean up the mess. Sometimes their siblings/housemates will swallow that regurgitated garbage without a second thought. Reincarnation?
Same.
Why?
They ran this terrible ad campaign broad brushing men as "alpha male" stereotypes, it just came across as so preachy, pathetic and woke. If that's their philosophy and hypothesis, then i reject it, and won't purchase their products.
It's symptomatic of the conservative cancel culture.
@UncleRico: A quick review of this, and other Gillette threads, shows that clearly it is not confined to any particular philosophy.
@jackspratt: And yet you clearly described it as “the conservative cancel culture”.
What am I missing?
Yeah, same.
Is this the best a man can get?
The best a ma'am can get.
Hopefully the handle will be on sale soon
great price. thanks OP
Any different from aldi brand?
Bought on 28 Aug, 2022 for $12.95. Inflation aye.
Out of stock but now $14.95, ordered thanks
![[Backorder] Men’s Gillette Fusion ProGlide 5 Power Blades 4-Pack $15.95 + Delivery ($0 with Prime/ $39 Spend) @ Amazon AU](https://files.ozbargain.com.au/n/17/795417.jpg?h=66c03eb7)
Does it have a price?