I decided to move some discussion from this post up to the top level here. Specifically, Watoosh wrote: "Well, if violence is defined as initiation of force (which, of course, presupposes certain property rights), then I think Rockwell is correct..." Well, if we define cats as elephants, then many people keep elephants in their house. More seriously, firstly, violence is not usually defined that way. It's defined as, you know, violence, so that, say, someone may respond violently or non-violently to someone who aggresses against them. Otherwise, it would make no sense to say, for instance, "He punched me, but I did not stoop to violence in response." And, secondly, the libertarian usage of "initiation of force" is very offbeat. If I wander onto someone's meadow, most people would not say I had "initiated force" -- I mean, sure, I used "force" against the earth to push off walking, but that's not force directed against...
WARNING: UNSUBSTANTIATED BROAD GENERALIZATION FOLLOWS
ReplyDeleteThe difference is, men don't fall for that crap like women do.
If you keep watching that graphic for a while after the ad seems to have ended, the bloke makes a lewd gesture.
ReplyDeleteAnd Andy is right -- I'm proud of the luxurious shag carpet on my back.
ReplyDeleteAndy:
ReplyDeleteBecause they aren't constantly bombarded with ads like this! :) Let the erosion of the male ego begin!
I guess I should be worried about my son (is he gonna grow up worrying about how he looks?), but right now he thinks he's adorable, so I can stave off that particular fear.
Gene:
There's also a music video. I can't believe how much the razor people put into this ad.