Changing masculinity, one ad at a time

Gry Høngsmark Knudsen*, Lars Pynt Andersen

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review


This paper takes a rhetorical perspective on how ads address the current debate of toxic masculinity and attempt to change its hegemonic ideals. We compare rhetorical strategies in two purpose branding campaigns, Lynx's Is it ok for guys (2017) and Gillette's The Best a Man Can Be (2019), to demonstrate how respective uses of formal and narrative tropes create vastly different narratives about masculinity and therefore also very different audience agency. We argue that Gillette repeats older versions of hegemonic masculinity ideals and call for men to take responsibility and act as protector of the weak, whereas Lynx invites the audience to embrace and identify with less stereotypical identities. We suggest that Gillette's polemical rhetorical approach may generate more public debate on the issue of toxic masculinity, while Lynx's approach builds on a more embracing strategy that encourages the audience to empathise with non-stereotypical forms of masculinity.

Original languageEnglish
JournalWestminster Papers in Communication and Culture
Issue number2
Pages (from-to)63-78
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2020
Externally publishedYes

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
Copyright: © 2020 The Author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. See


  • Advertising and gender
  • Brand narrative
  • Masculinity
  • Purpose branding
  • Rhetorical analysis


Dive into the research topics of 'Changing masculinity, one ad at a time'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this