What's new

PLANET KIND by Gillette

Remember this SAGE advice my friend: if @KeenDogg is too smart to do it, it SHORE ain't for the faint of heart!

I have been AMAZED tho by the random combinations of soap and creams and tubes being greater than the singular soaps, creams, and tubes! If it weren't for that absolutely lousy brush shedding like a Christmas tree left in the corner until March (yeah, I was single once. Then my wife fell for my charms, bank account, and my incredibly handsome face, not to mention my humility) that set up has given me my smoothest shaves.

A long time ago, a true gentleman on here (not like KeenDogg) sent me a brush that I experimented with for a while to try to kill. It's a really high class brush, an Edwin Jagger, wooden handle, boar bristles. It was given to me by a guy who wishes to remain anonymous (@shavefan ) because he's so humble, like me, and he even gave me permission to try to see how long it will last without rinsing. So I think when I get home I'll PIF the original brush, a "Marvy" plastic thing that I am pretty sure the bristles came from a Dingo, so that someone else can try it. The question is, should I rinse it first or leave it in it's beautiful, permanently bent state?

Have youse guys ever met ANYONE (besides a politician) that can talk about absolutely NOTHING of consequence for as long as I can that don't have a law degree? Me neither! Maybe that's why my wife likes me bein' on here so much...
I vote "no rinse"... kinder to the planet thus sticking with the thread. I am also concerned that the brush may not hold together.
 
It is good to know that you are such an expert on what "people" want.
Whether people want this product or not remains to be seen.
But, I don't recall an overwhelming demand for a cucumber-scented shave cream in a tin can before this product was released.
Countries across the world are banning plastic packaging, in the process of banning plastic packaging or increasing taxes and costs associated with plastic packaging. If I was given the choice between having an ecologically sustainable product and a non-ecologically sustainable product at an identical price point there is almost no reason for me to not take the sustainable one. Obviously you wouldn't recall there being any demand for a cucumber scented shave cream in a tin before this product was released just like you wouldn't recall there being any demand for almost any product. Very few people are vocal about what they want, they just pick existing options that they'd like. Companies do research and manufacture accordingly.
 

FarmerTan

FarmerStan the Man
I vote "no rinse"... kinder to the planet thus sticking with the thread. I am also concerned that the brush may not hold together.
Be careful! I may just send it to you!

I've honestly thought about rinsing the snot out of it and setting it in the sun and spray painting it with gold colored paint and making a trophy out of it.

Then mailing it to the person that put up the shtoopidest post of the month (I'd be the judge) and they'd be stuck with it until someone else posted something even stupider and they could mail it to that person.

We could call it the "Stoopid Trophy for the Shtoopidest person of the month award" and it would be sure to make people not act like me.
 

FarmerTan

FarmerStan the Man
Countries across the world are banning plastic packaging, in the process of banning plastic packaging or increasing taxes and costs associated with plastic packaging. If I was given the choice between having an ecologically sustainable product and a non-ecologically sustainable product at an identical price point there is almost no reason for me to not take the sustainable one. Obviously you wouldn't recall there being any demand for a cucumber scented shave cream in a tin before this product was released just like you wouldn't recall there being any demand for almost any product. Very few people are vocal about what they want, they just pick existing options that they'd like. Companies do research and manufacture accordingly.
I think Gillette is on the right track. For too long people have forgotten that we humans were tasked with the job of being "Stewards" of this planet and we suck at it, overall. I was AMAZED at how quickly this planet started recovering from mankind's disregard for picking up after ourselves when all the big cities like L.A. were in lockdown.

I get a kick out of people criticizing me for "polluting" the air for burning wood for heat for the last 45+ years when it's putting out the same "chemicals" that wood DECOMPOSING does!

While they drink coffee from a plastic and paper cup!
If we forced companies to put their intake pipes downstream from their output pipes it would be an easy fix, but trying to get certain countries to do so would be nearly impossible.

Remember: man is a rationalizing animal, not a rational one.
 
Plastic is a worse pollutant than aluminum. This is a fact. Gilette's marketing department doesn't need to tell you this, almost every scientific study ever will show this. Plastic does not degrade at all for many years. When it does it creates plastic particles so small that they cannot be filtered out by our bodies or the ecosystem. Obviously, there is a profitable angle here. People want a more ecologically sustainable product, that is why marketing told product development to make a more ecologically sustainable product. This is what people want.

If you had read my comment and asked questions rather than broadcasting your narrative you would see that I did not issue a blanket statement regarding plastic vs aluminum.

What I said was we have no reason to believe the aluminum Gillette is using is less damaging than a plastic alternative. If you educate yourself in the field you will learn their are sources of aluminum both recycled and raw that are far more damaging to the environment than some plastics.

Damage to the environment doesn’t begin when something hits a landfill. It’s starts at the products inception. You don’t need Gillette to tell you this, it’s widely available information.

Back to my original point....companies pander to environmentalism because it makes them money not because it’s the right thing to do. literally nothing about Gillettes latest cream is good for the environment. Is it less harmful than a nuclear bomb? Sure. Is it making the environment better? Nope.
 
Anyway....

I tried the cream today.

I used it with a brush and whipped it into a good lather easily. The cream is slick. The scent is very take it or leave it and it doesn't linger.

Overall, it is a decent middle of the road cream. It is priced right at $7.99 at Target.

I do like that Gillette jumped back into the brush-friendly cream. It is an upgrade over the slop in a can we have had for years.
 
My wife bought some at Target last week and has been using it. She likes it better than the gel she was using, she said it is slicker and easy to lather.

I haven't used it as I'm in the GRUYERE for 2021 but I do like the scent.
 
I think Gillette is on the right track. For too long people have forgotten that we humans were tasked with the job of being "Stewards" of this planet and we suck at it, overall. I was AMAZED at how quickly this planet started recovering from mankind's disregard for picking up after ourselves when all the big cities like L.A. were in lockdown.

I get a kick out of people criticizing me for "polluting" the air for burning wood for heat for the last 45+ years when it's putting out the same "chemicals" that wood DECOMPOSING does!

While they drink coffee from a plastic and paper cup!
If we forced companies to put their intake pipes downstream from their output pipes it would be an easy fix, but trying to get certain countries to do so would be nearly impossible.

Remember: man is a rationalizing animal, not a rational one.
Humans as stewards? Has anyone told the mice?

But "stick yer intake pipe downstream of your output pipe" is one I'm going to borrow...
 
I think Gillette is on the right track. For too long people have forgotten that we humans were tasked with the job of being "Stewards" of this planet and we suck at it, overall. I was AMAZED at how quickly this planet started recovering from mankind's disregard for picking up after ourselves when all the big cities like L.A. were in lockdown.

I get a kick out of people criticizing me for "polluting" the air for burning wood for heat for the last 45+ years when it's putting out the same "chemicals" that wood DECOMPOSING does!

While they drink coffee from a plastic and paper cup!
If we forced companies to put their intake pipes downstream from their output pipes it would be an easy fix, but trying to get certain countries to do so would be nearly impossible.

Remember: man is a rationalizing animal, not a rational one.


I still call wood the original renewable solar, it hurts people’s head but people get it ;). Btw the newer wood stoves ( we put in a Jotul ) are pretty efficient and clean burning. We use ours pretty much daily supplementing heating oil / radiator heat.
 
Had my 2nd shave with this today. It is a moderately decent cream, good protection and is slick.

It continues to burn on my face, though. :/
 
I race two stroke go karts drive a f150 that gets 11 miles at best, shoot over 10,000 lead shot filled shotgun shells with plastic shot cups, and drive a 2 stroke snowmobile.

im trying to increase my carbon footprint not decrease it. Funny when people rant and rave about me then never do the research on the horrific manufacturing processes Involved for car batteries for electric vehicles and the fact still remains there is no way to recycle the huge batteries when the cars gets totaled or the batteries need replacing.

as long as the scent Is good on this, I could be swayed to make a purchase.
 
0 for 2 with both Gillette Planet Kind and Pure. Both burned my skin terribly (and I didn't much care for the scent of either).

I'll stick with Proraso for my inexpensive shave cream.
 
I've only tried it out once but it worked great, no burning or any other issues. Same with the Pure which I've used many times. YMMV as they say!
 
0 for 2 with both Gillette Planet Kind and Pure. Both burned my skin terribly (and I didn't much care for the scent of either).

I'll stick with Proraso for my inexpensive shave cream.
I think in your case these 2 belong in the trash or gift them. No way I would use a burning soap. I can use pure w no problems.
 
I purchased the cream at Target for a very reasonable price, not expecting much. I do enjoy the cream and the scent. It performed better than I expected and has pretty good slickness and skin softeners. It bowl lathered as good at TOBS, equal to most of the other lower cost creams in a tube. Based on the price, it is a good middle of the road shaving cream which I would recommend. If you only use premium products like Ethos, Castle Forbes, etc...You will most likely not be impressed with this cream or any other less expensive creams.
 

Chandu

I Waxed The Badger.
Are Target and the Gillette site the only places selling these products? I don't see them in drug or grocery stores.
Target is both, but I know what you mean. It seems more and more like Target and Walmart are for product launches and if they sell well they end up at "lesser" stores.

In general on this topic
I buy soap that doesn't come in plastic when possible. Hard pucks in paper are the best, something in tin/metal/glass second best. Many creams, especially European ones come in tin tubes.

Artisan's for all their talk about earth friendly natural ingredient face feel friendliness don't seem to give a hoot about their packaging and many boast of generous oversized tubs for ease of lathering, or potentially to not get digned on product shrink as the moisture leaves. Artisan soap makers, how about some glass, tin or paper? Step up.

So perhaps the tub of Gillette is better for the environment than the tub of your favorite artisan's soap.
 
Artisan's for all their talk about earth friendly natural ingredient face feel friendliness don't seem to give a hoot about their packaging and many boast of generous oversized tubs for ease of lathering, or potentially to not get digned on product shrink as the moisture leaves. Artisan soap makers, how about some glass, tin or paper? Step up.

Artisans are businessmen before environmental advocates. Most of us prefer the large, lightweight, waterproof, and extremely durable containers, and that's why they're used. There are issues with glass, tin and paper that simply don't exist with basic plastic, which is also usually cheaper, thus reduces cost of an already expensive niche product. Soap in paper, i.e., refill pucks, are an option available by some manufacturers like Stirling and Mystic, but it generally requires more production and storage costs to produce both the container soaps and refills, something not practical for very small scale and margin artisans.

It's legitimately nice to discuss ways to produce products more ethically and sustainably, but consumer preferences, practical issues, and cost concerns cannot be ignored by small niche vendors in an increasing competitive environment.

I'm loathe to criticize artisans for wanting to stay in business and meet consumer demands.
 
Top Bottom