Gillette Mach3 Starter Pack (1x Razor, 3x Blade Refills) $6 (Save $7) @ BIG W

630

Enjoy :)

Gillette Mach3 men’s manual razor delivers a close shave, without all the redness while feeling better after the 10th shave than a new disposable does on the first (vs. BlueII Plus Disposable).

It features 3 DuraComfort blades for long-lasting comfort.
A lubrication strip glides to help protect your skin from redness, while an advanced skin guard helps stretch your skin, and prepares your hair to be cut.

Product features:

  • Duracomfort blades
  • Lubrication strip
  • Advanced skin guard
  • Premium handle
  • Fits all Mach3 blade refills
  • Includes: 1 x razor, 3 x blade refills

Related Stores

BIG W
BIG W

Comments

  • +22 votes

    https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/432474

    Boycott Gilette brigade will be here soon

    • +45 votes

      Checking in.

    • +3 votes

      Nee-naaaaw nee-naaaaw

    • -10 votes

      but if they truly were boycotting, they would also boycott posting in Gillette bargain posts…

      if they post here then they're just faking it ;)

      • +7 votes

        There's no correlation between boycotting Gillette and posting in posts for Gillette "bargains"

        • +23 votes

          Nope. YOU are the bully. You've basically just called anyone that disagrees with you a bully. This is inception level hypocrisy.

          • -7 votes

            @syousef: No. This is where you are wrong. No one up till the point you provided this reply has engaged in rational debate, or provided a rational viewpoint even.

            When you give the reply, I can now see the other viewpoint.

            To top it off, I am the one getting the rude replies from beginning. When I try the hardest not to bring emotion into it at all. All the while, no useful arguments were presented.

        • +4 votes

          You aren't starting a conversation, you're pushing an ideology.

          People who disagree with you aren't bullies. That's a transparent deception on your part designed specifically to shame people into silence. You don't want a real conversation. Preachers never do.

          If one truly wants to have the conversation about men it is far more unsettling than neat forgone conclusion that your pop-culture sociology demands. The real truth is that your laundry list of masculine ills built the world over thousands of years, one conflict at a time. It is exactly the willingness of men to take risks, slave for years, fight, and even die that built everything that the modern world is. Everything you have comes from the point of a sword, and that sword is being held by a man.

          The truth is that toxic femininity always seeks to unjustly take from men. Toxic femininity is the hand always out. Toxic femininity is expecting men to do all the hard work. Gillette's shame based messaging is perfectly inline with toxic female thinking: men should do all the work, even when it comes to emasculating and destroying themselves.

          Are you enjoying our conversation? Does having the parasitic nature of the toxic female shoved in your face making you feel extra woke and ready to buy some overpriced pink razors? Maybe you should do some soul searching if you disagree. God forbid you bully me.

          • -1 vote

            @cfuse: Typical of many here, quagmired in a gender issue, when in fact, bullying is generic, and should be seen as such. It is dominance and control over others perceived as weaker. This culture is but one instance. People of all gender fall victims. Hardly a feminist issue, lots of good people have fought these issues, that is why society have push backed on slavery, Apartheid, segregation, racism, Anti-Seminism, sexism etc, and have laws protecting minorities.

            My first ever comment engaging in this topic is this. Then I encountered name calling. Credit to one who genuinely wanted to discuss, and we engaged in civil discussion.

            Timeline-wise, up to this point, 2 arguments emerged from those opposing the ad:

            • Ad calls all men rapist and bullies – mischaracterisation of facts – not a valid argument.
            • Virtue-signalling by Gillette

            I cannot read minds, no other arguments were put forth – the logical inference is they want the status quo.

            After this point, then emerged the argument:
            ‘We are good men, already doing the right thing, but do not like the preaching tone of ad. The preaching tone is so offensive, it outweighs any good this message might bring. And warrants a boycott.’

            To these group, I say there is no issue then, since they are not bullies. Excercise your right to boycott.

            There is a 2nd group who does not have a problem with the ad.
            The 3rd group wants status quo – and they feel threatened, as they should.

            Scientific research and official stats back this as a top issue of society today.

            •  

              @bluesky: … society has push backed pushed back

            •  

              @bluesky: Bullying is a superset but masculinity is not a wholly contained subset thereof. Drawing a deliberate and false conflation between masculinity and bullying is disingenuous to say the least.

              Don't haul out intersectional feminist dogma like 'toxic masculinity' and then walk that back when challenged. Gillette deliberately made this about men, and so did you. Either repudiate your earlier comments or step up and stand by your convictions.

              That APA statement cites no evidence, and it's basically an OP ED. The replication crisis in science in general and Psychology in particular should make one very wary of treating some (heavily criticised) statement with no supporting evidence as inviolate fact. If one is going to make sweeping statements about an entire gender and attempt to alter their conduct then I'd suggest that be based on more than the assumption of people that don't even know how to produce replicable studies.

              • +2 votes

                @cfuse: You either don’t read, are sloppy or downright dishonest. Twisting my words and putting words in my mouth.

                Bullying is a superset but masculinity is not a wholly contained subset thereof. Drawing a deliberate and false conflation between masculinity and bullying is disingenuous to say the least

                Masculinity can be positive or toxic. I am deliberately linking toxic masculinity to bullying, not all masculinity. Positive masculinity is never a problem.

                Toxic masculinity is well-defined now, and describes a toxic culture embraced by some men. Others embrace positive masculinity. For a refresher of this concept, if you need it.

                BTW If you beat up a homeless man, harass a gay man, coward-punch another man at the bar, bully the weaker boy at school, these are also examples of toxic masculinity.

                Don't haul out intersectional feminist dogma like 'toxic masculinity' and then walk that back when challenged. Gillette deliberately made this about men, and so did you. Either repudiate your earlier comments or step up and stand by your convictions.

                Your statement shows intellectual dishonesty - to spin the false narrative (again!) that Gillette’s message is about men, when Gillette’s message is about men who practise toxic masculinity and bullying.

                This is precisely why I stand by the premise, that this issue is best seen as a bullying problem, and not a gender issue. Because then, there is no room for your kind of message manipulation.

                Toxic masculinity is not a gender issue, but a bullying problem also because :

                • Victims can be from any gender.
                • Not all persons from a gender (men) embrace this toxic culture.

                As mentioned above, this also leaves no room for dishonest mischaracterisation (“some men” to “all men”)

                If one is going to make sweeping statements about an entire gender and attempt to alter their conduct

                Once again, more mischaracterisation - 'some in gender', to 'entire gender'.

                Clearly, you are not here for any meaningful discourse. To engage in rational debates there must be some minimal standards, which you fail :

                • Your tone is aggressive, rude, and you want to make it a gender issue at all cost, even if you are wrong. You come across as someone with gender issues.

                • Continued ‘mischaracterisation’ of message. Just as I pointed out mischaracterisation does not make a valid argument (in last response) – you try it on again. Also, mischieviousness, by ignoring whatever the other person says.

                • Using ‘broken record’ technique, you think if you keep saying a falsehood long enough, it becomes true.

                Ironically, you have just proven why Gillette’s message is so appropriate. The very thing you want to disprove, you just proved by your actions and behaviour.

        • +1 vote

          My personal perspective…….whilst I don't agree with the Gillette marketing campaign and have actively joined the boycotting, this is a bargains site and everyone is entitled to their opinions. Gillette made a conscious decision knowing there would be a backlash against them from part of their customer base - if they have read the landscape well then their company and shareholders will be happy with it…..

          This country needs to learn to debate things with civility if it wants to preserve its democracy. I for one am happy that for the most part, this site is free from political discussion.

    • +29 votes

      You should be boycotting them by default since disposable razors are the most expensive way to shave.

      But if the puke inducing attack on men is a reason to stop so be it.

    •  

      eric (@ericmangun) sums it up well:

      Point of the ad: men aren’t inherently jerks and we can stand up to the assholes who give men a bad name.

      People online: WhY aRe YoU sAyInG iM a BaD pErSoN??

      It says a lot about the people who identified with the bullies in the ad and not the people standing up to them.

      Incidentally, scientific research supports the message

      Just days before the release of the ad, the American Psychological Association (APA) issued new "Guidelines for the Psychological Practice with Boys and Men." The new guidelines highlight the unique physical and mental health risks that boys and men face, including higher rates of completed suicide, violence, substance abuse, cardiovascular problems and early mortality. They also issue a warning against conforming to traditional stereotypes of masculinity, citing years of research that links machismo to the aforementioned health risks.

      "We didn't coordinate with [Gillette]," Jared L. Skillings, Ph.D., chief of professional practice for the APA, tells CNBC Make It. "The timing of this is coincidental, although, nicely so."

      • +15 votes

        And nothing will help reduce these ills more, than a global organisation telling men they are rubbish

      • -14 votes

        Eric is exactly right. The average good guy is not affected negatively by the ad. Only the assholes are.

      • +2 votes

        Personally I don't think the ad's message was the problem, it was no one like being preached to in order to buy a product, nor do many people trust a large somewhat exploitative corporation to be 'woke' for the sake of social change rather than the money.

        If the government had released such an ad to address these issues, people would have largely been ok with it. A company releasing an ad like this to sell more product… well that just comes of as disingenuous.

      • +2 votes

        I don't think the ad had a clear and unambiguous message. It was all over the place which is why people on both sides seems to be tripping out that the other side can't see how bad it is.

        To me, it was a little condescending, but nothing to stress out about.

      • +1 vote

        In order to reduce these health risks, the nanny state is advocating that males transition to females. Male = evil, female = good; is what Western governments preach.

        Problem solved, a male free world.

    • +51 votes

      Here. Screw Gillette. Pandering to the vocal minority through extreme virtue signalling.

      • +31 votes

        Spot on, screw Gillette.

      • -28 votes

        Pandering to the vocal minority through extreme virtue signalling.

        So you know it is a virtue to stand up to bullying, but you do not want this virtue for yourself. If it indeed is a vocal minority, then even more kudos for Gillette, putting principle above profits, to stand up against bullies.

        • +24 votes

          What a load of rubbish and the typical argument from the left when you disagree with them. This has nothing to do with bullying.

          • -9 votes

            @Maverick-au: I argue my case with facts. In contrast, you showed the kind of bullying (exactly typified by the Gillette issue) - trying to shut down good men who disagree with you, using cheap comments like this. (BTW, Soyboy says Hi! :-))

            Ironically, this issue is detrimental to men as well, as some suffer mental issues from it. It is trying to improve society in general.

            • +17 votes

              @bluesky: More bollocks as once again anyone who disagrees with the left are bullies.

              How is it trying to improve society by calling most men rapists and toxic? And portraying a white man as the aggressor as the black man comes in to save the day because we all know what would have happened if the roles were reversed.

              This has nothing to do with improving society but is about creating more false victims.

              • -7 votes

                @Maverick-au:

                How is it trying to improve society by calling most men rapists and toxic?

                This is already debunked in last post here and here. You are using the 'broken record' technique - hoping to make a false statement true. (Watch the ad carefully, your other claim that it is race-segregated is also false).

                Like I said before, there are those who :

                • want the bullying culture gone
                • want the status quo
            • +21 votes

              @bluesky: bluesky, get off your self righteous political soapbox, this is ozbargain not ozpolitics, go pedal your agenda elsewhere :)

        • +24 votes

          He said virtue signalling.
          Like celebrities asking for open borders but having high levels of security around their property. Or Gillette saying men should do better and treat women better, all while advertising on the asses of F1 grid girls..
          It doesn't matter what you say. It matters what your actions are and what you do. Good men (the majority) do not need to be told to be better by a razor company.

          • +1 vote

            @mick123: I know men who are not offended. If you think some good men are offended, then it is their prerogative to choose what they want to do, like not buying the product. But it is still Gillette’s prerogative to put up the ad.

            Using inconsistencies in Gillette's past behaviour as a reason to dismiss a message which raises genuine awareness of a valid issue in society, is like ‘throwing the baby out with the bathwater’.

            Therefore, even as a good man, one must be careful - when using the excuse that they are ‘virtue-signalling’, as a means to warn others from speaking out about a real issue.

            Basically, it boils down to:

            • Those who want a change
            • Those who do not want a change.
            • +28 votes

              @bluesky: The change we're seeing is one of "toxic" virtue signaling. You don't need to invoke Gillette's past ads to see evidence of that. There's plenty more. Any man who disagrees is abused and belittled. (I'm a happily married man and I've been called an ugly incel that's going to die alone by strangers. Way to stand up against bullying hypocrites!). On what planet is it not okay to offend anyone except for one group (men)? We are taught these days that offensive behaviour doesn't require intent - if a person is offended then the behaviour is offensive. Except for men. If they are offended they are incels and sexist pigs.

              You wouldn't defend the "perogative" of a company to produce an ad that called out "toxic Judaism", "toxic blacks", "toxic sex workers", "toxic LGBTs" despite any perceived slights or missteps by that group. (If you don't like those groups there are plenty of others to choose from) But it's okay to scream "toxic masculinity" at the top of your lungs.

              And there are lots of other things wrong with the ad - conflating speaking to an attractive woman with harassment, conflating play fighting with bullying, using fake news clips and TV shows because no such show really exists, misappropriating the phrase "boys will be boys" not to mean they'll be silly and adventurous but purely for it's most neferious use - "boys will be monsters".

              There's a change afoot alright - a change where rational thought is thrown out the window, and bullying and hate speech masquerade as progress towards justice. Be part of the RIGHT change, not a movement of "toxic" bullies. If you can't see all that's wrong with this ad, that's on you. But if you want to abuse people for refusing to also be blind, that's not something a decent man's going to tolerate.

              • +5 votes

                @syousef: Well done Sir, well said!

              • +1 vote

                @syousef: Please read my original comment – you will see where I stand. I believe bad human nature is the root cause - of all domination and control over others perceived as weaker – and this is not confined to any group/gender/race/class/religion etc.

                That is why, if it were up to me, I would have preferred ‘toxic dominance’ or ‘toxic power’, and addressed them generically.I am against bullying of all kind.

                I know what you are talking about – that is why I do not like to affiliate with any political agenda/parties/movements etc. I like rational debates, where one group does not use bullying or shouting down the other – and in doing so, avoid rational debate. (No danger of me employing this tactic, I am the minority here :-)).

                In fact, I think it is regrettable the phrase 'toxic masculinity' is used – which is easily misunderstood as against men, when it is against a culture, and not even condoned by good men. (Yes, Gillette could have framed the issue better). If it were up to me, I will call on all ‘toxic dominance’ or ‘toxic power’, as I said in my comment. Majority of people have experienced some form of bullying from others in their life – they would have been able to relate to the message a lot better.

                Also, you will be mistaken, if you think I do not support initiatives that expose toxic culture with any other groups etc. Just so happens this grabbed the headline, so we are talking about this. I am actually against bullying of all kinds, by people of all persuasions, and would prefer this problem to be framed generically. Then we would not have the opposition we are seeing now.

                • +7 votes

                  @bluesky: I understand what you're saying. What you're failing to see is that there's a strong anti-male sentiment taking root, which goes way too far in overcompensating by punishing good men for the past transgressions of bad men, and without due process. That is dangerous. We're heading for worsening race relations and a gender war (and unfortunately not a cold one). Against this backdrop and in that context this ad does much more harm than good.

                  • +1 vote

                    @syousef: I can at least see where you are coming from, and your point of view now.
                    This is what I mean that all sides can benefit from rational debate. And not let emotion or name-calling to take hold.

                    By you explaining the issue as you have done, you are already breaching the divide somewhat. For those of us who do not understand why there is such a fierce opposition to a message that is good for society.

                    there's a strong anti-male sentiment taking root

                    Even though personally, I have not observed this anti-male sentiment (perhaps due to the people I mix with), I will be looking out to see if there is any validity to this.

                    It almost seems like a storm in the teacup. In real life, I have yet to see this ingrained hatred against men. But I do worry about the stats regarding male mental illness and suicide - we all have male loved ones. Especially, when the scientific research even backs it up.

                    I am always very suspicious of what I see in social media – especially if it splits society. Due to known presence of foreign and local agitators in other societies trying to sow chaos and discord, to weaken it. So I am always aware that this may also be happening here.

                • +2 votes

                  @bluesky: @bluesky The best way I can put it so it shows that your justification is null and void is to use the PC police/lefties own argument.

                  A terrorist attack by radical Muslims. The majority of the public is outraged. Lefties message: Not all Muslims.
                  African gangs beat into a guy/home invasion/steal cars etc…The majority of the public is outraged. Lefties message: Not all Africans.
                  A miniature portion of sicko males rape/beat woman/murder… The public is outraged. Lefties message: All men are responsible!
                  Case closed.

                  Let's face it… these hypocrites are part of the problem.

                  Seriously… a razor company. They did it for profit. Why not do it without their name in the advert? If you cannot see that well I feel sorry for you.
                  Oh wait! (in the USA) "we will be distributing $1 Million per year for the next three years to non-profit organizations executing the most interesting and impactful programs designed to help men of all ages achieve their personal best". Big deal! Only one group selected so far. They have 4300 locations. A grand total of $232 each! Laughable….

                  • +1 vote

                    @Fletch:

                    A miniature portion of sicko males rape/beat woman/murder… The public is outraged. Lefties message: All men are responsible!

                    This is the crux of our disagreement … Who says all men are responsible?

                    •  

                      @bluesky: @bluesky By the way I'm not offended by the advert. I already think that myself and all the males in my life do all the good things like calling out a mate if they say the wrong thing. I know that because assholes who are misogynistic are told so and booted from my life. I dont need a razor company (seriously laughable) to say I am responsible. Its everyone's responsibility!

                      •  

                        @Fletch: Then, I see no issue. My main point has always been to get rid of bullying. And if you have already done so in your life, then good for you. If you do not like the message, don't buy their products.

                    • +1 vote

                      @bluesky:

                      This is the crux of our disagreement … Who says all men are responsible?

                      A woman kills eight children and she was "sick" the poor women.

                      A student is raped and killed by someone who should likely have been in a care facility or at the very least not allowed to sleep on the streets and the Premier of Victoria doesn't blame the governments policies or the lack of police patrolling but blames all men.

                      "Nothing will change until we change, too. Until we stop blaming 'bad men' - while ignoring the sexist attitudes in our society that created them," Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews said in the wake of Ms Maasarwe's killing."

                      Yep typically weak head of a state.

            • +2 votes

              @bluesky: I’m not offended at all. I feel contempt for the worthy little small minded people that thought this ad was a good idea.

              Utter contempt.

              And I will demonstrate my contempt by buying some other brand.

          • +1 vote

            @mick123: Good men (the majority) do not need to be told to be better by a razor company.

             but the minority do.
            
        • +3 votes

          "A bully is anyone who disagrees with me personally."

      •  

        This whole saga confuses me. Are people against the pandering or against the message?

        Does that mean vitriol should have been poured on all the companies that supported gay marriage last year?

        • +8 votes

          Definitely the pandering, kind of sort of the message. There's nothing wrong with wanting people to be better versions of themselves - none of us are perfect, after all. The problem with the ad is that it makes incorrect assumptions about men and then applies them to all of us. If the inference that men are bad and need to do better was correct, the ad would be ok. But it is not correct.

        • +4 votes

          Watch the Isaac Butterfield video, he'll clear it up for you.

        •  

          They're against the message that the majority of males suffer from "toxic masculinity", and that the small minority need to stop us all from being rapists and just assholes in general. What on earth does gay marriage have to do with anything?

    •  

      Another one here :D

    •  

      So what is a man?
      How to do an ad correctly and not to attack your customers who expect you to produce good products.

      https://youtu.be/x_HL0wiK4Zc

      Go woke, go broke.

  • +7 votes

    why are gillete on special everywhere recently?

    • +3 votes

      …because it's the best a man can get.

      • +30 votes

        …because it's the best a man (arrogant, toxic masculinity, sexist, misogynist pig) can get…

    • +24 votes

      People are working out that what they're selling is a ripoff.

      Oh and they attacked men recently which seems like a suicidal business move but I guess that's what you get when you play the identity politics game.

      • -8 votes

        attacked men

        i felt so violated..
        Pretty sure the summary of the ad was
        'Hey, guys that are being bad men, you should be better.. Guys that are doing good, nice work, keep it up….. Buy a razor'

        no wonder you're so violated

    • +1 vote

      Has it not been on special before? Like every month or so?

    •  

      Because all the masculine men grew beards to hide their weak chins. Everyone else uses electric shavers.

  • +2 votes

    Shrug this would last me a year or more. Couldn't care less about adverts or wet shaving. Also have a head that needs shaving and I'm comfortable with the mach 3 for that.

    $5 a year for razors is about what it works out to for me. Nothing on shaving gel, I just use water.

  • +3 votes

    Any solutions for good razors that are environmentally friendly? Buying all these cartridges and plastic handles etc isn't great

    • +3 votes

      Perhaps look into a safety razor? I've been looking to get one myself.

      •  

        I will it's just a bit daunting. Went onto shavershop website and lots of new terminology - open and closed something or other, double vs single something something. You get the idea. I'll do some research

    •  

      https://www.beardandblade.com.au/products/merkur-34c-safety-...

      Love this, have been using it since Xmas. I will never use a cartridge razor again.

      •  

        37C ftw!

        And after four years or so I've nearly run out of my pack of 200 blades that cost ~$20. What blades do you use?

      •  

        Why? It looks like a ye olden day razor, before they invented cartridges. Not having a go,genuinely curious.

        • +1 vote

          Cost. Depending upon how much you shave, you could save a substantial amount buying a safety razor and blades. A huge amount. I paid about $50 for safety razor and blades a few years back and still won't have to buy razors for at least a few more years.

        •  

          @Madak
          I'm still on the Merkur blade included with it but bought the sampler pack so plenty to go through.

          @Dancasper
          1. Better shave, i would save my face 2-3 times with a Mach 3. I would get ingrown hairs and irritation (shaving rash)
          2. Cost, the razor pays itself off in a year or so
          3. Less waste
          4. Looks sick AF

  • +41 votes

    I'd love to go out and get me some Gillette razors, but gosh, I just don't know how I'm going to find the time, what with all the raping I've been getting up to lately. Oh, if only someone could have assumed I would go on to be a rapist and made a smug ad designed to educate me on how to be better…. Oh well. See you soon ladies ;)

  • +1 vote

    This is a good deal but I did better. Actually got paid 25 cents to take home a Mach 3 at Coles just a couple of days ago.

    Ok, was a targeted promotion: 1000 bonus flybuys points for any gillete razor or blades (excluding disposable range). And they had the Mach 3 (single refill) at 1/2 price for $4.75. Since 1000 points are worth $5: 25 cents profit :-)

    I was actually only alerted to the quality of the deal when they sent a follow up email telling everyone they limit it to a maximum of 10 items that the 1000 points will be given for.

  • +1 vote

    I wish they were the sensitive ones. These ones are good at carving up my skin.

    • +6 votes

      Plenty of sensitive ones in this thread. Imagine being triggered by an ad.

      •  

        Need an OzBargain special hamper deal consisting of all the things people get upset about. Like Gillette, Caged Eggs, Chinese flags, eBay 20% off coupons and Nutella.

      • +9 votes

        Noone is triggered by the ad. People are just disagreeing with Gilette's values and we won't buy their products as a result.