The face on the pancake box

 

     

Wednesday, April 12, 2023

 

I had an discussion about the removal of black people from product boxes, and whether or not the people depicted on them were real people, as they turned out to be, although liberal media kept calling these racist images, when they are not.

Everything these days is racist. Because it fits the racist agenda woke people are selling, and story after story in media keeps selling these one-time heroic black figures as token uncle toms, and the companies that maintained these images for years as racists.

The whole gambit is bullshit.

The image of black in America has changed, and woke people today refuse to admit the images reflect success stories of blacks achieving something they could not previously achieve, but represented an image many blacks no longer can tolerate.

We have become too sophisticated to want to see a black woman on the box of a pancake product or one on syrup or on the rice was eat – even though back then, black people did most of the shopping and it was a good idea to show a successful black person on the product they might be buying.

This is not racist. We see it today with everything sneakers and sports jerseys, products often made by slave labor overseas, not representing successful blacks.

Now, we get Bud Light, and you have to wonder if down the road, in some more enlightened time, people will be outraged by putting the image of a transgender on the can, the way some are outraged about blacks on boxes of pancake batter.

It is the same exploitation, each company looking to attract business by exploiting the image they think will accomplish that. When will be remove black faces from products that straight hair or lighten skin? Are these not also racist? When will we remove the sport stars from cereal boxes?

Admittedly, the image portrayed on some of these is out of touch with how modern blacks (and their liberal woke supporters) see them. But how much worse would it be if these companies actually portrayed some of the successful blacks of today, the rap thugs who rant out anti-white racists music, or the exploited black women who now grace every advertising market in the corporate attempt to do what the companies did back at the turn of the century.

If the images of those on those boxes is racist, isn’t every advertisement using a black face to sell a product also racist?

This points to the folly of media which goes after some companies, while using black faces on their sites to sell more modern products, and call it enlightened?

A google search shows just how pervasive this modern day racism as become, the need to have a black face on a product to sell products to a black audience, and yet, these same media outlets are screaming about the racism of companies who did the same thing a century ago.

Will we someday wake up and find the advertising we see today as racist, too.

The fact is nobody wants to admit that there were successful black people prior to the civil rights movement, and that blacks can succeed in a white society without the benefit of woke media and woke racists protesting.

At what point do we stop? Was the use of a native American in the 1960s to protest litter along our nation’s highways racist, too?

Or the use of Asians to sell products to Asians or Hispanics to Hispanics.

The fact that the black faces on older products no longer fit the image woke wants us to buy of who black people are, doesn’t make those products racist, it makes them out of date.

But in a woke society, anything woke says is racist must be racist, even when it’s not.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

email to Al Sullivan

Bud Light attacks masculinity

 

 

Tuesday, April 11, 2023

 

Bud Light now has a transgender on its beer cans, a dumb move by a dumb corporation that is desperate to catch the social wave and be hip.

It is much like all those corporations that took black people off their products, too stupid to realize who those black people were and how much of a success story they were in their time.

The implication with these is that this must be racist to display a successful black face on their product.

The Bug Light issue is slightly different, something similar to the scene from Hard Day’s Night in which George Harrison made fun of the corporate people who hoped to catch the wave on their way to be hip, trend setters who are well-known drags (an ironic bit of language all these years later).

The company clearly missed the boat, having hired some idiot diversity coach who hasn’t a clue as to who actually uses the product, and so has resulted in the biggest social blunder in modern business history.

Had the company come out with another product, something specifically designed to appeal to the gay community, it might have gotten away with putting one of the sadder examples of the transgender community on its beer can. Instead, it tried to force down the throats of traditional buyers this social engineering stunt, and it has turned off many of those who used to drink that beer as well as many of the distributors in conservative communities.

But like the racists companies that removed blacks from their products, the beer company is not likely to learn anything from this, and will continue to push on with this silly agenda on the assumption that the gay movement is the way to go for them, as former beer drinkers go to products like Coors.

This desperate attempt to main stream radical ideas is bound to fail, much like the socially conscious banks that focused more on promoting diversity than actually serving the financial needs of their clientele.

  Who knows where all this will end up, but for the moment, the back lash risks bringing down the beer company, who relied in the past on the macho football fan crowd, and those men who always saw the beer company as representing their values.

So be it. You can’t force feed a faulty agenda down the throats of people who are traditionally against what you are selling, and if you are selling gay rights instead of beer, then expect people who want beer to walk away in disgust.

You have to wonder what company managers were thinking when they made this move. Did they really think their macho male crowd would embrace their gay agenda?

Or is it a new generation of ownership that believes foolishly that the company should be promoting a social agenda rather than its beer product and that the customers will quietly go along with it, regardless of how outrageous the company gets?

The parent company for Bud Light is exploiting gays so it can get its hip creds in today’s society, no doubt orchestrated by young executives who have lost touch with who their customer base it, and want to become part of trend setting crowd George Harrison mocked.

These are not only silly people, but stupid people, although woke means the same thing as stupid, and the real stupidity lies with upper and older management who went along with this crap.

Although there might have been some backlash anyway, the company would have been wiser to launch a new product that would address the trans community.

But this is not about providing a product, it is about social engineering, and the spoiled brat woke executives don’t merely want to welcome the trans community, they want to destroy the macho base that the company has been selling to for generations. This is about trying to undermine the male ego, and social control – a deliberate attack on traditional values, and although many of those boycotting Bud Light don’t know it consciously, we are all aware of the attack that is underway, orchestrated by the young woke executives at Bud, and to take it lying down, would be a disgrace.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

email to Al Sullivan