L’Oreal to remove the word “white” and “whitening from product labels.

y0ssar1an22 · 25-09-2020 10:45pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

but uncle ben on the rice had nothing to do with racism, nobody even slightly felt it was racist until this 'woke' year. It was grand for 77 years and I've never once heard it referred to as racist until lately.

if the brand just wanted a change then that would be fine, but they've explained that is not the case, they're being motivated by the outrage of a small perpetually offended minority.

that people can look at the uncle bens box of rice and derive racist vibes from the branding is the real ill here.

i dunno. this seems pretty racist to me:

The firm said Uncle Ben was the name of a fictional character that was first used in 1946 as a reference to an African-American Texan rice farmer.

It said the image it used "was a beloved Chicago chef and waiter named Frank Brown".

look, its racism or its not.

if you guys deem the old packaging as racist, did you do anything to stop that for the last 77 years?

joeguevara · 25-09-2020 11:02pm

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

i dunno. this seems pretty racist to me:

The firm said Uncle Ben was the name of a fictional character that was first used in 1946 as a reference to an African-American Texan rice farmer.

It said the image it used "was a beloved Chicago chef and waiter named Frank Brown".

look, its racism or its not.

if you guys deem the old packaging as racist, did you do anything to stop that for the last 77 years?

To an Irishman I don’t think it is racism. But honestly my opinion doesn’t matter and I couldn’t know if it is demeaning to someone else. Why are people getting annoyed about it. This whole knee jerk argument is equally bizarre. Are people really arguing that a logo of a Blackman on rice is being changed.

y0ssar1an22 · 25-09-2020 11:10pm

joeguevara wrote: »

To an Irishman I don’t think it is racism. But honestly my opinion doesn’t matter and I couldn’t know if it is demeaning to someone else. Why are people getting annoyed about it. This whole knee jerk argument is equally bizarre. Are people really arguing that a logo of a Blackman on rice is being changed.

different people have different reasons.

my reason...very basically; was the branding racist?

thats a pretty binary question.

joeguevara · 25-09-2020 11:23pm

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

different people have different reasons.

my reason...very basically; was the branding racist?

thats a pretty binary question.

Maybe not at the time. But definitely can be considered now. All this talk about maitre d is crazy. Or bow tie black man shows wealth. At the end of the day a rice plantation was worked by slaves. All black men were called boy, uncle or old man by white people.

Quantum Erasure · 25-09-2020 11:38pm

joeguevara wrote: »

To an Irishman I don’t think it is racism. But honestly my opinion doesn’t matter and I couldn’t know if it is demeaning to someone else. Why are people getting annoyed about it. This whole knee jerk argument is equally bizarre. Are people really arguing that a logo of a Blackman on rice is being changed.

What's your opinion on removing books from the leaving cert curriculum, or statues from outside a hotel?

Shur it's not for us white folk to have an opinion on it, ...?

y0ssar1an22 · 25-09-2020 11:44pm

joeguevara wrote: »

Maybe not at the time. But definitely can be considered now. All this talk about maitre d is crazy. Or bow tie black man shows wealth. At the end of the day a rice plantation was worked by slaves. All black men were called boy, uncle or old man by white people.

whats your position?

put aside for a minute what people consider or feel.

joeguevara · 26-09-2020 12:10am

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

whats your position?

put aside for a minute what people consider or feel.

My position is I understand that people see it as a racist logo and applaud any company that does their bit to not offend people. I find all the things that are happening hard to take and do agree that people seem to be offended for the sake of it.

But there are mo important things to stand up for than a rice lovo

y0ssar1an22 · 26-09-2020 12:53am

joeguevara wrote: »

My position is I understand that people see it as a racist logo and applaud any company that does their bit to not offend people. I find all the things that are happening hard to take and do agree that people seem to be offended for the sake of it.

But there are mo important things to stand up for than a rice lovo

this fallacy of understanding, why/how do you understand?

dont understand. Just share your opinion. not you specifically, just in general.

stop saying how you think people will feel, just say what you think.

Nedington · 26-09-2020 12:57am

Linguists to remove the word white from the colour white

joeguevara · 26-09-2020 1:16am

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

this fallacy of understanding, why/how do you understand?

dont understand. Just share your opinion. not you specifically, just in general.

stop saying how you think people will feel, just say what you think.

I don't know what you want from me. I said I have no issue with the company changing their logo. It does not effect me. I hate how everyone needs an opinion on everything. I can't be any clearer. I don't understand what you mean by share my opinion but not me specifically.

I think that having to share opinions, in general about things that you cannot comprehend the reason behind is BS. To me it is akin to a Norwegian getting annoyed about the troubles.

feargale · 26-09-2020 1:16am

sdanseo wrote: »

Another example of liberal extortionism.

I was just thinking today how "liberal" culture has progressed.
Someone who had what was considered to be a fairly liberal viewpoint 10 years ago would today in some circles be viewed as a neo-fascist.

You are confusing liberalism and pseudo-liberalism. Liberalism is the reason you can vote, the reason the state cannot imprison you without trial etc etc. People died for those rights. Liberalism still has a place. Pseudo-liberalism is comfortable hypocrites spotting an opportunity for self-promotion and cynically taking a free ride on the backs of the liberal martyrs, knowing that there will always be sheep to follow.
It happens to every reform movement. Look at the brave women who fought for rights 50 years ago, Dublin women like Máirín de Búrca and Margaret Gaj and look at some of the Óinseachs who have come afterwards, comfortable overpaid wielders of pens that refuse no ink, who can't write about the price of cattle in Hackballscross without bringing gender into it.
Please don't blame great movements for the bolshies in their midst. It has always been thus.

y0ssar1an22 · 26-09-2020 1:39am

joeguevara wrote: »

I don't know what you want from me. I said I have no issue with the company changing their logo. It does not effect me. I hate how everyone needs an opinion on everything. I can't be any clearer. I don't understand what you mean by share my opinion but not me specifically.

I think that having to share opinions, in general about things that you cannot comprehend the reason behind is BS. To me it is akin to a Norwegian getting annoyed about the troubles.

i want you to share your own opinion.

i mean, when you joined this thread you did essentially that.

no norwegian gives a damn about the troubles, like why would they? however, should a norwegian voice their opinion on the troubles, surely you ask them 1st off:

can you clarify your position so we're all on the same foot; and following that, why do you think that, and please, defend your position.

i'm gonna presume you're not a mind reader, or a speaker on behalf of any group. Your opinions are your own to own. This is what you said:

My position is I understand that people see it as a racist logo and applaud any company that does their bit to not offend people. I find all the things that are happening hard to take and do agree that people seem to be offended for the sake of it.

But there are mo important things to stand up for than a rice lovo

joeguevara · 26-09-2020 1:43am

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

this fallacy of understanding, why/how do you understand?

dont understand. Just share your opinion. not you specifically, just in general.

stop saying how you think people will feel, just say what you think.

I do have an opinion on meath politicians starting a campaign to ban To kill a mocking bird from schools. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.independent.ie/irish-news/education/twelve-year-old-pupils-do-not-understand-complexities-of-racially-charged-classics-says-councillor-seeking-removal-of-books-39393404.html

I read it for the junior cert and was blown away by it. Mainly because of the way it explains racist people, times and how good people can do bad things. Our English teacher also showed us Missippi burning at the same time.

Now to me to deny kids the opportunity to read and discuss the book and the issues it raises is wrong. Now just to point out that I have never come across a book that does the same thing. But I think the reason behind the politician doing it is because of brownie points. Much more of an issue than rice logos. Probably have not explained it well but am wrecked after being on my feet arguing all week in work.

joeguevara · 26-09-2020 2:02am

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

i want you to share your own opinion.

i mean, when you joined this thread you did essentially that.

no norwegian gives a damn about the troubles, like why would they? however, should a norwegian voice their opinion on the troubles, surely you ask them 1st off:

can you clarify your position so we're all on the same foot; and following that, why do you think that, and please, defend your position.

i'm gonna presume you're not a mind reader, or a speaker on behalf of any group. Your opinions are your own to own. This is what you said:

My position is I understand that people see it as a racist logo and applaud any company that does their bit to not offend people. I find all the things that are happening hard to take and do agree that people seem to be offended for the sake of it.

But there are mo important things to stand up for than a rice lovo

I first posted in this thread as I have a lot of knowledge on the whitening cream and the reason for its use from an ex girlfriend. I saw a lot of wrong stereotypes. I also lived in Colombia for 2 years and learned from local about blanquimento or whitening and how it effects them still.

But seeing as you have asked me for my opinion and I suppose it is good to discuss I'll give it to you. I'm tired so apologies if it is not expressed well.

I'm sick to death of people not understanding an issue. People who say that next we will not be able to say white Christmas or have whitening toothpaste. I think it is crazy that people are literally arguing for a black man as a logo. I'm also sick of people having to label everything and if you don't agree with everything they say you will be the subject of their wrath. Hate that there is no difference between the left and right. Both use the same tactics of shouting and screaming and can't debate or discuss any issues.

I am shocked to read the multicultarism thread and the way so many young people feel. Honestly so many posts reminded me of the scene in American history X, just before they ransacked the super market. I was chatting to a few people and they were spouting so much lies about refugees, Ireland losing its culture, black people being treated way better than Irish etc. All from social media and mostly untrue.

To sum up. I was not offended by the logo. Did not care if it was changed. But I am honestly fearful about the fact that on one side everyone is offended and the other seeing division and anger growing.

But fcuck it, haven't cooked rice in years

joeguevara · 26-09-2020 2:14am

But you the thread started in June and the issue was probably more divisive than the uncle Ben logo. People saw the removal of the word whitening as an attack on white people (completely incorrectly). But easier to understand why they were offended than the change of logo with uncle Ben.

I had to say to a guy in work to stop constantly talking about the US election to me. Have no interest in it. When he was talking about the supreme Court for 20 minutes I had enough. The constant incessant obsession with the US annoys me. I lived in New York for a few years and heard less about US politics than now.

Demonique · 26-09-2020 3:06am

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

i want you to share your own opinion.

i mean, when you joined this thread you did essentially that.

no norwegian gives a damn about the troubles, like why would they? however, should a norwegian voice their opinion on the troubles, surely you ask them 1st off:

can you clarify your position so we're all on the same foot; and following that, why do you think that, and please, defend your position.

i'm gonna presume you're not a mind reader, or a speaker on behalf of any group. Your opinions are your own to own. This is what you said:

My position is I understand that people see it as a racist logo and applaud any company that does their bit to not offend people. I find all the things that are happening hard to take and do agree that people seem to be offended for the sake of it.

But there are mo important things to stand up for than a rice lovo

Why do you care so much about whether they share their own opinion or not?

biko · 26-09-2020 3:07am

Is this stereotype racist?

1.jpg?8788

joeguevara · 26-09-2020 3:12am

biko wrote: »

Is this stereotype racist?

Olam group is based mainly in Nigeria so not sure if a black woman with braided hair which is common there could be considered racist.

joeguevara · 26-09-2020 3:17am

Demonique wrote: »

Why do you care so much about whether they share their own opinion or not?

Funnily enough I thought I had shared my opinion.

Eric Cartman · 26-09-2020 3:37am

Nothing from the past should ever be judged by 2016-2020 standards, leave the statues, leave uncle ben on the rice, leave the golliwog, just stop screwing with history trying to appease a small group of teitter loudmouths

joeguevara · 26-09-2020 3:44am

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Nothing from the past should ever be judged by 2016-2020 standards, leave the statues, leave uncle ben on the rice, leave the golliwog, just stop screwing with history trying to appease a small group of teitter loudmouths

Would that appease you? Do you yearn for the good old Golliwog days?

Eric Cartman · 26-09-2020 3:48am

joeguevara wrote: »

Would that appease you? Do you yearn for the good old Golliwog days?

What would appease me is brands not revoking iconography / imagery because some twitter users shout racism. Im not looking for KKK brand rice, not looking for brands to stay static, but ‘we listened’ and removing a black man from the packaging and renaming the brand because some snowflakes were upset is madness.

Quantum Erasure · 26-09-2020 3:53am

joeguevara wrote: »

Olam group is based mainly in Nigeria so not sure if a black woman with braided hair which is common there could be considered racist.

What if I'm offended by it? Or a black man in the USA is? Or an African immigrant in the UK....

joeguevara · 26-09-2020 3:57am

Eric Cartman wrote: »

What would appease me is brands not revoking iconography / imagery because some twitter users shout racism. Im not looking for KKK brand rice, not looking for brands to stay static, but ‘we listened’ and removing a black man from the packaging and renaming the brand because some snowflakes were upset is madness.

I’m in agreement on what you are saying. But honestly Uncle is in itself a slur. It’s the same as calling someone black ‘boy’. Rice plantation in the US were worked by slaves.

I am not offended by it. But I am not offended by anything really. But if after consultations and years of considerations they changed it, then so be it. None of these things are a knee jerk reaction. The L’Oréal’s issue was in discussion for years.

Eric Cartman · 26-09-2020 4:03am

joeguevara wrote: »

I’m in agreement on what you are saying. But honestly Uncle is in itself a slur. It’s the same as calling someone black ‘boy’. Rice plantation in the US were worked by slaves.

I am not offended by it. But I am not offended by anything really. But if after consultations and years of considerations they changed it, then so be it. None of these things are a knee jerk reaction. The L’Oréal’s issue was in discussion for years.

I wouldnt say im offended by the change, rice is rice, shampoo is shampoo no matter the name etc..

I suppose the offense comes from any brand resonating with a vocal yet small minority, even if it has been years in the works. I mean if we all woke up tomorrow to find out heinz beans were being renamed ‘the earth is flat vaccines are a lie beans’ most of us would say that not only was that peddling false information but why are we politicising food. It would be insane and almost everyone would agree, same deal here for me, id be the first person to object to the fictitious beans can name I made up above, doesnt change whats in the can but jaysus why did the bean company need to get political, same deal here

joeguevara · 26-09-2020 4:04am

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

What if I'm offended by it? Or a black man in the USA is? Or an African immigrant in the UK....

Ok. Being offended for no reason is pointless.

Firstly Olam is a Nigerian company. It has a bad history of slavery but is trying to combat it. https://www.olamgroup.com/content/dam/olamgroup/locations/europe/united-kingdom/united-kingdom---pdfs/olam-slavery-and-human-trafficking-statement-2017-2018.pdf

If the logo was associated with the past then it could be offensive to certain people. So again not me or doubtfully you. Unless you’re an African immigrant in the UK.

joeguevara · 26-09-2020 4:10am

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I wouldnt say im offended by the change, rice is rice, shampoo is shampoo no matter the name etc..

I suppose the offense comes from any brand resonating with a vocal yet small minority, even if it has been years in the works. I mean if we all woke up tomorrow to find out heinz beans were being renamed ‘the earth is flat vaccines are a lie beans’ most of us would say that not only was that peddling false information but why are we politicising food. It would be insane and almost everyone would agree, same deal here for me, id be the first person to object to the fictitious beans can name I made up above, doesnt change whats in the can but jaysus why did the bean company need to get political, same deal here

Certain products will always have sensitivity in the US. Rice and Cotton being obvious examples. If uncle bens was a name of a furniture store I don’t think it would be an issue. But I am in agreement that most of the time it is offended for the sake of it.

Eric Cartman · 26-09-2020 4:14am

joeguevara wrote: »

Certain products will always have sensitivity in the US. Rice and Cotton being obvious examples. If uncle bens was a name of a furniture store I don’t think it would be an issue. But I am in agreement that most of the time it is offended for the sake of it.

Ill give you that, i still never saw it as a racial thing and never associated it with any of the slavery/ segregation era, there definitely were brands associated with such, I personally just never considered uncle ben to be one of them

Quantum Erasure · 26-09-2020 4:17am

I'm just wondering what the next 'woke-ism' will be...

joeguevara · 26-09-2020 4:20am

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Ill give you that, i still never saw it as a racial thing and never associated it with any of the slavery/ segregation era, there definitely were brands associated with such, I personally just never considered uncle ben to be one of them

As a kid I always wondered why a black guy and not a Chinese guy was on the box. Never thought about it again. I read an article by a black professor on it. Very reasoned and not in any way raising tension type of way. He discussed rice as a product that is sensitive. Also he discussed the use of the word uncle. Never thought about it before.

But how could we have an idea on what it possibly could mean.I wasn’t offended before or after.

26-09-2020 6:09am

joeguevara wrote: »

Olam group is based mainly in Nigeria so not sure if a black woman with braided hair which is common there could be considered racist.

This post sums up the vast difference in how you and others think. The idea that a black woman with braided hair could be considered racist depending on location makes no sense to me.

joeguevara · 26-09-2020 5:11pm

Deleted User wrote: »

This post sums up the vast difference in how you and others think. The idea that a black woman with braided hair could be considered racist depending on location makes no sense to me.

This is what I said. Absolutely nothing to do with what I think. But seems that it is difficult for you to get. If it is from an area that people as in the logo were used as slaves to harvest the crops contained in it, then of course it could be considered racist to them. Capiche.

26-09-2020 5:46pm

joeguevara wrote: »

This is what I said. Absolutely nothing to do with what I think. But seems that it is difficult for you to get. If it is from an area that people as in the logo were used as slaves to harvest the crops contained in it, then of course it could be considered racist to them. Capiche.

It's not that it's difficult for me to get.. It's that I don't follow the logic. 2020 and the current climate doesn't add validity to these arguments that x, y, and z, are racist because some people might consider them racist.

Outlaw Pete · 26-09-2020 6:01pm

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

I'm just wondering what the next 'woke-ism' will be...

I've some Punch shoe polish with Negro on it.

Only a matter of time before someone says that black people were once made shine shoes and so has to be cancelled.

Odds are 99.99% it'll be some woke white middle class spoilt brat that takes offence at it though.

joeguevara · 26-09-2020 8:06pm

Deleted User wrote: »

It's not that it's difficult for me to get.. It's that I don't follow the logic. 2020 and the current climate doesn't add validity to these arguments that x, y, and z, are racist because some people might consider them racist.

For what it’s worth I don’t consider it racist.

Quantum Erasure · 26-09-2020 9:13pm

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

I've some Punch shoe polish with Negro on it.

Only a matter of time before someone says that black people were once made shine shoes and so has to be cancelled.

Odds are 99.99% it'll be some woke white middle class spoilt brat that takes offence at it though.

Crayola are holding out, for now...

https://twitter.com/Crayola/status/1266464416058560512

joeguevara · 26-09-2020 9:44pm

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

Crayola are holding out, for now...

https://twitter.com/Crayola/status/1266464416058560512

Crayola have history with this. They removed their flesh coloured crayon which was a peach colour due to the fact that there is different colour flesh. This was in 1962, so it’s not a modern thing.

Indian red was removed too. Well name change. Was a pigment from a tree but became synonymous with American Indians.

So, before people get angry that this is all new, this sort of thing has been going on for decades.

ProfessorPlum · 26-09-2020 9:57pm

joeguevara wrote: »

Crayola have history with this. They removed their flesh coloured crayon which was a peach colour due to the fact that there is different colour flesh. This was in 1962, so it’s not a modern thing.

Indian red was removed too. Well name change. Was a pigment from a tree but became synonymous with American Indians.

So, before people get angry that this is all new, this sort of thing has been going on for decades.

Hardly the same as removing the colour /name of the colour black though. Applying the word ‘black’ to a colour that is black isn’t racist. Not in any language.
The idea that anyone would petition Crayola to remove ‘black’ is ridiculous and should make people laugh at the gob****ery of it, and the person demanding it, not make them angry tbh.

joeguevara · 26-09-2020 11:10pm

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

Hardly the same as removing the colour /name of the colour black though. Applying the word ‘black’ to a colour that is black isn’t racist. Not in any language.
The idea that anyone would petition Crayola to remove ‘black’ is ridiculous and should make people laugh at the gob****ery of it, and the person demanding it, not make them angry tbh.

It is ridiculous. Pure lack of education and not knowing that Spanish word for black is negro. I don’t think it is the English word. But stupid people stupid acts.

Quantum Erasure · 27-09-2020 2:51am

joeguevara wrote: »

As a kid I always wondered why a black guy and not a Chinese guy was on the box. ...

Bit racist, no? :pac:

joeguevara · 27-09-2020 4:18am

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

Bit racist, no? :pac:

Yes I deserved the cat o nine tails.

Hamsterchops · 27-09-2020 11:00am

joeguevara wrote: »

It is ridiculous. Pure lack of education and not knowing that Spanish word for black is negro. I don’t think it is the English word. But stupid people stupid acts.

So what do the Spaniards call black people?

joeguevara · 29-09-2020 12:56am

Hamsterchops wrote: »

So what do the Spaniards call black people?

I was saying that it was stupid to try and say negro was an offensive word as it is black in Spanish. Not sure why you are asking me this question

Achebe · 29-09-2020 6:24pm

Hamsterchops wrote: »

So what do the Spaniards call black people?

Negros.

CtevenSrowder · 29-09-2020 6:30pm

Achebe wrote: »

Negros.

This just goes to show that all Spanish speakers are racists.

Hamsterchops · 29-09-2020 6:39pm

joeguevara wrote: »

I was saying that it was stupid to try and say negro was an offensive word as it is black in Spanish. Not sure why you are asking me this question

It was s rhetorical question really, like I know negro is the Spanish word for black, but it just seems so last century to be talking about black people as negros. Maybe black people don't mind being called negros by Spaniards, I don't know.

I'm a Caucasian which presumably means I'm white, sorry L'Oréal

joeguevara · 30-09-2020 9:36am

Hamsterchops wrote: »

It was s rhetorical question really, like I know negro is the Spanish word for black, but it just seems so last century to be talking about black people as negros. Maybe black people don't mind being called negros by Spaniards, I don't know.

I'm a Caucasian which presumably means I'm white, sorry L'Oréal

Its just the colour black. Used for black jeans, black paint. Nothing to do with the English word negro.

30-09-2020 9:40am

Hamsterchops wrote: »

It was s rhetorical question really, like I know negro is the Spanish word for black, but it just seems so last century to be talking about black people as negros. Maybe black people don't mind being called negros by Spaniards, I don't know.

I'm a Caucasian which presumably means I'm white, sorry L'Oréal

Context. They're not using the word negro in reference to black people. They're using the word negro to mean the color black. A black car. A black cat.

This is just like the outcry over the professor using the Chinese word, which sounded like nigga. Context.

L’Oreal to remove the word “white” and “whitening from product labels.

Comments