Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

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

12357…12

Comments

  • #122
    joe40
    Registered Users Posts: 3,811 ✭✭✭joe40


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Whatever actor voices what character doesn't impact your life. It does impact theirs though.

    You agree that BLM protests shouldn't have happened.

    Plenty of people are against illegal immigration, yet it is Avery unpopular opinion to hold,especially on social media.

    I accept that people are allowed to deride other cultures, yet it is absolutely true that being openly critical of the Catholic church is absolutely accepted and sometimes applauded, whereas even minor criticism of Judaism could be enough to get you labelled anti-Semitic, openly criticising islam could get you labelled islamaphobic (or worse)

    Nothing I said was made up or me being outraged or a snowflake.

    Again been critical of Judaism is not anti-Semitic.
    In fact the is a long history in Ireland with people been extremely anti Israel. Irish Republicanism would have found common ground with the Palestinians.

    The Catholic Church is important because majority of Irish people are Catholic, maybe not practicing anymore but Catholic influence in Ireland is still widespread.

    Judaism or Islam (purely as religons) don't affect our lives as much so criticism, either good or bad, is less widespread.

    I just think a lot of the things that people attribute to PC culture, or PC gone mad are all over hyped.
    Social change had taken place maybe it is just that social norms have shifted, but there is no radical change in personal freedom.


  • #123
    joe40
    Registered Users Posts: 3,811 ✭✭✭joe40


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Only vampires can play vampires.

    Only FBI agents can play FBI agents.

    Only murderers can play murderers

    That ridiculous, if this type of nonsense continues the thread will be ruined.


  • #124
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭[Deleted User]


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    You didn't mock but you stated the questions they were asking was ridiculous? Well that's contradictory.

    You also say you explained how whitening cream is suggesting white skin is better in your post....

    Then you ask me to quote you to show that you suggested whitening is oppressive or shows superiority?

    If you keep speaking in contradictory circles, your point will get lost.

    I didn't mock the posters. I didn't even name them. I very clearly said their questions were ridiculous and off topic, which they were. I did not mock the poster. I did not call the poster ridiculous. There is nothing contradictory there.

    Yes calling a skin care product whitening suggests white skin is the ideal. Just like calling toothpaste whitening suggests white teeth are the ideal. Now I'm not arguing that white teeth aren't the ideal, of course they are - clean, white teeth free of staining and plaque is nice and healthy. But a skincare product called whitening suggests that's the aim when it's not or at least it shouldn't be because there is nothing wrong with dark skin.

    You said I "state that the word whitening somehow implies some sort of racial superiority and is oppressive"

    I did not state that.


  • #125
    TomTomTim
    Registered Users Posts: 2,835 ✭✭✭TomTomTim


    joe40 wrote: »
    I just think a lot of the things that people attribute to PC culture, or PC gone mad are all over hyped.
    Social change had taken place maybe it is just that social norms have shifted, but there is no radical change in personal freedom.


    I'd view issues surrounding speech as a great matter of personal freedom. Things haven't really changed in that regard though, we still live within repressive system that all but says you can only have certain opinions, much like Catholic Ireland. Anyone who is against said opinions is viewed as a modern day heretic. You'll deny that of course, but it doesn't make it any less true.

    “The man who lies to himself can be more easily offended than anyone else. You know it is sometimes very pleasant to take offense, isn't it? A man may know that nobody has insulted him, but that he has invented the insult for himself, has lied and exaggerated to make it picturesque, has caught at a word and made a mountain out of a molehill--he knows that himself, yet he will be the first to take offense, and will revel in his resentment till he feels great pleasure in it.”- ― Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov




  • #126
    joe40
    Registered Users Posts: 3,811 ✭✭✭joe40


    TomTomTim wrote: »
    I'd view issues surrounding speech as a great matter of personal freedom. Things haven't really changed in that regard though, we still live within repressive system that all but says you can only have certain opinions, much like Catholic Ireland. Anyone who is against said opinions is viewed as a modern day heretic. You'll deny that of course, but it doesn't make it any less true.
    Can you give me specific examples.

    In my everyday interactions with people I encounter a range of views, and people feel able to express these views.


  • Advertisement
  • #127
    joeguevara
    Registered Users Posts: 7,992 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    Deleted User wrote: »
    During the gay marriage referendum the Catholic church's stance on homosexuality was lambasted. Mostly, these very same people are remarkably quiet in comparison about the traditional and much harsher Islamic view on homosexuality.

    I'd also say the basis for people attributing the actions of Muslim terrorists to their religion is because the have a habit of screaming the name of their god while killing people. You can see why people may link them

    Were the Islamic churches in Ireland as vocal about same sex marriage as the Catholic Church is.

    People should have a phobia of militant imams who radicalise people rather than a fear of Islam itself. Similarly people should have a phobia of paedophile priests rather than a phobia Catholicism. Religion is a tough one i agree. And I must admit that i have noticed that people are scared to speak out against imams but have no problem throwing vitriol at the parish priest.

    I have a strange view on the treatment of the Australian Rugby player who posted that unless homosexuals repent they will burn in hell or something similar. As that is basically what is enshrined in canon law, I believe that unless you are going to make those teachings illegal, then someone who believes it shouldn’t be targeted.


  • #128
    joeguevara
    Registered Users Posts: 7,992 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    TomTomTim wrote: »
    I'd view issues surrounding speech as a great matter of personal freedom. Things haven't really changed in that regard though, we still live within repressive system that all but says you can only have certain opinions, much like Catholic Ireland. Anyone who is against said opinions is viewed as a modern day heretic. You'll deny that of course, but it doesn't make it any less true.

    Can I ask you what personal freedom of yours is currently restricted in Ireland? What opinions do you (or not to personalise it) Irish hold that they free to openly talk about or publish in any form of media?


  • #129
    Cupatae
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,915 ✭✭✭Cupatae


    god i hate companies like this that pander to these crowds... and give there stupid ideology credence... bet L'Oreal really care for the movement...:rolleyes::rolleyes:

    Such stupidity going after stuff like this... like really your offended by the word white on a make up bottle, whats next to go? whitening toothpaste? moronic SJW's..


  • #130
    mick087
    Registered Users Posts: 1,122 ✭✭✭mick087


    Ridiculous
    People Kneeling, progammes taken off air or being reviewed, products names now offensive satues being pulled down.

    And not one thing being done to change the injustices of wealth privallage nothing being done about education. health, housing equality.
    Who ever it is making this ridiculous decisions should spend a bit more time in the real world. They should spend less time worrying about over priced coffee and should they or should they not have a Muffin or croissant with it.
    If they was to look out there window and see the social injustices of the poorist then maybe just maybe we would see more equality.


  • #131
    joeguevara
    Registered Users Posts: 7,992 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    Cupatae wrote: »
    god i hate companies like this that pander to these crowds... and give there stupid ideology credence... bet L'Oreal really care for the movement...:rolleyes::rolleyes:

    Such stupidity going after stuff like this... like really your offended by the word white on a make up bottle, whats next to go? whitening toothpaste? moronic SJW's..

    Have you read L’Oréal’s report on Corporate responsibility? You assume that a large commercial corporate doesn’t care about equality, inclusion and improvement. By using terms such as pandering to crowds it belittles the good work that they do. I had a read of it and i was impressed. :

    They have reduced co2 emissions across all of their plants by 77% while increasing production by 33%. Do you think that doing that is pandering to climate activists? Do you believe that the only reason they did it was to gain Kudos with public climate activists?

    They are the only company in the world to have obtained,
    for the third year running, a triple ‘A’, the highest possible rating, from CDP, the independent, international benchmarking organisation. A List names the world's most pioneering companies leading on environmental transparency and performance.

    In the area of gender equality they have been classed as the most gender-equal company in Europe by Equileap, and are second globally, among more than
    3,000 businesses. Lastly, for the first time, they have achieved first place
    in the Covalence EthicalQuote ethical reputation index across all industries. This ranking covers the 581 largest listed companies in the world.

    They have also been listed as one of the only companies of the world to be named as pioneering the United Nations Global Compact principles for the last 20 years. These include human rights abuses and racial discrimination.

    So before you roll eyes, and question whether it’s ridiculous pandering or a defined principle in their corporate strategy which was published well before the BLM movement gained such publicity.


  • Advertisement
  • #132
    Ficheall
    Registered Users Posts: 9,018 ✭✭✭Ficheall


    joeguevara wrote: »
    The simpsons thing is being misinterpreted and misquoted. The character of Apu was retired because it is based on a racial stereotype. It was described by an Indian comedian as ‘a white man doing an impression of a white man doing a bad impression of his father’. To compare that to a woman voicing a child is clutching at straws.
    And what about Carl and Dr. Hibbert, or Cleveland in Family Guy?


  • #133
    Strumms
    Registered Users Posts: 24,764 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    Ficheall wrote: »
    So if an actor can't act as someone else, does that mean Nancy cartwright can't be voicing a ten(?) year old boy?
    And homer should be voiced by a fat, bald guy?
    And Marge should be voiced by a woman with extremely tall blue hair?

    This is the direction we are going in. The world is a pretty fûcked up sad place right now. A guy, who is a voice ‘actor’ is stepping down from playing a person (acting) of a different ethnicity and different culture to him.

    Soon you’ll have somebody in a band, say himself, his four collage mates, who on the cusp of making it big, get refused from entering a studio to record an album, due to the fact that there are 5 white faces in the band...

    They replace the drummer with a person of African ethnicity only to be told on tour that xx venue won’t accept their booking as there is ‘only’ one non white person, and hey, why is there nobody of Asian diaspora included ?


  • #134
    Cupatae
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,915 ✭✭✭Cupatae


    joeguevara wrote: »
    Have you read L’Oréal’s report on Corporate responsibility? You assume that a large commercial corporate doesn’t care about equality, inclusion and improvement. By using terms such as pandering to crowds it belittles the good work that they do. I had a read of it and i was impressed. :

    They have reduced co2 emissions across all of their plants by 77% while increasing production by 33%. Do you think that doing that is pandering to climate activists? Do you believe that the only reason they did it was to gain Kudos with public climate activists?

    They are the only company in the world to have obtained,
    for the third year running, a triple ‘A’, the highest possible rating, from CDP, the independent, international benchmarking organisation. A List names the world's most pioneering companies leading on environmental transparency and performance.

    In the area of gender equality they have been classed as the most gender-equal company in Europe by Equileap, and are second globally, among more than
    3,000 businesses. Lastly, for the first time, they have achieved first place
    in the Covalence EthicalQuote ethical reputation index across all industries. This ranking covers the 581 largest listed companies in the world.

    They have also been listed as one of the only companies of the world to be named as pioneering the United Nations Global Compact principles for the last 20 years. These include human rights abuses and racial discrimination.

    So before you roll eyes, and question whether it’s ridiculous pandering or a defined principle in their corporate strategy which was published well before the BLM movement gained such publicity.

    It is pandering removing the word white off something in this climate is pandering to the crowd, why didnt they do it before all this? because no one would have noticed! or was the idea of racism a sudden revelation for L'Oreal? (Never knew a make up bottle could be racist but such is the world we live in and anything is possible and anything can offend when the SJW are at the ready)

    But that aside what was achieved by removing this word? nothing it's pandering.

    Give the SJW a stick and they ll bang on about how great L'Oreal are for days free publicity

    There a business profit before all else dont be codding yourself.


  • #135
    joeguevara
    Registered Users Posts: 7,992 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    Ficheall wrote: »
    And what about Carl and Dr. Hibbert, or Cleveland in Family Guy?

    Well I gave my interpretation of the Apu character so maybe you give your opinion on these three.


  • #136
    Ficheall
    Registered Users Posts: 9,018 ✭✭✭Ficheall


    joeguevara wrote: »
    Well I gave my interpretation of the Apu character so maybe you give your opinion on these three.
    I think it's completely ridiculous. That was the point.


  • #137
    joeguevara
    Registered Users Posts: 7,992 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    Ficheall wrote: »
    I think it's completely ridiculous. That was the point.

    Whatever about those three characters, Apu was a poor portrayal and was similar to how Bernard Manning or Roy Chubby Brown depicted an Indian person. It probably is completely ridiculous but equally being offended at not allowing a white person to hurdy gurdy is equally as ridiculous.


  • #138
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,283 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    Dante7 wrote: »
    It's hardwired in us to find tanned skin attractive and healthier. It hides blemishes and pock marks that would otherwise be viewed as unhealthy and not good mating material.

    Its not though, ive heard that lie peddled by women to justify their unhealthy obsession with fake tan and sunbeds, theres nothing wrong with being white/paler , and this is a lesson we need to be teaching our young women, the tanning indistry is causing them harm


  • #139
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    joeguevara wrote: »
    One that caught me by surprise was when someone explained to me that the word half caste is an offensive term. Not in a million years would I have thought that. Apparently caste is a term for pure and half caste means half pure.

    But I do get a kick out of this,

    https://youtu.be/LDFTPtOHRnc

    I grew up saying half caste too. It wasn’t used pejoratively in my corner of Ireland. Then I moved to Dublin for college...


  • #140
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Because it won't stop with this single change. As long as nobody objects, those with these kinds of beliefs will have free rein to continue changing both what's acceptable in culture and in language.

    TBH I find it quite funny how the people who wish to downplay these kind of changes, fail to realise that most of us have seen how PC culture grew in the US. From small insignificant changes to becoming a response that allowed Trump to get into power. Such changes typically come in gradually, until there is a serious pushback of some sort...

    The Labour party in the UK is going the same way. They have glommed onto niche identity politics in the misguided hopes that that will be turn around their fortunes. In reality, they have alienated a lot of women voters because of the identity politics and their traditional working class voter base by treating them with utter contempt post-Brexit referendum.


  • #141
    SouthWesterly
    Registered Users Posts: 6,438 ✭✭✭SouthWesterly


    In all the black is good, white is bad debate there is one thing that society is forgetting as they pull down statues and want to compensate blacks for selling them.
    It's that blacks sold other tribes into slavery.


  • Advertisement
  • #142
    whisky_galore
    Registered Users Posts: 15,712 ✭✭✭✭whisky_galore


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Only vampires can play vampires.

    Only FBI agents can play FBI agents.

    Only murderers can play murderers

    If it puts an end to Mrs Brown's Boys I'm all for it.


  • #143
    joeguevara
    Registered Users Posts: 7,992 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    SouthWesterly wrote: »
    In all the black is good, white is bad debate there is one thing that society is forgetting as they pull down statues and want to compensate blacks for selling them.
    It's that blacks sold other tribes into slavery.

    And if there are statues of them displayed in a public place as a memorial to them, they should be rehomed and put in an area with some acknowledgment of their cruel deeds. Why are the actions of others relevant to statues of Collson, Rhodes, leopold et al. Do you disagree about reparations for descendants of slaves as a restorative justice concept?


  • #144
    Ficheall
    Registered Users Posts: 9,018 ✭✭✭Ficheall


    joeguevara wrote: »
    Whatever about those three characters
    Well, yes, those three being removed in response to the BLM movement is what I was referring to. There are no negative stereotypes portrayed by Carl or Dr Hibbert that I can think of. Don't really watch much Family Guy, so can't say on Cleveland.


  • #145
    Nozebleed
    Registered Users Posts: 1,727 ✭✭✭Nozebleed


    i assume they are goin to stop selling bronzer...fake tan etc..thats as racist as it gets. black face..all over!


  • #146
    SouthWesterly
    Registered Users Posts: 6,438 ✭✭✭SouthWesterly


    joeguevara wrote: »
    And if there are statues of them displayed in a public place as a memorial to them, they should be rehomed and put in an area with some acknowledgment of their cruel deeds. Why are the actions of others relevant to statues of Collson, Rhodes, leopold et al. Do you disagree about reparations for descendants of slaves as a restorative justice concept?

    Can we get reparations for the things the English, Normans and Vikings did to us?

    Leave the statues where they are and have a conversation about what these guys did. These things wouldn't have happened of course if there hadn't been a market among the general population to buy a workforce.

    Can the descendants of those Irish sold into "indentured service" have reparations as well?
    While I'm at it. I apologize for being white and being a descendant of an Irish landowner.

    As for the actions of a particular group. They were all at it. Don't see anyone calling for reparations from the African nations for their part in it.

    The whites wouldn't have had a source only for them.


  • #147
    LiquidZeb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,254 ✭✭✭LiquidZeb


    SouthWesterly wrote: »
    In all the black is good, white is bad debate there is one thing that society is forgetting as they pull down statues and want to compensate blacks for selling them.
    It's that blacks sold other tribes into slavery.

    And who was driving the demand for African slaves? Good old whitey raping and pillaging the world.


  • #148
    joe40
    Registered Users Posts: 3,811 ✭✭✭joe40


    SouthWesterly wrote: »
    Can we get reparations for the things the English, Normans and Vikings did to us?

    Leave the statues where they are and have a conversation about what these guys did. These things wouldn't have happened of course if there hadn't been a market among the general population to buy a workforce.

    Can the descendants of those Irish sold into "indentured service" have reparations as well?
    While I'm at it. I apologize for being white and being a descendant of an Irish landowner.

    As for the actions of a particular group. They were all at it. Don't see anyone calling for reparations from the African nations for their part in it.

    The whites wouldn't have had a source only for them.

    I don't think reparations would be workable, and no serious person is looking for an apology.

    I wouldn't want an apology from a British person about the famine, but I would like acknowledgement of Britain's involvement.
    Plenty of modern Brits think the Irish famine was purely due to lazy Irish farming practices.

    As for the statues I have zero issue with statues to slave traders been removed.

    The sole purpose of a statue is to celebrate an individual.

    Education can be achieved by museums, books etc. It is nonsense to suggest statues serve an educational purpose.


  • #149
    joeguevara
    Registered Users Posts: 7,992 ✭✭✭joeguevara


    Ficheall wrote: »
    Well, yes, those three being removed in response to the BLM movement is what I was referring to. There are no negative stereotypes portrayed by Carl or Dr Hibbert that I can think of. Don't really watch much Family Guy, so can't say on Cleveland.

    You are probably right. Dr Hibbert especially portrays a successful professional. It does smack of a business who has fallen from the public zeitgeist in dramatic fashion, trying to do something to curry favour in the current climate. Carl is also a very highly qualified person who holds a masters degree in nuclear physics (in a cartoon), so the character is not what is stereotypically seen.

    Apu is definitely on a different scale and this has been going on since 2015. They tried to make amends by Lisa calling it out but failed spectacularly.

    Cleveland I think is trying to breathe life back in to a stale character. The spin off failed miserably and he offers nothing to the show as it stands. I don’t think it’s anything to do with respect.


  • #150
    TomTomTim
    Registered Users Posts: 2,835 ✭✭✭TomTomTim


    LiquidZeb wrote: »
    Good old whitey raping and pillaging the world.

    You're the type of poster to scream about the mods letting conversations you don't like exist, yet you don't seem to see the amount of leeway posters like yourself get. I'd get a straight ban if I said that about any other group.

    “The man who lies to himself can be more easily offended than anyone else. You know it is sometimes very pleasant to take offense, isn't it? A man may know that nobody has insulted him, but that he has invented the insult for himself, has lied and exaggerated to make it picturesque, has caught at a word and made a mountain out of a molehill--he knows that himself, yet he will be the first to take offense, and will revel in his resentment till he feels great pleasure in it.”- ― Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov




  • Advertisement
  • #151
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭[Deleted User]


    LiquidZeb wrote: »
    And who was driving the demand for African slaves? Good old whitey raping and pillaging the world.

    Really? The Egyptian empire through a variety of dynasties? How about the Ottoman empire? Both had large involvement in the slave trade before whitey got involved in any major way... As did African tribes who sold their captives into slavery long before Whitey came along... what were those markets for? After all, many accounts by European explorers refer to slavery being established before the European powers or companies gained any serious foothold there.

    And I often wonder about Spanish people, would they be white? Considering they had the largest European empire that involved slavery.. but I guess it's just convenient to consider Spanish people as white while they're in Europe, but Hispanic when in the Americas.

    In fact, if you're willing to actually consider those nations who actively engaged in the use of slaves, European/White nations likely fall behind in how long the trade was acted, and the actual numbers of slaves enslaved. Instead, the focus is on Europeans (sorry, "Whitey") because of their trading/transportation of slaves Even though, slavery (as a business and institution) was essentially ended by Whitey.

    But, I know that this will be ignored, since we live in a world where historical facts are often inconvenient, and will be ignored in favor of maintaining a series of double standards, to enables minorities to feel entitled to their victim status.

    (especially since Black owners of slaves was a thing... who was driving it? who cares as long as you can pass the blame on to white people)


Advertisement