-
“ghetto-fab parties are part of a broader reactionary movement that believes whiteness and the ivory tower are being imperiled by political correctness, radical professors and “minority rights.””
-
“A consumer group accused Unilever of hypocrisy…for running conflicting advertising campaigns — one for Dove that praises women and their natural beauty and one for Axe that the group said “blatantly objectifies and degrades” them.”
-
“University police were unable to decide whether the piece of rope found in the basement of Belk Residence Hall was a noose…They have been investigating since a student reported finding it in the basement of Belk Hall Sept. 19.”
-
Great post here. “When you hear vitriolic anti-immigrant sentiment coming from elected officials or minuteman-type vigilantes, we need to call this out as racism. Even though they’ll claim that their intents are not racist…”
-
“Jeff Yang catches up with renaissance girl Margaret Cho as she trades in standup for set of pasties and a cavalcade of scantily-clad studs and vixens in her new alt-burlesque traveling show, “The Sensuous Woman”"
-
“pictured a restaurant credit-card slip with a 7 percent tip and a signature for “Mark Goldfarb.” Underneath was written: “Attention all crappy tipping Jews!!! Just because you’re ’screwing’ the server … does not mean that it’s a mitzvah.”"
Carmen Van Kerckhove is co-founder and president of
drydock wrote:
Vicente “even blacks won’t do these jobs” Fox’s anti-racism is completely opportunistic and totally phony. But when you use a classblind analysis like the colorlines magazine article it’s hard to tell the difference an act of solidarity and some politician’s BS.
Posted 11 Oct 2007 at 5:58 am ¶
Roni wrote:
The inconclusive noose article is something I’ve wondered about*. News organizations have a tendency to publicize even tenuous connections of a controversial story to make a trend and keep people watching. Does that mean people are going to jump on every bit of knotted and looped rope laying about and report it as another noose? A noose is a pretty specific thing. Is the country having a sudden and awful trend of threatening nooses, or a trend of reporting anything that could keep the story going?
I think it’s relevant because of the way the media reports on things like women being attacked by strangers. It enhances this oppressive culture of fear and restricts movement, while ignoring and distracting from the reality that women are statistically in far more danger from intimates.
The outbreak of nooses is both alarming and depressing, but I wonder what it may be obscuring.
* I don’t have access to TV news, consequently my news via the internet is rather self-selecting. I am genuinely wondering how it’s being covered.
Posted 11 Oct 2007 at 9:11 am ¶
Wendi Muse wrote:
wow…i had no idea that unilever was over axe too…that’s disgusting…not to mention the skin bleaching products they sell in south and southeast asia…how ironic
Posted 11 Oct 2007 at 9:23 am ¶
Rob Schmidt wrote:
Racialicious has all the “noose” that’s fit to print!
Posted 11 Oct 2007 at 9:56 am ¶
Latoya Peterson wrote:
Wendi -
I’m hesistant to lump Dove & Axe in the same boat. Here’s why: it would not be unusual at a huge corporation like Unilever to have different divisions with different brand identities – and to never have those divisions communicate or intersect.
So, while the Dove brand may have a lot of women staffers, and they have been voting to take the brand in a different direction, whereas Axe may have a lot of male staffers who like the status quo in advertising. And the two camps may never meet.
I understand that it is hypocritical of Unilever to promote two radically different messages, but I think that is more due to brands being operated independently within the origanization.
Then again, I could be wrong…never worked there, so I don’t know.
Posted 11 Oct 2007 at 10:23 am ¶
Tish Jackson wrote:
I LOVE MARGARET CHO! LUV LUV LUV HER. Thanks! But I was wondering…how do Asian folks feel about what Jeff said at the end of the article…how he trashed her tv show. Should he have given it a good review just to show solidarity, because he knew her and knew she was a great comedian (though the show sucked?) I guess it’s all past now…As a Black woman, I admit I’d be tempted to give it a good review if it was a friend of mine, boss be damned. Wow, that’s bad, huh?
Posted 11 Oct 2007 at 2:50 pm ¶
Wendi Muse wrote:
that’s true…re: unilever
but if that is the case, that the two camps don’t communicate, they need to work on that. it’s bad business if they don’t. that means they don’t really care that much about degrading women or furthering self-hatred and colorism in women of color enough to get their messages straight.
and um, why is it that in order to market to men, they feel the need to degrade women? but in order to market to women, they don’t feel the need to degrade men? funny how that works…
Posted 11 Oct 2007 at 3:56 pm ¶
Angel H. wrote:
and um, why is it that in order to market to men, they feel the need to degrade women? but in order to market to women, they don’t feel the need to degrade men? funny how that works…
THANK YOU!!!!!
I’ve ben saying that for years! (And I’ve been boycotting Unilever for months now.)
Posted 11 Oct 2007 at 4:28 pm ¶
imdeep wrote:
Latoya, Wendi (and Tish too),
You’ve only seen the campaign in the US English language leg. Go to YouTube and compare with the European and South American campaigns.
I think you’d be heading down the wrong path to automatically assume a “think pink” mentality among the marketing folks involved. We don’t know if the Axe campaign lacked some female creatives, and Dove some male creatives in the process.
As grinding as the spots are by themselves, I have to admit the full online spot that tied to the recently ended contest was much better– very clever, funny, more satirical. Sexist as hell, but great multiculti genre hopping spoof.
As to how they could do such a thing– in America, you have to ask such a question?
Posted 11 Oct 2007 at 7:34 pm ¶
Jay wrote:
and um, why is it that in order to market to men, they feel the need to degrade women? but in order to market to women, they don’t feel the need to degrade men? funny how that works…
because they believe men are selfish boors that only buy a product if it productizes women. Or something.
(On the other hand, Axe commercials, at least the ones I’ve seen, only have white male protagonists. Wonder if that means something.)
Posted 11 Oct 2007 at 9:35 pm ¶