EPTOn June 02 2011 06:14 j2choe wrote:
If this case settles out of court I will eat my shoe.
If this case settles out of court I will eat my shoe.
If this goes to court I guess the justice system sees chocolate candy as black people too. Nobody wins.
Naomi Cambell threatens sue over "racist" advert - Page 18
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Baarn
United States2702 Posts
If this goes to court I guess the justice system sees chocolate candy as black people too. Nobody wins. | ||
|
chickenhawk
Portugal339 Posts
As I've said before, it's not about what should or shouldn't be said. Its not about censorship. It's about awareness. Just because the Godiva ad was racist does not mean it should be burned at the stake. Its about being honest. Black chocolate with a fat white woman would most likely upset women with eating disorders/body issues. Mostly because of the fat white woman and less so because of the chocolate--it could be any food product. Stop trying to make the world's hardships into logic puzzles to solve. A lot of people in the world are bothered/hurt/etc... by many things we deem normal and "common." Those people whether triggered by race, gender, violence, etc... should not be kicked to the curb just because "that's too many things to keep track of." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ What's important about Naomi's case is that she be listened to. That's it. Whether Canterbury should "win" or not is none of our concern, that's their business and it is private. It will set a precedence that will affect all related cases after it for both the better and the worse. Women and chocolates have been juxtaposed together as a singular entity for the past decade, always sexual always objectified. Not just in this ad but in a lot of other ads. It's not a surprise that someone finally stood up and said asked them to stop it. Would it have been better if it was someone who didn't use to beat the help? Yes. Would it have been better if she got upset at a worse ad than this, yes. But you don't cherry pick emotions and the last straw is the last straw no matter how silly or trivial that straw looks. People who keep wanting to figure out what specific thing that cadbury is doing wrong do not understand the reason why a minority finally stands up and complains about something. That is why I keep saying over and over again that the rightness and wrongness of both parties means nothing. That the only thing that is important is the discourse. You have the heart in the right place, but I do not think like you. I think that a small amount of racism should be allowed, or even sexism. If some one get s a bit hurt, well thats life, there is no need to go to court over adds like this. We are all different, and a good way to accept that is for us to be allowed to play with that. I find it to be much more offensive to have legal amounts of women in some Europeans parliaments for example, the law should be for both genders. | ||
|
Cel.erity
United States4890 Posts
| ||
|
stokes17
United States1411 Posts
| ||
|
j2choe
Canada243 Posts
On June 02 2011 06:57 MozzarellaL wrote: I'm confused as to how a trial court ruling or outcome sets precedent. Basically, if the court rules in favour of Campbell and awards damages (i.e. money), then the underlying rationale is, generally, that any racial interpretation that can be gleaned from an advertisement, no matter how abstract, is valid. This rationale will HAVE to be adopted in any future case with similar facts, essentially throwing the door open for anybody with a possible racial interpretation of an advertisement to get damages in a similar fashion. This is contrasted with the "precedent" mentioned before that advertising companies will be constrained severely in what types of advertisements they can produce. This is not a legal precedent at all; it's merely a commercial reaction to the legal precedent I outlined above. | ||
|
Cr4zyH0r5e
Peru1308 Posts
She has the burden of proof here, and needs to show that the chocolate factory made that "racist implication" knowingly or with intentional disregard. In other words, I'll be VERY surprised if she gets anything out of this other than publicity and expressed moral support from the black community. Personally, I don't think she has a case at all. But whatever, she can sue anyone she wants. | ||
|
j2choe
Canada243 Posts
On June 02 2011 07:07 Cr4zyH0r5e wrote: She is a public figure, the advert was not intentionally racist. She has the burden of proof here, and needs to show that the chocolate factory made that "racist implication" knowingly or with intentional disregard. In other words, I'll be VERY surprised if she gets anything out of this other than publicity and expressed moral support from the black community. Personally, I don't think she has a case at all. But whatever, she can sue anyone she wants. Honestly, I think the black community would be embarrassed by Campbell's actions. She's obviously using racism as a vessel for expressing her own outrage over the fact that she was labeled a diva and the fact that her persona was used in a demeaning way. Interestingly, I think that if she were to frame her case in that manner, it would have a lot more merit from a legal standpoint. | ||
|
Yorke
England881 Posts
| ||
|
stokes17
United States1411 Posts
On June 02 2011 06:45 benjammin wrote: i might use this in my class. can you see the rhetorical flaws in this argument? No I can't >.< can you show me??  | ||
|
lorkac
United States2297 Posts
Once again, I apologize. | ||
|
ntvarify
United States331 Posts
| ||
|
j2choe
Canada243 Posts
On June 02 2011 07:20 lorkac wrote: After skimming through my posts I've come to the conclusion that my passion for the topic has overrun my objectivity. I apologize for the intensity of my posts. It's hard to keep a level head when I talk about this topic--race issues are very personal to me and I let this thread get the best of me. Once again, I apologize. Wow...wtf. Serious? Who does that? Hats off to you, whoever you are, for having the guts to apologize here (where the debates just seem to roll on forever for the sake of personal pride). | ||
|
Elsid
Ireland318 Posts
On June 02 2011 07:20 lorkac wrote: After skimming through my posts I've come to the conclusion that my passion for the topic has overrun my objectivity. I apologize for the intensity of my posts. It's hard to keep a level head when I talk about this topic--race issues are very personal to me and I let this thread get the best of me. Once again, I apologize. That my friend is admirable <3 It is a topic that is close to many of our hearts. Racism being in my eyes vile and disgusting and i'm sure in the eyes of most others aswell. | ||
|
Pyo
United States738 Posts
EDIT: I take that back sort of. It isn't really right for me to dictate what others should or shouldn't be offended by. It's just a little weird for me to accept that being compared to something nearly universally held to be a good thing (chocolate) is a bad thing. If anything, she should be offended that she is being called a diva (which she unquestionably is) - bringing race into the issue is just ridiculous. | ||
|
BabyGiraldo
United States135 Posts
| ||
|
S.O.L.I.D.
United States792 Posts
| ||
|
furymonkey
New Zealand1587 Posts
On June 02 2011 07:40 Pyo wrote: Wait a sec, haven't people of all races been using the vanilla vs chocolate analogy to compare/contrast/describe/allude to white and black people? There isn't even anything derogatory about describing someone as chocolate (in comparison to racial slurs comparing black people to monkeys, for example). EDIT: I take that back sort of. It isn't really right for me to dictate what others should or shouldn't be offended by. It's just a little weird for me to accept that being compared to something nearly universally held to be a good thing (chocolate) is a bad thing. If anything, she should be offended that she is being called a diva (which she unquestionably is) - bringing race into the issue is just ridiculous. I disagree with the statement that monkey is used as racial slurs, if so, they should be proud to be called monkey! | ||
|
EndOfTime88
Austria259 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + Negerkuss ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/nVZVA.jpg) + Show Spoiler + Negerbrot ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/8goeE.jpg) | ||
|
Lennon
United Kingdom2275 Posts
| ||
|
j2choe
Canada243 Posts
Yea, I hate shit like this. Just come out and say what they are without being an elitist about it. Hopefully you say something useful aside from picking out purely technical flaws in logic. | ||
| ||
