EPTEuropean Politico-economics QA Mega-thread - Page 964
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. | ||
|
SK.Testie
Canada11084 Posts
| ||
|
Sent.
Poland9270 Posts
On October 13 2017 07:29 Simberto wrote: The big problem i have with this whole thing is that to dove, it might as well say "Better don't put people of colour in your ads". Because if all the people in the ad had been white, no one would have cared at all. They won't do that. For some (probably explainable) reason it's very important to keep your ads as diverse as possible if you're in a clothing or cosmetic business. Even in my extremely homogeneous country these companies keep using black models in their ads, so they're either all using imported ad material to cut costs, or there is some rational reason behind using models who don't look like the company's target audience. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On October 13 2017 07:07 sc-darkness wrote: Nope, it's my opinion and it's not loud. You need to go read more about freedom of speech. There's not more to discuss here with you whether you like it or not. I won't change my opinion because some of you feel the need to be funny.  I didn't tell you to change it. I simply pointed out that you are mirroring the behaviour you are critizising. Dove made an advertisment, some people used their freedom of speech to critizise it believing they have a moral high ground, you use your freedom of speech to critizise those people for their opinion because you believe you have the moral high ground. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9768 Posts
Marketing people do what they think looks good, end of. You can't really attribute characteristics such as 'SJW' to the marketing department of a soap company. | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
What a useless term. | ||
Nixer
2774 Posts
On October 13 2017 07:31 sc-darkness wrote: Freedom of speech isn't limited to an action against the government. It's also the right to express your opinion online. Anyway, enough with offtopic. I'm not going to write more comments about this issue because I don't think it's necessary.. No, that's not the case. Internet forums that are run privately (generally speaking) have no obligation to fulfill your free speech rights. Free speech generally addresses your rights not to be restricted by the government so it's a misconception to think that it applies to privately run businesses and spaces. With a few exceptions of course but this is not one of them. "This is our house" is an apt figure of speech, you get the idea. If you express your opinion don't assume you can't be called out for it. Because if you couldn't be, that would be against the spirit of a forum. | ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/527658-czech-election-guide-2017 | ||
|
Deleuze
United Kingdom2102 Posts
On October 13 2017 06:05 sc-darkness wrote: I understood you completely. I'm just saying order shouldn't be changed even if some crybaby is going to be upset. In my opinion, Dove didn't make a mistake. They definitely did make a mistake. Their intention with that advert was to present a range of women of different skin colors benefiting from their product. Their intention was to present themselves as inclusive and progressive. But because of their ignorance of their own history (or potentially their assumption that their market was ignorant of their history) and of the history of advertising more widely, they totally, totally screwed up, making their advert deliver exactly the opposite message. That's a textbook case study of a mistake in advertising. I don't believe that the Dove advertising executive team are a bunch of racists and that this was intended as an insidious piece of racist propaganda. But it's clear that they either are either ignorant of their own history or ignorant of their audience. Both of which are cardinal sins in the world of marketing. Portraying the people who called Dove out on this mistake as crybabies is ridiculous. They have every right to do this, and probably should. If you call them crybabies you're effectively blaming them for Dove's mistake. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12386 Posts
On October 13 2017 21:39 Dangermousecatdog wrote: What is this SJW business? Forgive me as I clearly don't delve into the same regions of the internet as you guys do, but it appears that "SJW" means "people who take actions I disagree with, which is not a useful description of anything at all. Typically it's "people who are more liberal than me socially and that I want to criticize for some reason" Depending on who's talking it can be more liberal than Clinton or more liberal than Sauron. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
 | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 13 2017 21:43 Dangermousecatdog wrote: Yeah, so still not a usual decription of anything at all. You have cracked the code. It doesn’t describe anything, so it can be anything. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12386 Posts
On October 13 2017 21:47 Plansix wrote: You have cracked the code. It doesn’t describe anything, so it can be anything. SJW functions pretty much like the right pretends that racism functions. If someone says something that you don't like and he's to your left, you can always dismiss him by calling him a SJW. The only difference is that they don't want to own racism, and we should be able to own social justice. It makes sense that someone's reaction to being called a racist is negative based on the image that the right wants to project. Someone's reaction to being called a SJW should be... Yeah. Why not. We get to own that term if we want, and I, at least, think we should. | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
The use of Sjw and femnazi are signs of people feeling threatened for no apparent reason and who want to lash out at usually liberal "others", defame them and devaluate their opinion without engaging at all. Much akin to how Nazis react to being called Nazi with the difference that according to my reception of reality they are rightly so called and treated that way. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9270 Posts
The only difference is that they don't want to own racism, and we should be able to own social justice. It makes sense that someone's reaction to being called a racist is negative based on the image that the right wants to project. Someone's reaction to being called a SJW should be... Yeah. Why not. The other difference is that while nazis don't think they're racist by wanting the get rid of the minorities, sjws do think they're "just" by forcing their ideology on others. They call themselves "social justice warriors", "true communists" or even "liberals", but use bolshevik methods to get their way. But there are similarities too! Nazis and sjws are tiny groups, yet some people from center right and center left tend to call anyone further to the opposite side nazis/sjws when they run out of arguments. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
|
Sent.
Poland9270 Posts
| ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
| ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
| ||
