- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Sonic commercials very woke
Posted on 3/14/21 at 8:18 pm to Azkiger
Posted on 3/14/21 at 8:18 pm to Azkiger
quote:
I'm sure we're both ok with white people, but I can't imagine either of us would say that there wouldn't be a problem if the only people in media and in commercials were white.
Perhaps you really believe what you say, but I'd certainly have a problem with only white people being in media and commercials.
Dafuq? Different hypothetical entirely. You asked and I answered about interracial-ONLY content. Now you're talking about one-race exclusive advertising? I'd obviously have an issue with that, no matter which race was featured.
quote:
What would be the magical minimum threshold of representation in ads that must be met for the apparently fragile sensibilities of American society not to be upset?
Speaking of gotcha attempts
Applaud the effort. quote:
the woke crowd sees race.
Apparently, so does the anti-PC crowd. This thread and the MANY threads like it on this board are proof positive.
quote:
Having 50 years of precedent is hardly unprecedented, especially when we're speaking about current events (commercials/ads in the last 3ish years).
Show me more marked growth/incidences of interracial proliferation in our nation's history, then. And I see you tryna be slick and re-frame, btw
quote:
Because I think the population should roughly be represented in media.
1.) Why? Kind of a silly thing to get hung up over when you stop and think about it, really.
2.) We still don't even know if interracial relationships are being represented in line with total population percentage, or if people are overreacting to seeing them being portrayed, or a combination of the two. Not that the former would change my position one iota, for the record, but again, people are acting as if there's an overrepresentation which they themselves cannot be bothered to begin to quantify.
quote:
Show why it's irrelevant to our discussion first.
I've done this several times now. Fixed population percentage (relatively) versus steadily rising. Also, if you want to throw in another factor, immutable characteristic (sexual orientation) versus freedom of choice in mate. Apples to oranges comparison, like I said. Can't just throw both in the "intersectionality" bin and then try to make the scales balance in this particular discussion. Doesn't wash.
quote:
Alright, lets play this game. If it's short sighted at best, what is it at it's worst? Racism, right?
Huh? No. What are you even on about?
I'm addressing that it's not a good argument that you made. I can do that without starting down the road of accusing you of racism. I can assure you the thought never entered my mind. I don't roll that way. Thousands upon thousands of posts in my history to buttress that. Gonna have to try a different tack with me. quote:
Just because you can find a difference between the things I'm comparing doesn't mean they're not comparable within the context of the discussion I'm having.
I'm talking about intersectionality, and race is certainly part of that. End of story.
Not a cogent part, however. At least not cogent in the way you attempted to couch it RE: homosexuality and interracial relationships. It's a math equation that doesn't balance, as I've clearly and patiently demonstrated for you today.
quote:
Feel free to point out your counter argument then.
I have done so, mijo. Several times.
This post was edited on 3/14/21 at 8:41 pm
1
Posted on 3/14/21 at 8:26 pm to Azkiger
quote:
Again, you clearly don't understand, and aren't even attempting to understand, my point.
Oh, I understand, I just don't give a shite about your points. Despite what you might think, you're not an ally. Which we didn't ask for anyway. Any point that begins with "there are too many interracial couples on television" is a loser. Do you honestly think saying to mixed couples, "we should see less of people like you," is a winning argument? It's a non-starter on inter-personal and political levels. Anything you say after that about sjws, being woke, intersectionality, etc., etc., is irrelevant.
Posted on 3/14/21 at 8:50 pm to Saint Alfonzo
quote:
Do you honestly think saying to mixed couples, "we should see less of people like you," is a winning argument?
Bingo. That's really where the rubber meets the road. And here's the other thing that some fail to consider: biracial offspring. It's not just "oh mixed couples are so picky about wanting their kids to see interracial couples on TV." Honestly, I personally couldn't give less of a frick. It's all academic--I'm the consummate consumer at the end of the day, I'll just buy what I think are thr best products. But the market will care. And in a generation, the market will have a sizable clientele that are biracial themselves, grew up with lots of biracial friends, or idolized biracial pop culture icons (and did so on their own merits). Companies are getting out ahead of that now instead of getting Kodak'd. This shite ain't a fad
This post was edited on 3/14/21 at 8:58 pm
Posted on 3/14/21 at 9:57 pm to TbirdSpur2010
quote:
You asked and I answered about interracial-ONLY content.
I asked if media and commercials only allow interracial couples on air. In other words, no same race couples would ever be shown.
I'd have an issue with that.
quote:
Speaking of gotcha attempts Applaud the effort.
Amazing, you ask a question and it's not a gotcha attempt. I modify one word and apply it to you, and now all of a sudden it's a gotcha attempt.
I'm glad you see that it's a gotcha attempt now.
quote:
Apparently, so does the anti-PC crowd. This thread and the MANY threads like it on this board are proof positive.
Or, maybe, they see what the woke PC crowd is doing with race. Sorta hard to call them out on race without mentioning race (or some other demographic) wouldn't you say?
quote:
Show me more marked growth/incidences of interracial proliferation in our nation's history, then. And I see you tryna be slick and re-frame, btw
I've made my point, this precedent has been set for over 50 years. If you want to hang your hat on that with respect to what's happening over the last few years, go for it.
quote:
1.) Why? Kind of a silly thing to get hung up over when you stop and think about it, really.
If there's going to be some sort of metric used to determine representation in media (and the powers that be are pushing for crap like this), is there a better one than that? Honest question.
I'd love to live in a society where that's not even a thought, where worrying over things like that was seen as silly. But lets be honest, these sorts of conversations have only become more common over the last 3-5 years.
quote:
2.) We still don't even know if interracial relationships are being represented in line with total population percentage, or if people are overreacting to seeing them being portrayed, or a combination of the two. Not that the former would change my position one iota, for the record, but again, people are acting as if there's an overrepresentation which they themselves cannot be bothered to begin to quantify.
That's certainly an issue, and unless there's data out there I'm unaware of it's an assumption people are making. But, considering what I've already shown you earlier in this thread, it's not an outlandish one.
quote:
Apples to oranges comparison... Can't just throw both in the "intersectionality" bin and then try to make the scales balance in this particular discussion. Doesn't wash.
First, you can compare apples to oranges if you're discussing fruit. In order to highlight an improper comparison, you need to find it in the context of the comparison, not just differences you can name.
Maybe you missed it in the link ridden post I replied to you a few pages back, but GLAAD was not only concerned and setting goals for media to hit for LGBTQ demographics, but also LGBTQ people of color representation.
You can tell me I'm off base all you want, but I'm watching progressives admit to exactly what I'm cautioning people over.
If you want to argue progressives aren't having a massive influence over media, you can try and make that argument. You can even argue that even though that's what they're trying to do, there's no harm being done in this particular instance. But I'm spot on with my criticisms of intersectionality, and what's happening in our media/commercials.
Posted on 3/14/21 at 10:03 pm to Saint Alfonzo
quote:
Do you honestly think saying to mixed couples, "we should see less of people like you," is a winning argument?
Likewise, do you think telling same-raced couples "we should see less of people like you," is a winning argument?
I know you're not saying that, but doubt you know that neither am I...
Posted on 3/14/21 at 10:04 pm to FightinTiga
quote:Holy shite, you have solved the great Tater Tot Ad Debate of 2021.
13 % of the population commits 80 %of the crime
Who would have thought that crime statistics would have told us whether a Black man should be allowed to sit in the car of a White woman on a commercial for fast food?
Just brilliant. Hats off.
This post was edited on 3/14/21 at 10:15 pm
Posted on 3/14/21 at 10:23 pm to Azkiger
quote:
Likewise, do you think telling same-raced couples "we should see less of people like you," is a winning argument?
You're right, I've never said that. I couldn't care less what permutations are represented on television.
quote:
I know you're not saying that, but doubt you know that neither am I...
You probably aren't but it is at the heart of this entire thread. People think that interracial couples are over-represented in commercials, on tv, etc. But less of us isn't the "solution" to their problems. In America, there's only more of us coming. It's a demographic certainty that white people are having issues adjusting to. Black people, too, if you want to be truthful about it. Many of their objections to interracial couples are identical. It is what it is, it can't be reversed. People need to adjust their attitudes and act accordingly.
Posted on 3/14/21 at 11:22 pm to Saint Alfonzo
quote:
It's a demographic certainty that white people are having issues adjusting to.
I don’t think you meant all white people, but I wish people would be more precise with their language when they’re going to throw out accusations.
Posted on 3/14/21 at 11:36 pm to PiscesTiger
quote:
a black male with a ponytail is in the front passenger.
The woman was probably giving the black mayne a lift because his 1978 caddy was broke down on the side of the road.
Posted on 3/15/21 at 12:04 am to Flats
quote:
I don’t think you meant all white people, but I wish people would be more precise with their language when they’re going to throw out accusations.
Of course I didn't mean all white people, just like I didn't mean all black people when I said they have similar issues. We're discussing the people that do have a problem. Another truth is that, nowadays, the vast majority of people, white, black or otherwise, don't have any issues whatsoever with interracial relationships, nor do they obsess about the racial breakdown of people shilling products in commercials. It's weird to have a such a heightened sense of that. Ignore the commercial, go take a piss and grab a beer.
Posted on 3/15/21 at 5:51 am to PiscesTiger
Add Sonic to my boycott list except if anyone wants to meet out back.
Lol
Lol
Posted on 3/15/21 at 7:42 am to munchman
quote:
Add Sonic to my boycott list except if anyone wants to meet out back.
Do you only eat at places with all whites in the commercial?
Posted on 3/15/21 at 7:44 am to Esquire
quote:
Do you only eat at places with all whites in the commercial?
Or all blacks?
Posted on 3/15/21 at 9:43 am to Azkiger
quote:
I asked if media and commercials only allow interracial couples on air. In other words, no same race couples would ever be shown.
I'd have an issue with that.
Any sort of racially-exclusive content is problematic.
quote:
I'm glad you see that it's a gotcha attempt now.
Way to intentionally miss the point. It doesn't work because I'm not the one who's been clamoring for interracial representation in advertising. The posters itt have been. Hence my query. The "gotcha" is you trying to flip it as if it's a tit for tat, when that was never the case from jump street.
Again, valiant attempt, though. Good effort
quote:
I've made my point, this precedent has been set for over 50 years. If you want to hang your hat on that with respect to what's happening over the last few years, go for it.
You haven't made a point at all
My point was that we literally have never seen anything like this current phenomenon RE: interracial marriages/relationships in our nation's history. You cannot point to any earlier point that refutes this, and you know it. My point stands, glad you concede. Moving on. quote:
If there's going to be some sort of metric used to determine representation in media (and the powers that be are pushing for crap like this), is there a better one than that? Honest question.
Honest answer: I truly do not see why it matters as much as you and many posters itt are trying to make it seem RE: interracial representation in ads. Again, to me, this is all rather academic. I've never been one to say "there must be X amount of white people in ads, X amount of black people, X amount of Hispanics/Asians/etc., and we need to have gay and interracial relationships represented at these percentages." The marketplace may care, but I do not. But RE: interracial relationships in particular, why must there be a percentage at all? You've proffered your opinion that it should be in line with population percentage--why is that? Why does that even matter? If we both agree that IR relationships are no problem unto themselves, as they're materially no different than any other relationship (it's a superfluous difference in melanin, I mean, come on), then what are we really freaking policing here? I get that we're all concerned with intersectionality creep as a whole (and when it comes to things like Coke's "be less white" bullshite or Gillette's "toxic masculinity" nonsense, I'm right there with you, btw), but when it comes to THIS, I think I've shown the nuance.
quote:
That's certainly an issue, and unless there's data out there I'm unaware of it's an assumption people are making. But, considering what I've already shown you earlier in this thread, it's not an outlandish one.
Perhaps, but again, you did make a comparison between a relatively fixed population and a steadily growing one, as I showed, which renders many of your conclusions tepid, at best. EVERYTHING people are talking about RE: supposed "overrepresentation" of interracial couples right now is based basically upon their personal conjecture of what they think an advertising slate "should" look like. Which is highly subjective--just as subjective as any super woke person's opinion on the other side of the aisle, so we can't do anything with that, really. Hence my asking for something to work with. Data. Statistics. We know marriage rates are steadily rising, and have been for quite some time now. That also means biracial offspring are on the rise (personal case in point: my own kids are quite unremarkable in being mixed kids in this area--it's ridiculously commonplace in many parts of the country now). And we haven't even gotten into simple interracial boyfriend/girlfriend scenarios that DON'T necessarily end in marriage--those incidences also rise accordingly, and one would also expect an increase in marketing thereto.
So we're grappling with a two-pronged issue here, essentially: (1) the notion (of some) that there must be a "cap" on interracial relationship representation (or else...something bad happens to society, I guess--even though none of us have a problem with IR relationships? But I digress
); (2) the fact that IR relationships (marriage and dating/casual) + biracial population is experiencing an unprecedented boom and will only claim more and more of the market niche as time goes on. We can opine about progressive media influence (and that is a real problem), but what is also very real is that the landscape is changing for the forseeable future. That is neither good nor bad, it just is what it is. IN GENERAL, I think getting hung up on the racial composition of couples in ads is a silly thing to get hung up on, hence why it never mattered to me in years past whether most couples portrayed in media were same-race or not, and seeing more mixed-race now doesn't sway my buying habits in the slightest. For damn sure it doesn't sway my emotions--but I do understand why the phenomenon is occurring.
quote:
If you want to argue progressives aren't having a massive influence over media, you can try and make that argument.
I have not made that argument at all. Of course progressives have a vise grip on media. That's not even up for debate. That fact doesn't affect the points I've made one iota.
quote:
You can even argue that even though that's what they're trying to do, there's no harm being done in this particular instance.
Feel free to make a counterargument, if you so choose--because that's kind of where these kinds of threads have been hinting. That there's some sort of problem if interracial relationships are "overrepresented." Then those same people will turn around and say they "don't have a problem" with IR relationships. Like I said earlier, that's duplicitous. I personally do not care one way or another RE: ad representation--I'll buy the best product, and I'll save my criticisms for issues that are more warranted (like Coke saying "be less white"--THAT is wrong). Seeing more or fewer interracial couples? Absolutely not an issue at all. Only super woke or super anti-PC types are making it an issue, albeit using different arguments (you should see "Black Twitter" try to justify fewer interracial couples in ads--hilarious how those convos go
). quote:
I'm spot on with my criticisms of intersectionality, and what's happening in our media/commercials.
Intersectionality is happening, but you've attempted to paint with too broad a brush here, and it's undermined the points you're trying to make. Like I said, we agree on MANY of the larger points you've made RE: intersectionality in media, but regarding this SPECIFIC instance (interracial relationships in advertising), it's not an intellectually tenable tack to take, my friend
This post was edited on 3/15/21 at 10:34 am
Posted on 3/15/21 at 10:04 am to PiscesTiger
Sad that every commercial or TV show has to cater racial or LBGTQ issue.
Normalizing their pet social issues.
Normalizing their pet social issues.
Posted on 3/15/21 at 10:07 am to LSU7096
quote:
Sad that every commercial or TV show has to cater racial or LBGTQ issue.
Normalizing their pet social issues.
Based on this thread, it's clear we need more commercials on the dangers of white fragility.
Posted on 3/15/21 at 10:10 am to TbirdSpur2010
Damn, TBird, when did you get your teacher cert? Cause you're schooling fools in this thread.
Posted on 3/15/21 at 10:29 am to FightinTigersDammit
Sometimes it's nice to take a break from Twitter and get back to my long-form roots!
Hope you've been well, FTD!
Posted on 3/15/21 at 10:46 am to TbirdSpur2010
quote:
If we both agree that IR relationships are no problem unto themselves, as they're materially no different than any other relationship (it's a superfluous difference in melanin, I mean, come on), then what are we really freaking policing here?
The whole "we don't have a problem with you but there should be less of you on tv" thing is a headscratcher, for sure.
Posted on 3/15/21 at 10:59 am to Saint Alfonzo
quote:
The whole "we don't have a problem with you but there should be less of you on tv" thing is a headscratcher, for sure.
It's intellectually untenable. And I love the attempts to flip it into a gotcha
If all the IR couples disappeared from advertising tomorrow, I'd be like "huh, that's weird," and go buy milk and eggs like normal. I wouldn't be posting threads bitching about "WHY ARE THERE ONLY SAME-RACE COUPLES IN ADVERTISING?! I DEMAND COUPLES THAT LOOK LIKE MY HOUSEHOLD!" I truly, truly do not give that much of a shite. Others are affected on some deep emotional level by seeing IR couples in ads, and it's so odd--especially when they'll say they don't have a problem with it. Either you do or you don't--you really can't have it both ways. And if you do? Cool. This is America--I can deal with people who are bothered that I didn't end up with a black chick--no skin off my nose. My marriage is healthy, my kids are healthy, the sex is great, and we'll hit a decade of wedded bliss this summer. IDGAF 
Page 11 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News