Could somebody please explain

turnoffsaysthestar said:
.
Ms Kimani complained about the bra for her skin tone carrying negative connotations, while more positive words were used for lighter colours.
Yet two months on from her initial complaint, the bra is still being sold in a "tobacco" colour on the Marks & Spencer website.
However, the retailer pledged to drop the name when approached by the Mirror and apologised for not acting sooner.

Ms Kimani told Mirror Online: "I saw it about two weeks after George Floyd's death and it was particularly raw to see at that time.
"Why not call it cocoa, caramel or chocolate - sweet dessert items? But they used tobacco. I was shocked when I saw it.
"It's hurtful to me and my friends. If a young girl who is already uncomfortable with the colour of her skin (sees it) she will be feeling even more alienated.
"Each week that website is showing that racism is another week a young girl may come across it and feel bad for the rest of her life.
"To see that 'tobacco' is for their skin tone will make them feel unwanted by society. Tobacco is referred to in society as bad, unhealthy, and highly likely to kill - ‘smoking kills’.
Click to expand...

If that's all quoted correctly it's one of the most stupid statements I have ever heard. Agree with SmallTown's post "Everyone is offended by everything it seems. Funnily enough it's always a fact. No matter what you say it can and almost certainly will offend someone else. " We live in a strange sometimes sad world.
 
Corcaigh_the_Cat said:
I often wonder why sellers have a picture of their goods then a description of the colour. You can see it, and the chances their are hundreds of varieties of the shade anyway.

Buy what is described as navy by a vendor and you will get items that are different shades.
Click to expand...

Few reasons


Vision impaired people & inconsistencies between colour temperature, lighting and display settings mean that a picture of an item often leads to expectations being mismanaged when an item

color temp and display settings make a huge difference and can make pure white seem off orange, blue, green, and evening if photo is perfect, the users monitor can be set up differently
 
Corcaigh_the_Cat said:
I often wonder why sellers have a picture of their goods then a description of the colour. You can see it, and the chances their are hundreds of varieties of the shade anyway.

Buy what is described as navy by a vendor and you will get items that are different shades.
Click to expand...
black-blue-white-gold-dress.jpg
 
KingOfTheTribes said:
I just wonder why a load of white men are offended by a young black woman complaining about something that made her feel upset. :unsure:
Click to expand...
Because, there is only so many times you can play the race card. "tobacco" has been a legitimate term for a colour of clothing for a long time at least as long as smog on the mars has had his suit! In this case it looks like someone crossing to be offended by something mundane, rather than something actually being offensive. We are in danger of losing our collective minds if, when someone want to change anything, all they have to do is claim it's racist and whatever it is gets stopped without any thought.
 
SmallTown said:
Because, there is only so many times you can play the race card. "tobacco" has been a legitimate term for a colour of clothing for a long time at least as long as smog on the mars has had his suit! In this case it looks like someone crossing to be offended by something mundane, rather than something actually being offensive. We are in danger of losing our collective minds if, when someone want to change anything, all they have to do is claim it's racist and whatever it is gets stopped without any thought.
Click to expand...

I'd guess if this was a white woman this wouldn't have got half the attention.
 
SmallTown said:
Because, there is only so many times you can play the race card. "tobacco" has been a legitimate term for a colour of clothing for a long time at least as long as smog on the mars has had his suit! In this case it looks like someone crossing to be offended by something mundane, rather than something actually being offensive. We are in danger of losing our collective minds if, when someone want to change anything, all they have to do is claim it's racist and whatever it is gets stopped without any thought.
Click to expand...

Is that a genuine danger here?

reading the article her issue isn’t that it’s called tobacco as such, it’s that the white skin tones are all sweet treat names and the dark skin tone is tobacco, which has a negative connotation. M&S have apologised and are renaming it, can anyone explain the hurt for any white people here that is going to make (white) people lose their minds? All that’s happened is a clothing range has been aligned across all skin tones, whereas previously there was a disparity. Yes tobacco is something that has been used in the past as a colour name, but so is caramel, cocoa, chocolate etc which would have fit the existing theme.
 
TheFair86 said:
Is that a genuine danger here?

reading the article her issue isn’t that it’s called tobacco as such, it’s that the white skin tones are all sweet treat names and the dark skin tone is tobacco, which has a negative connotation. M&S have apologised and are renaming it, can anyone explain the hurt for any white people here that is going to make (white) people lose their minds? All that’s happened is a clothing range has been aligned across all skin tones, whereas previously there was a disparity. Yes tobacco is something that has been used in the past as a colour name, but so is caramel, cocoa, chocolate etc which would have fit the existing theme.
Click to expand...
I feel it is a genuine danger, yes. You've seen how quickly companies have to react these days if one single person gives the merest suggestion that they are offended by what they believe is racist behaviour. There's no rationale though behind it now, no one going: "hang on, IS this racist, or is it just one person with a false interpretation?"
 
SmallTown said:
Because, there is only so many times you can play the race card. "tobacco" has been a legitimate term for a colour of clothing for a long time at least as long as smog on the mars has had his suit! In this case it looks like someone crossing to be offended by something mundane, rather than something actually being offensive. We are in danger of losing our collective minds if, when someone want to change anything, all they have to do is claim it's racist and whatever it is gets stopped without any thought.
Click to expand...
But the point is, people are allowed to complain about stuff, if they want, if they have the energy, and they feel its worth doing. You don't have to agree or respond with the same level of emotion. Everyone is allowed a voice, no matter how whacky it is in your view, its nothing to get upset about.

Of course you can get upset if you want, but you don't have to, just like they don't have to.
 
SmallTown said:
You've seen how quickly companies have to react these days if one single person gives the merest suggestion that they are offended by what they believe is racist behaviour.
Click to expand...

They don't have to do anything, the police don't ask them to 'react'. They simply make a decision as to what will be the most profitable route forward for them, after the complaint. It really is that simple.
 
SmallTown said:
I feel it is a genuine danger, yes. You've seen how quickly companies have to react these days if one single person gives the merest suggestion that they are offended by what they believe is racist behaviour. There's no rationale though behind it now, no one going: "hang on, IS this racist, or is it just one person with a false interpretation?"
Click to expand...

But what is the harm? even if she was the only person that was offended? Does it degrade white people's lives by bringing dark skin tones in line with the naming convention used for white skin tones to call them by deserts instead of a cancerous product associated with being dirty and smelly? If M&S didnt agree they could have just said so or ignored it. They chose to act, probably because you cant really justify having it on one side and not the other.

Something can also be racist even if only one person is offended by it. In this case I doubt it was genuinely racist, but pretty poorly misjudged to have this misalignment naming convention in place, so its right to challenge and right to change it. Nothing dangerous has happened, people aren't losing their minds, life continues.
 
So,very soon we will have the 'outraged' complaining about the term 'dark' shall we when describing shades of colour. Flesh toned colour should be o.k then in the shop( I bet someone will complain though). But when buying on-line a colour chart will have to be used. It's like women complaining that certain shop sizes are too small etc . Load of fuss over nothing I say, but businesses know if they don't respond in the P.C way sales will be effected.
 
TheFair86 said:
But what is the harm? even if she was the only person that was offended? Does it degrade white people's lives by bringing dark skin tones in line with the naming convention used for white skin tones to call them by deserts instead of a cancerous product associated with being dirty and smelly? If M&S didnt agree they could have just said so or ignored it. They chose to act, probably because you cant really justify having it on one side and not the other.

Something can also be racist even if only one person is offended by it. In this case I doubt it was genuinely racist, but pretty poorly misjudged to have this misalignment naming convention in place, so its right to challenge and right to change it. Nothing dangerous has happened, people aren't losing their minds, life continues.
Click to expand...
Not true the other it. It's cost the company money to address the issue. This is the problem. If any company gets accused of racism, no matter how ludicrous the claim, the HAVE to be seen to be reacting. No thinking about it, nothing. The twitter army will want immediate reperations. Which could be costly for the company .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top