Because they aren't vestigial reminders of Jim Crow? Turns out it's pretty easy for companies to have non-problematic mascots.

I thought it was clear, but I'll elaborate since my original writing wasn't clear enough for you to understand. I was projecting what a future Trolly might say if one day he woke up and notice there were no black corporate symbols any more. I mean, we need equal representation, right?


And there you go again with the "mascot" nonsense. I really wish people would stop misusing the word.

Most people would say yes, but I'm interested in hearing your perspective.

If the question you're putting is "How would Trolly feel if minorities were erased from society?" Well, that would upset me, as it would any sensible person.

I suspect it's a facetious question though. And what any of this has to do with antiquated pancake syrup mascots is beyond me.

It's not even the good stuff. Definitely worth it to pay up for real maple syrup. I'd hope this would be the one thing we can all agree on.

It's not even hard to find legit locally-made maple syrup in much of the US.

If local is like 8 states you're correct. Do you just make stuff up all the time?

Here's where maple syrup is made in the US, if you want to nit it up over whether this counts as "much of the US" or not, fine, knock yourself out.

I found 100% maple at an HEB in deep south tx. Definitely accessible

Feels like a push. A bit more than 8 states, not much of the geographic contiguous US but much of the US population.

No.

Dumb **** under the age of 30

The Clydesdale Bud ad seems more woke than the trans ad

Black guy hugging the dude at the beginning
a woman
A latino? woman hoisting the flag
Those guys on the porch could be a couple lol

I smell a conspiracy LB

How this marketing chick still has her job???

Apparently she's on a leave of absence.

https://nypost.com/2023/04/21/bud-li...ership-report/

So the coach that says the comments gets a slap on the wrist and the reporter that reported the comments gets fired ?

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/sports/nba...dd421d23&ei=26

It would be ironic if she got that job through white privilege. Given the fact that she utterly sucks at it the odds are decent.

Woke is, essentially, a new and expansive manners regime designed to obviate the effects of historical violence on various social statuses conferred by group membership where group membership is defined by immutable traits.

It's like the demand to say please and thank you except it encompasses things like not saying racist jokes at work and not wincing when two dudes kiss in public. You don't have to give the American Indian his land back but, by not turning them into Halloween costumes that will raise their potential to participate fairly in society, now, again, without the land. And when I said "give his land back" I was continuing the perception, originating in the physical strength of men over women and hence in violence, that men are the sex to own property. That's a no-no because it confers a lesser perceived status onto women which will then reify into the maintenance of this material inequity between men and women.

Woke is just an odd fixation/glorification of the psychological quirks related to the LGBTQ+IAATr2 movement.

It's undeniably weird, as are many of the most outspoken voices for the people who practice these things, and since these people make up maybe 1% of the overall population, that leaves a very very large majority from which to pull a voice of opposition.

The behaviors and beliefs are analogous to religion, but they've cultivated an image of oppression that leads people otherwise uninvested in their religion to aggressively campaign on their behalf. The reality is that most people don't really care, but we all know there are plenty of people who aren't good at just ignoring things, so it escalates, and escalates again, and suddenly you have people running for President on the platform of making the woke people go away.

Imagine if Target started putting out end cap displays celebrating people who hang their toilet paper roll with the tail at the rear instead of the front. People who do this are obviously weird, and aren't actually hurting anyone else, but if there was some major movement to demand that the rest of society accommodate their odd behavior by mandating that all public bathrooms transition to rear-hang rolls, you'd have a public outcry for sure. If those people made their toilet paper shenanigans into the strongest part of their personal identity and called front-hangers bigots and deplorables just for not agreeing with them, you'd end up in the same place we are today with the woke battle.

We kicked this into high gear with the latest trend of being aggressively trans and foisting these ideals on kids who have absolutely no concept of the consequences. Gender-bending isn't new, but no amount of screeching on twitter is going to normalize it in the eyes of a vast majority of other humans, and raising "theybies" is just straight up child abuse in many of these cases. This sets some people off, and as we mentioned earlier, there are a lot of people in the opposing camp so you're going to run into some outlier responses that gain traction.

Man, these guys really do only have 1-2 jokes, max.

Imagine if people who hang their toilet paper roll with the tail at the rear instead of the front were discriminated against constantly, subject to laws that they could only hang their toilet paper a certain way and that they weren't allowed to marry other people who hang their toilet paper the same way, then your analogy would make some sense. But because of course that doesn't happen, your analogy is complete and utter bullshit that appears to be attempting to make an important issue into a very unfunny joke.

I thought the analogy was simple and reasonable. Also, are you confusing gays with trans? Gays make up more than 1% but all the other letters are probably in the 1% or less pool. The government could just shake the term marriage and leave that for religious folks and shift to domestic partnership.

When a group advocates for the effective (or literal) castration of minors, it's going to ruffle feathers.

If his analogy was meant to solely focus on transgender people, and thus leads you to ignore the part in my post about laws and marriage, the analogy still remains complete and utter bullshit.

Do you have a better analogy for him to use?

Why do we need one?

How about 2-3? This way he can choose