27 ms·
I'm not sure what you're referring to for Disney. Bud Light in particular hardly did anything in the first place, a microscopic marketing deal with one trans in
by zerocrates 3y ago
I'm not sure what you're referring to for Disney. Bud Light in particular hardly did anything in the first place, a microscopic marketing deal with one trans influencer, and they tossed Mulvaney overboard almost immediately, to no avail. Target was doing more or less the same Pride stuff they've been doing for a long time, though some widely-spread misinformation has muddied the waters there. I'm pretty sure I have a solid handle on who's responding to "manufactured outrage" in these situations.
- zmgsabst 3y ago[flagged]
- DoughnutHole 3y agoWhat specific merchandise of Target’s promoted violence? And please provide a source that said product was a major source of the outrage.
- zmgsabst 3y agoAmong their many items were those that included guillotines and skulls with messages promoting violence. Those were the ones that I saw in memes about the issue promoting a boycott; but Discord being what it is, I’m having trouble finding them now.
- DoughnutHole 3y agoA cursory google of “target guillotine” reveals a shirt that was never even sold at Target, but was a past creation of a designer that later designed some Target products. Devious “promotion of violence” on Target’s part. This strikes me as a meagre attempt to post-hoc justify the outrage after the viral story that triggered the initial moral panic (targeting “tuck-friendly” swimsuits at children) turned out to be completely fabricated. It’s outrage laundering - you have a story that could outrage a neutral observer but it’s predicated on bullshit. So in order to make keep the outrage alive its proponents need to fill the air with more bullshit that takes more time to debunk than it does to spew.