Old Navy Ad Features Interracial Couple: People Go Batshit - Polidicks

I didn't realize we were in 1950?

[QUOTE=TornadoAP;50256472]Let's be honest here: Old Navy did this because it knew that it would create a controversy. It's still an important issue, don't get me wrong, the prejudice against interracial couples is horrifying, but you know as well as I do that Old Navy has the kind of people who think of this thing in their advertising division.[/QUOTE] Uhh, for most people there's nothing controversial about interracial marriage. The fact that people are still being bigoted about this is ridiculous but I highly doubt the average person cares.

[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;50256420]This is strange to me because we've been having white woman/black man interracial couples in all sorts of ads for the past couple years, but now they're doing white man/black woman everyone's freaking out?[/QUOTE] tbh i'm surprised that there isnt backlash about white women/black men ads considering how /pol/ and the alt right is obsessed with calling people cucks.

[QUOTE=TornadoAP;50256472]Let's be honest here: Old Navy did this because it knew that it would create a controversy. It's still an important issue, don't get me wrong, the prejudice against interracial couples is horrifying, but you know as well as I do that Old Navy has the kind of people who think of this thing in their advertising division.[/QUOTE] No they didn't, they posted it because it's not the fucking 50s. It's like saying any ad that has a black person in it is doing it to cause controversy. It might have been a controversy 50 years ago, but not the only one who would even remotely find it controversial are racist idiots.

[QUOTE=proboardslol;50256367]What century is it???[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=simkas;50256514]I didn't realize we were in 1950?[/QUOTE] Is it really necessary to [I]literally[/I] bleat "It's [current year]?" History is filled with periods of profound social progress and social regression, it's quite simply the way of things. Two hundred years from now we could be having people mock us for our "degenerate" views on women and minorities just as smugly as we're judging the people of our past. [Current Year] doesn't mean shit, and it's quite dumb to act like it does. [editline]4th May 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Svinnik;50256561]tbh i'm surprised that there isnt backlash about white women/black men ads considering how /pol/ and the alt right is obsessed with calling people cucks.[/QUOTE] There's plenty of backlash, people normally don't hear it because the media tends not to report every instance of someone getting booty-bothered in their echo chamber on the internet. Hell, I'd argue the only reason this ad is getting notable backlash is because it's portraying an interracial relationship we're not used to; everyone's used to seeing the pretty blonde woman drool at the sight of a tough black man, but the black woman falling for a white guy isn't something often shown.

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;50255400]Trump voters.[/QUOTE] SJWs will call her a "race traitor" for marrying a white man too.

[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;50256566]Is it really necessary to [I]literally[/I] bleat "It's [current year]?" History is filled with periods of profound social progress and social regression, it's quite simply the way of things. Two hundred years from now we could be having people mock us for our "degenerate" views on women and minorities just as smugly as we're judging the people of our past. [Current Year] doesn't mean shit, and it's quite dumb to act like it does. [editline]4th May 2016[/editline] There's plenty of backlash, people normally don't hear it because the media tends not to report every instance of someone getting booty-bothered in their echo chamber on the internet. Hell, I'd argue the only reason this ad is getting notable backlash is because it's portraying an interracial relationship we're not used to; everyone's used to seeing the pretty blonde woman drool at the sight of a tough black man, but the black woman falling for a white guy isn't something often shown.[/QUOTE] Right but this is something we solved in a supreme court case almost 50 years ago. This is not something we should be hearing about in this day and age. Like, it's surprising to me that EVERY ad doesn't have interracial couples in it, given how common they are. My girlfriend and I like to play a game at the mall counting all the interracial couples, and sometimes we forget that WE'RE an interracial couple. It's just so fucking commonplace and part of everyday reality that it boggles my mind for ANYONE to actually be offended by an interracial couple. Like, I've literally NEVER dated a white girl. All my girlfriends have been a different race than me, and I often forget this fact because it's just so commonplace for interracial couples to exist today. The only argument I [I]can[/I] give is [B]it's 2016, what the fuck?[/B]

I honestly feel like these *controversy* "REMOV" "NO U" *RATURUOUS APPLAUSE* marketing things are planned / the companies pay people to have these reactions / they fish for specific people making the reaction so that when they're ~so bold and upstanding~ they get tons of positive coverage

Like, what if you saw an article about the catholic church getting in trouble for selling indulgences. You'd say "What the fuck, is it 1517??" because that's a thing that just seems so foreign and incompatible with the modern day. Like you jumped into a time machine to a less enlightened time period when they didn't have basic necessities like soap or TV

[QUOTE=proboardslol;50256640]Like, what if you saw an article about the catholic church getting in trouble for selling indulgences. You'd say "What the fuck, is it 1517??" because that's a thing that just seems so foreign and incompatible with the modern day. Like you jumped into a time machine to a less enlightened time period when they didn't have basic necessities like soap or TV[/QUOTE] The thing is that racism isnt something that can go away like indulgences, it's present throughout history.

[QUOTE=proboardslol;50256622]Right but this is something we solved in a supreme court case almost 50 years ago. This is not something we should be hearing about in this day and age. Like, it's surprising to me that EVERY ad doesn't have interracial couples in it, given how common they are. My girlfriend and I like to play a game at the mall counting all the interracial couples, and sometimes we forget that WE'RE an interracial couple. It's just so fucking commonplace and part of everyday reality that it boggles my mind for ANYONE to actually be offended by an interracial couple. Like, I've literally NEVER dated a white girl. All my girlfriends have been a different race than me, and I often forget this fact because it's just so commonplace for interracial couples to exist today. The only argument I [I]can[/I] give is [B]it's 2016, what the fuck?[/B][/QUOTE] So you're basing your own personal experiences with interracial couples and calling them "common" when they're still what, 8.4% of all marriages? That's a pretty small minority bro. And see, you're still doing the "what the fuck, it's [Current Year]" when the year shouldn't (and doesn't) mean jack shit. [QUOTE=proboardslol;50256640]Like, what if you saw an article about the catholic church getting in trouble for selling indulgences. You'd say "What the fuck, is it 1517??" because that's a thing that just seems so foreign and incompatible with the modern day. [B]Like you jumped into a time machine to a less enlightened time period when they didn't have basic necessities like soap or TV[/B][/QUOTE] This reads like your typical 19th century Victorian during the Scramble for Africa harrumphing about the "less enlightened" peoples of the lands they conquered, the ones that didn't have basic necessities like soap or steam power. Bruh, expand your mind and try to connect with the mindsets of people back then, it'll do wonders for improving your very narrow view of history.

[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;50256690]So you're basing your own personal experiences with interracial couples and calling them "common" when they're still what, 8.4% of all marriages? That's a pretty small minority bro. And see, you're still doing the "what the fuck, it's [Current Year]" when the year shouldn't (and doesn't) mean jack shit.[/QUOTE] But the year does mean jack shit? It means a lot, you wouldn't think it's okay if someone had black slaves because that problem was solved ages ago and would never happen nowadays. The time period makes all the difference, things that were okay 50 years ago are pretty fucking far from being okay now.

[QUOTE=Steel & Iron;50255496]Huh, must be a slow news day.[/QUOTE] That's close actually. [quote] bunch of bda posts [/quote] You guys realize you're being trolled to hell and back, right? I've seen 4 interracial ads in the last two hours just on AMC alone ranging from valspar paints absurdly attractive power couple to the one where where Jordan Peele and Chelsea Peretti laugh like literal hyenas on a beach for 20 seconds and nary a peep from "all these people" (the latter with two million youtube views and a slot on Walking Dead (9 million nielsen hits) no less. You got zeke'd.

[QUOTE=greasemunky;50256524]Uhh, for most people there's nothing controversial about interracial marriage. The fact that people are still being bigoted about this is ridiculous but I highly doubt the average person cares.[/QUOTE] Yeah, I feel like the average person is just going to say "oh look, two people in an Old Navy ad" and not comment at all. If they do comment it'll be something more like "can't wait to get a new outfit!!" rather than "hey, they're an interracial couple! cool" because it's a non-issue. So really the only race-related comments you get are the /pol/acks complaining about "racemixing" and "cucks" and "diversity is a codeword for white genocide" shit, and [I]only then[/I] do you get people speaking up and saying "don't be ridiculous, people are people". It's that stupid Cheerios ad reaction all over again.

Anyone legitimately outraged that this happened fell for the bait The people who say these things are literally doing so to make people upset and start an argument, and everyone fell for it hook line and sinker

tbh you'd think people would have bitched if it was a gay couple but apparently people still live in the 1940's [editline]4th May 2016[/editline] I hope they make a new add with an interracial gay couple

Why is this an issue? Haven't clothing companies already been doing this kind of thing?

[QUOTE]@OldNavy Absolutely disgusting. What's next? Gender neutral bathrooms? Pedophilia acceptance propaganda?! Never shopping here again. — M (@GonnaMAGA) April 30, 2016[/QUOTE] Jesus, how fucking out of touch from reality can someone possibly be? lmao if this person actually believes this then I think they may have been frozen in ice in an some abandoned barn since black people were considered slaves

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;50255400]Trump voters.[/QUOTE] This sort of stereotyping makes you just as ignorant as those that are being racist. Holy shit the hypocrisy.

Is it just me or do the tweets in the article seem like ironic jokes as opposed to real outrage?

[QUOTE=sgman91;50256849]Is it just me or do the tweets in the article seem like ironic jokes?[/QUOTE] Many of them probably are but at the same time poes law. There are people who ACTUALLY believe this.

[QUOTE=J!NX;50256860]Many of them probably are but at the same time poes law. There are people who ACTUALLY believe this.[/QUOTE] Oh, I'm sure there are, but that applies to literally everything. It's not really something to mention or be worried about. The whole thing just seems like manufactured outrage so that people can feel good about themselves and how not-racist they are. Every article I look at has the same exact "outrage" response tweets that both strike me as people being ironic and/or trolling. I actually can't find a single other negative tweet.

[QUOTE=simkas;50256707]But the year does mean jack shit? It means a lot, you wouldn't think it's okay if someone had black slaves because that problem was solved ages ago and would never happen nowadays. The time period makes all the difference, things that were okay 50 years ago are pretty fucking far from being okay now.[/QUOTE] saying "it's 2016" is only self-serving. it doesn't change anyone's mind about anything. social progress isn't made by advancing the years, it is made by actually doing things to advance it. if someone hates interracial couples in 2016, reminding them that people hated interracial couples last century isn't going to make them think "hmm my ideals are outdated and oppressive", they'll probably think something like "and look how fucking shit is today compared to then!". the only people who actually get anything from "it's 2016" are people who already agree with it. it is an attempt at social shaming that is essentially masturbating your sense of righteousness without doing anything to actually confront and address [i]why[/i] these people think the way they do in this day and age.

[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;50256566]Is it really necessary to [I]literally[/I] bleat "It's [current year]?" History is filled with periods of profound social progress and social regression, it's quite simply the way of things. Two hundred years from now we could be having people mock us for our "degenerate" views on women and minorities just as smugly as we're judging the people of our past. [Current Year] doesn't mean shit, and it's quite dumb to act like it does.[/QUOTE] Social regression doesn't happen this intensely that we lose our right to compare unaccepted behavior in modern times with accepted behavior from a more primitive society. Saying this kind of backlash would've been typical for the 50s is not only understandable but also fully correct.

This is that Cheerios ad all over again. People getting worked over nothing.

Nothing to worry about here guys, just polluting the gene pool, that's all!

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;50255400]Trump voters.[/QUOTE] Yeah because every Trump supporter is a blatant racist.

[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;50256877]saying "it's 2016" is only self-serving. it doesn't change anyone's mind about anything. social progress isn't made by advancing the years, it is made by actually doing things to advance it. if someone hates interracial couples in 2016, reminding them that people hated interracial couples last century isn't going to make them think "hmm my ideals are outdated and oppressive", they'll probably think something like "and look how fucking shit is today compared to then!". the only people who actually get anything from "it's 2016" are people who already agree with it. it is an attempt at social shaming that is essentially masturbating your sense of righteousness without doing anything to actually confront and address [i]why[/i] these people think the way they do in this day and age.[/QUOTE] Nobody who says "It's 2016" thinks that progress happens alone by numbers changing on your calendar. They just take it as self-evident that things are done that progress our society when time pasts, which isn't wrong. What you described was kind of redundant because yeah, it isn't the purpose of that phrase to change someone's mind. "It's 2016" is usually thrown at someone whose worldview is so outdated and already proven to be wrong that you don't want to waste your time to dignify their moronic opinion. Just take a minute and think about what kind of arguments someone who thinks people shouldn't be allowed to date outside of their race would have to justify their belief with. Evaluate those arguments. And if you didn't reach the conclusion that it is purely subjective and intrusive ignorance that has no right to dictate other people's lives then you did something wrong.

[QUOTE=RaptorJGW;50257370]Nobody who says "It's 2016" thinks that progress happens alone by numbers changing on your calendar. They just take it as self-evident that things are done that progress our society when time pasts, which isn't wrong.[/QUOTE] It is pretty wrong when looking at the history of human civilization. It's constantly going back and forth between barbarity and progress. The 20th century, for example, has lead to more human death than at any other point in human history. Thinking that human society is constantly progressing towards some theoretical ideal is a shortsighted view. Seemingly moral societies can fall to barbarism within just one or two generations.

[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;50256690]So you're basing your own personal experiences with interracial couples and calling them "common" when they're still what, 8.4% of all marriages? That's a pretty small minority bro. And see, you're still doing the "what the fuck, it's [Current Year]" when the year shouldn't (and doesn't) mean jack shit. This reads like your typical 19th century Victorian during the Scramble for Africa harrumphing about the "less enlightened" peoples of the lands they conquered, the ones that didn't have basic necessities like soap or steam power. Bruh, expand your mind and try to connect with the mindsets of people back then, it'll do wonders for improving your very narrow view of history.[/QUOTE] Right but in this case the less enlightened people ARE those Victorians with Victorian mindsets. I'm saying that interracial marriages shouldn't have any stigma attached, and I'm the one who needs to expand my mindset? No, racism is simply unacceptable today. It's just not an opinion that we ought to give any legitimacy to, or one that we ought to have given legitimacy to EVER. It's a simple fact of existence: nobody is better or worse than somebody else because of the color of their skin, and there's absolutely [B]nothing[/B] wrong with interracial couples. Anybody who thinks otherwise is simply an idiot. The mindset opposite to this is so dated, it would be absolutely [B]mind-boggling[/B] to meet one of these people in real life because I would have so many question for them, such as "Do you have internet", and "Do you buy your butter or do you have to church it yourself? [editline]4th May 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=sgman91;50257384]It is pretty wrong when looking at the history of human civilization. It's constantly going back and forth between barbarity and progress. The 20th century, for example, has lead to more human death than at any other point in human history. Thinking that human society is constantly progressing towards some theoretical ideal is a shortsighted view. Seemingly moral societies can fall to barbarism within just one or two generations.[/QUOTE] You might not think it, but you're preaching historical materialism from Karl Marx :v: