Innocent drinks

ThoseTwitter likes are unlikely to = sales for Innocent smoothies. There may be a few people who confirm their solidarity with a picture of the product but this Twitter storm will pass in a few days and be forgotten and won't translate to sales and money for Innocent.

Those of us who did buy the product and are pissed off might be won back - but because we are creatures of habit and might just pick it up again.

But I'm not sure - they've established themselves as a brand who calls their customers complaints as "nasty people" and have engaged in shoddy immature social media behaviour. I certainly don't want to pay their salaries via buying their products and I bought them regularly.

This from article about customer retention...

"Acquiring a new customer can cost five times more than retaining an existing customer. ... The success rate of selling to a customer you already have is 60-70%, while the success rate of selling to a new customer is 5-20%." They must know this and decided it is worth the punt.

It would help if occasionally someone who believes in this nonsense could defend it without being childish, rude and unable to do more than insult everyone

The absence of such a considered and engaged response does lead one to conclude that there is none.

Maybe... just maybe. Trans rights do not come at the cost of women's rights. oops

As ever, the total absence of any critical thinking...just keep repeating the mantras. Hey, it has worked so far!

We know we’ve got a lot of work to do and these five principles are just the start. We want to respect, support and look after people, especially the protected characteristics of race, disability, gender, LGBTQ+, mental health, religion, belief and age (or anything else that’s important to someone). This will always be the case whether they’re planning on working with us or just want to visit and pinch a smoothie from the fridge. That’s because we reckon it’s right to encourage everyone to be themselves and value the things that make them who they are. We promise to always support people in the best way possible and constantly learn, listen and change what we’re doing as we go

Just looking at their website and reading this. I have no issues with them championing diversity but I thought it was interesting that so many of those listed characteristics fly in the face of each other.

For example many religions have no tolerance for homosexuality. They were recently very derogatory to an elderly woman on account of her ‘beliefs’ so the age discrimination doesn’t hold true. There are no ‘protected characteristics of gender’ so let’s assume they got confused and meant sex. Well we know they are very happy to throw sex based rights under the bus if the trans lobby triggers a dog whistle, so again that’s also bullshit.

Nahhh hun - I've been using bathrooms for 3 decades just fine. trans people have been using them too. I go into a cubicle, do my business and leave.

The misogyny I experienced is from Men. not trans folk.

So many 'I's' in this post. So much privilege.

Rise Thank you for your reply. I am no real user of Twitter and my account is linked to what I do, so I fully understand not wanting to rock the boat.

I think Innocent are totally wrong on this btw. (I am a serial name changer, not a plopper)

The misogyny I experienced is from Men. not trans folk.

Aren't transfolk men too? Or is there only one variety as far as you're concerned?

What the point is, god knows, because it makes the person look either worryingly daft or mendacious.

It's really odd isn't it? As if there's an expectation that you won't question anything, you'll just unthinkingly accept the vapid doctrines stated as facts.

What the point is, god knows, because it makes the person look either worryingly daft or mendacious.

Nahhh hun - I've been using bathrooms for 3 decades just fine. trans people have been using them too. I go into a cubicle, do my business and leave.

The misogyny I experienced is from Men. not trans folk.

if you wanna keep spaces single-sex, I'll put it simply.

I'm not fucking showing my genitals to a toilet inspector. That is not empowering.

so once again oops xxx

Do you have to lack a certain amount of reading comprehension before you become a trans ally? Or is it just coincidental that not a single one seems to be able to grasp that not letting men (of the male variety) self ID their way into women's bathrooms (and changing rooms, and prisons and refuges and sports and scholarships and hospital wards and breastfeeding/PND groups and shortlists...) isn't the same as having a "genital inspection"?

Because women (and men, I'd hazard) are actually pretty damn good at ascertaining whether someone's male or female. Very occasionally, a male will pass sufficiently well so as to go unnoticed into a women's space with other women. In which case- congratulations, you've gotten away with it! And if you've just gone there to "do your business", and not made anyone else uncomfortable in the process, then there's no real harm done.

But when the guidelines regarding single sex spaces are basically "if you say you're a woman, go on in and bollocks to how anyone else feels about it", then not only can you not ascertain whether the person going in is the sort to abuse or harass people, but a woman who goes into a communal changing room (for example) and sees what is very obviously a man there cannot do anything about it. She cannot tell a manager or attendant that there's a man in the women's changing rooms because that man says he's a woman- and who is she to dispute that?

You really start to wonder if there's any civil, articulate grown up anywhere within this movement.

I think that's how most of us ended up here.

Sure, absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence, but at some point Occam's Razor forces you to conclude that they can't just be conspiring to hide all their good arguments and evidence.

It's a brilliant song covered by Johnny Cash but it's not a Johnny Cash song as such. It's a Nine Inch Nails song.

Do facts matter? When are they factoids instead? Who knows these days.

I don’t think today’s that day.

It’s about as likely as Heinz suddenly re-tweeting Jane Clare Jones articles, or Muller sponsoring Fair Play For Women now that would be fun.

It would help if occasionally someone who believes in this nonsense could defend it without being childish, rude and unable to do more than insult everyone.

You really start to wonder if there's any civil, articulate grown up anywhere within this movement.

It’s amazing how we’ve gone from smoothies straight to toilets completely irrelevant to what’s happening here. What a weird attempted derail.

Anyway, back to Innocent, the actual topic at hand- when companies encourage pile ons on named individuals on social media over views on topics completely unconnected to their products and services does that encourage you to buy from them?

Still a no from me.

If I were not such a lazy knitter, I would send them a whole sack of knit dicks (thanks for the pattern link btw, might well come in useful). I've knitted wee little hats for them before. Never again.

I really think companies ought to train their social media staff on who their core market is. Whoever wrote that statement has clearly got down the baby-talk Innocent tone-of-voice while remaining tone deaf to who is actually spending money with them.

What a patronising, dismissive response from Innocent. A prime example of 'when somebody shows you who they are, believe them', alright.

Something going down well on Twitter means nothing in the real world, luckily the world is not quite as misogynistic as social media.

I've noticed the new TRA tactic when confronted with Karen White or some trans presenting person who has carried out an assault in a toilet is to say 'but those are men'. Would any of them care to share their magic diving rod that tells them they are men and not transwomen?
I'm guessing we won't be flooded with answers.

Johnny Cash fan Connie?
That's a great line.