Munroe Bergdorf sacked by l'oreal

[Biddlyboo]

Has anyone seen this news story today? The irony that a mtt transgender goes off on one about race when the exact same thing can be said about men's privilege and society standing on the backs of women...
Sorry, just made me a bit
www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/41127404/loreal-sacks-first-transgender-model-munroe-bergdorf
Can't do clicky link!

But the fact is, you are already white. For a black woman, before competing with beauty you have to compete with skin colour and race before you can enter the general beauty contest. (I don't know if I am still making sense) colour dictating beauty before anything else for black women

Sorry - disagree here. If we take the elite of what is considered beautiful (the epitome of what men want to fuck) then there will be likely, out of a tiny number, more white skinned women than black skinned. However, black skinned (or derivations thereof) are still a fetish for men (black and white), so there will be black skinned women and there will be many both black and white skinned who do not make the grade.

The big issue remains that we call this shit for what it is rather than prop it up in any way - both because of sexism and racism.

Bergdorf, born male, with male privilege, is fucking over white and black women by participating in the industry.

A better response would be to call out the industry for what it is (rather than focus on white women meeting beauty standards more so than black).

The people who agreed from the beginning on this post knew what that post meant. When munroe tried to explain what it meant, most people on here said she should have said that in the first place. She is doing damage control. But the fact is she wasn't.

What a strange line of "argument".

So a speaker will say clear, specific things and if they don't suit the listener, the listener is free to invent something else and insist that it's what the speaker "meant" despite it being quite different and then everyone else should fall in to line with the censored, inflicted meaning and discuss it a though that was what was actually said?

This is a system of public discourse you have some time for?

Sounds uber Orwellian to me.

The use of the word violence to include incorrect use of words or misgendering or opposing transwomen in female only spaces etc is ridiculous and symptomatic of some of the outrageous beliefs of the identity politics brigade.

Doesn't matter if you think those things are right or wrong, they are not violence.

I don't care what context Bergdorf thought she was using the word violence in. It has a meaning. English is her first language and she knows that meaning. If she meant violence in the sense of non-violent acts then she shouldn't have used the word in the first place and just take responsibility for her decision to do so.

@YetAnotherSpartacus "True! but it would be an injustice to conflate the two because they mean different things. Even though the very thing Is a form of oppression with similar aim" this is what I said earlier. Recognising the difference plus what the aim of both is. which is what you stated in the last post. I am not denying that. My argument was for black women. Which this below quote from above states.
"Just remember that the space you have mentioned is not something that is made for black women and POC in general. If it you take munroe out of the equation, what you said is still problematic in understanding beauty even though the reason for makeup in both groups is the same. Think of it in reverse." Saying make up was almost irrelevant there because my argument was ads and spaces white women occupy that black women can only dream of.

On that advert there were two other black women too. Unless I got it wrong. When black women talk about the beauty industry, they talk about breaking the mould and Sharing the same space. Being in the advert is still liberating and telling a different story whether you believe it or not. Selling beauty products is not going to end. But, It's what sort of messages are being given out which is important. Making people are aware of what the damages are to society. We could ban all adverts. That won't take away the racism and perception of what black women are through the lens of racism. Nor will it remove sexism. It's changing the mindset and how the product is sold.

We could ban all makeup. But that would be at the bottom of most black Women's worries whether some people realise it or not, or even the extent of it when it comes to looks.

In can see the sexism which munroe would fall under.
I can see the race which both white men and women would fall under. Both are relevant. Would a black women be denied space even if sexism didn't exist and racism did? It's a likely possibility. Probably more so. Are the two linked (race and sexism)? they can be but not always. That is what I was trying to point out. Maybe, it didn't come through well.

The use of the word violence to include incorrect use of words or misgendering or opposing transwomen in female only spaces etc is ridiculous and symptomatic of some of the outrageous beliefs of the identity politics brigade.

Absolutely agree with this. It is making the term meaningless. Which is perhaps an aim.

In fact I'd argue the beauty industry is part of our shared oppression
To a small extent. But white women have a lower hurdle to jump to be acceptable than black women (men's is lowest of all, natch)
I found some stats a while back showing black women spend most on cosmetic products than any other group.
I have curly hair, it's a pita, because of that I hang about on curly hair forums. Although my hair can be frizzy I'm not asked to style it beyond belief to be allowed at work. Ive never been told a particular hairstyle is inappropriate but ive seen stories of black women being sent home for wearing braids. There is no political angle to me wearing "natural hair". People don't come up and ask if they can touch it thank God. Probably the only similarity between my curly hair struggles and a black woman's is finding a high street hairdresser with the first clue how to cut It!
Similarly I can bet I can buy a lipstick/foundation/whatever at the trains station or in a supermarket. POC can't do that. A small thing but still indicates the barriers.

So Quentin why is a born male supporting such a sexist industry? He's making comments about racism, but is completely oblivious to the sexism.

He's making comments about racism, but is completely oblivious to the sexism.

That's probably a good part of what's so irritating about it. Wild hyperbole about the racism (to the point of distorting language into nonsense) but apparently completely blind to the sexism.

Yes Serf Terf. I completely agree. I thought that this was the OPs point too, yet most discussion here has eschewed the sexism.

@SerfTerf maybe, I should soul search and find out why I understood them straight away after reading fb post when posted here. Or why I found the #notallwhitepeople problematic and used as an excused. But based on this thread and the others I have seen recently, I doubt I am the problem in the bigger frame of things. Would I use violence as descriptive word for what they said, no! But on another thread, I have said all white people can be seen as racist until proven not. The same way I would view men as being sexist until proven not to be. Or having a lower level of sexism compared to the rest. But seeing that all us have sexism ingrained in us, I also, said the same would apply to white and black people when it came to racism. Maybe, I view things differently, who knows! Well, all of this in nut shell.

Well I think because Munroe was talking about race.
Whether L'oreal should be using a light skinned black trans woman over a dark skinned black female is a whole nother debate. I think that shows a lot of racism and sexism combined.

Yes, Monroe was talking about race whilst as a born male engaging in a deeply sexist practice ... Which was part of what the OP was drawing attention to I thought.

Because munroe was talking about racism which she has every right to do. Is there a particular reason why sexism has to be brought up? I believe someone earlier in this thread asked if a straight out man (as in not a transexual) had made this statement would they have been challenged as to why he is talking about racism and not sexism? I noticed no one had an answer for that.

Surely people are not saying that if a white woman talks about sexism someone can ask her why isn't she talking about Racism?

I don't think her gender status is relevant to her views on racism. Apart from the hyperbolic language which is quite typical of a TRA.
L'oreal are at fault in that respect for picking a trans identified male to represent diversity in females, not Monroe herself. If she had identified as a feminine man, she wouldn't have got the job and wouldn't have the platform to say what she said.
I don't think you can discount everything that someone says just because they are trans. That feels wrong to me, in the same way as no platforming Julie Bindel for "transphobia".

L'oreal are at fault in that respect for picking a trans identified male to represent diversity in females, this is the thing though, make up industry have started branching out and not just to trans people but male. Will we be complaining when men who are not trans star in adverts? It's something that is going to happen. Maybe L'Oréal used trans people as gate way to male audience which is something they are planing. I heard about this not long ago. Makeup, being female space might be no more. If most metrosexual men used makeup, will it change how trans people view it? I don't know wether it will be a hindrance or not to women. Wether or not the dynamic will shift and change and in what direction, I don't know.
"Male make-up counters could become a reality within five years, the UK boss of L'Oreal has said, as it is no longer a taboo for the "selfie generation".
In an interview with the Daily Telegraph, Vismay Sharma, the cosmetics giant's UK managing director, said that demand for make-up among men was growing fast.
Speaking about the industry as a whole, he said male-targeted counters in department stores and drug stores could be a reality in "five to seven years".
According to Mr Sharma taboos are changing and make-up is becoming more accepted for men among what he describes as the "selfie generation".
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/06/male-cosmetics-counters-could-hit-department-stores-five-yearsloreal/

I couldn't care less who is in the adverts actually (unless it's Jonny Depp or similar misogynist)
I don't wear make up and I think it's a tool of oppression (only slightly tongue in cheek)
I would love it however if they had a very dark skinned woman without some kind of "colour pop" make up. That's more ground breaking to me than Munroe.

I had hoped women would be less constrained by appearance but it seems actually what's happening is men are becoming similarly constrained. Blooming consumerism.

I don't think you can discount everything that someone says just because they are trans. That feels wrong to me, in the same way as no platforming Julie Bindel for "transphobia".

Exactly.

would love it however if they had a very dark skinned woman without some kind of "colour pop" make up. That's more ground breaking to me than Munroe. That would be something. More interesting if they had c4 hair too and not bold headed instead. .

Does anyone think Monroe would never ever have gotten that gig if they weren't Trans? And black trans at that.

Does anyone think Monroe would never ever have gotten that gig if they weren't Trans? And black trans at that.

What kind of fucking question is that? Jesus wept.

You sound just like people who assume a woman got a job because they fluttered their eyelashes.

WTF is happening to feminism?

I'm as gender critical as they come. But this shit is not good. It doesn't help our cause.

I honestly thought people here understood the difference betweeen being against what the TRAs are peddling and being against actual trans people.

But this thread is full of unfounded vitriol, aimed at an individual. It's not respectful, it's fucking bigoted.

The words that are beign quoted were taken OUT OF CONTEXT by the Daily Mail. Are you really so quick to want to pull this person down you're not able to stop a minute and say - wait, but it's the Fail?

Is believing the Fail OK now, if it's about trans issues? WTF is happening to you all - please, get a grip!

Guardian interview with Monroe

"She explains that, the morning after the rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, where an anti-racist protester was killed by a white supremacist, she wrote a Facebook post in response to that event. “It was an epic three-parter about how racism is a social structure and how, if this is the case, what can you do to combat racism?”

She says the post was deleted by Facebook for breaching its terms on hate speech; the racist, transphobic comments made about Bergdorf, however, were left up. (A Facebook representative said: “We haven’t yet got to the bottom of what happened to Munroe’s post”, but “we are looking into it.”)

The post was then filleted for its most incendiary lines: “Most of ya’ll don’t even realise or refuse to acknowledge that your existence, privilege and success as a race is built on the backs, blood and death of people of colour,” she wrote. “Your entire existence is drenched in racism. From micro-aggressions to terrorism, you built the blueprint for this shit. Come see me when you realise racism isn’t learned, it’s inherited and consciously or unconsciously passed down through privilege. Once white people begin to admit their race is the most violent and oppressive force of nature on Earth … then we can talk.”

Unsurprisingly, Bergdorf made some people uncomfortable, made some people cheer and pissed off many others, including her mother, who is white and reads the Daily Mail.

“That was an awful conversation. I’m half-white. My mum thought I was lumping her in with everyone, but this isn’t about individuals. To understand my point, you have to take yourself out of the conversation – it’s not about you – and truly think about society, structurally, economically, as a whole.”"

someone earlier in this thread asked if a straight out man (as in not a transexual) had made this statement would they have been challenged as to why he is talking about racism and not sexism? I noticed no one had an answer for that.

You right, I asked that and no one's answered it.

The level of debate seems to be "I've been to more feminist conferences than you've had hot dinners" which although quite funny as it's so absurd as an argument, is pretty depressing really.

I thought feminism included looking at the world critically and seeing it as it is. The arrogance, hypocracy and bigotry on this thread is truly depressing.

I've recommended a couple of friends come here to check out the trans debates so they could learn about it.

What do you think they'll learn if they read this thread? Can't you see what you sound like here?

If a straight man had said ALL white people are racist (yes I read the context and it's still wrong, Munroe's later attempts for rationalization notwithstanding) he would also be ridiculed.

Sorry I changed who "you" was referring to half way through that post!

Hope It's not too Confusing!