Another go woke go broke - McCains

[Birdsweepsin]

twitter.com/McCainUKIE/status/1541406087324246019?s=20&t=pug-ahmQqiD5mqyyLzLdAw

Who the hell in adland thinks insulting or mocking the people who buy your products is a winning strategy?

Smiley faces are not just kids food in the same way as fish fingers are not just kids food.

It's always been student food for a start.

There really are more important things to get worked up over.

I don't buy them, because we prefer Alphabites, but me and dh are in our 40's and our kids are 18 & 20.

What were they thinking? Why is something that would be really dodgy if an average bloke were doing it is acceptable and “right in”if he’s in drag? It’s like a get out of jail free card 🙄

Right on

I reported the tweet. Twitter have changed their reporting structure, potentially an improvement (first time I've used this version) though unsurprisingly they only include the protected category of gender (or gender identitiy, or sexual orientation) - not, you know, actual sex, but I used gender anyway because hey-ho.

We'll see. The ratio is heartening. It's good to see people speaking out.

Looking at McCains' twitter, the company has been tweeting videos of Baga Chips doing things with frozen potato products since the 30th of May.

I never thought anything ever could put me off chips, but Baga's narration while making a chip butty has achieved it. I don't like mixing sex and food.

Re it needs to be on the TV it doesn’t

ASA covers internet, phone etc too and this is a paid for advert presumably

It’s probably not targeted at children but pp can still make a complaint if it they think it’s off

Mc Cain include Smiles in the Kids section in the product part of their website
Mc Cain website

Mc Cain are presenting them as children’s food.

Mc Cain include Smiles in the Kids section in the product part of their website
Smiles aren't just kids food though.
Why can't they make adverts for students/adults who like them too?
Sounds like they're marketing them on their social media channels such as Twitter and IG, hardly CITV or Milkshake. Then I'd maybe see your point more

Why do they have to make these adverts for products primarily marketed at children?

Surely it doesn’t matter who it’s aimed at, adult or child, the term ‘big knockers’ when referring to a woman’s body is offensive! I can’t believe anyone would think in 2022 that’s an ok slogan to use?

As an adult I’m offended.

Why do they have to make these adverts. Full Stop.

Though I guess technically it should be a ?

And no it’s not because I’m ‘vanilla’ as someone has said up thread.

It is because is utterly degrading to women.

Not seeing the issue. Baga chips is her drag name. Abs that's the kind of act she does. It's mildly funny If you like that sort of thing and a play on words .....
So many pearl clutchers

Baga chips is her drag name. Abs that's the kind of act she does.

Thank you for explaining that, its the part I was struggling with!

This from 5 years ago:

At McCain, that process includes using real people in its adverts, which it has done since 2015, and Hodge explains that the company prides itself on finding genuine families and couples.

“We put so much time and effort into the casting. We look for people who are really interesting and have real stories. We go into their homes, interview them a lot, all to get that depth of human story which is really powerful,” he explains.

www.marketingweek.com/mccains-diversity-valentines-day/

This thread seems like a good example of what we've seen so often over the last few years:

• company/organisation with purpose or product aimed at kids, does something sexualised
• company/organisation either thinks this is fine or that they'll get away with it because it has a tenuous link to the ever-expanding set of letters / rainbow which has been trashed by queer theory in action
• women point out how it's not appropriate. In this case, be it that the product is for or not for kids, the mocking of women's bodies is offensive. Be it that the product is for kids, it remains offensive and it gives them the message that women's bodies should be mocked by males.
• we get loads of "but this is for students" as though young women don't matter. Or "it's not on telly" as though its existence doesn't matter or as though a company would spend time and money making an advert for no reason(!).
• then there's the extra layer of offensive and inappropriate which is the "you could park a bus in there". And still posters come on to tell us this is fine, nothing to see / ignore well established social boundaries and decency of conduct towards women.

On the last point, I guess this shows gender ideology and queer theory quite clearly. Remove "sex" as a protection and you don't see sexism. But we do see it and we won't shut up about it.

Pearl clutchers is a tired and wanky way to try and invalidate a sensible viewpoint.

If you're not seeing the problem, its an issue with you ability to see the problem. IT doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist. I'm sorry you've failed to grasp the issue, but don't blame others for your failings.

The right: 'Dresses, hair and make-up are not defining features of being a woman and just wanting to wear a dress doesn't make you female'

Brand uses a male actor who wears a wig, dress and makeup.

Also the right: 'YoU ArE TaKiNg ThE PiSs OuT Of WomEn StOp IiIiIiIT!!'

Woman up you lot. It's a man in a dress, he's not trying to piss in your toilets or bring his penis into your living room. He's not even trying to make you believe he doesn't have a penis, he's just expressing himself with his clothing without claiming to have access to female spaces by right - isn't that what you want?

It's Womanface.

People found the Black and White Minstrels funny at the time too but we've grown up since realising that that's Blackface.

Say it again, it's not womanface

Not sure far removed from blackface / do you find that funny too?

I love seeing the usual apologists on these threads. It reminds me of how, six or seven years ago, I would have been just the same because I was cool.
Then began the absolute onslaught on what I believed were women’s secure rights and I realised how the structural misogyny hadn’t gone anywhere; it was just waiting for people like me to become complacent before it came roaring back.

It IS womanface, not it's not..

You have your opinion, I have mine. Just watch what you want to watch and buy what you want to buy and I will do the same.