• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

CNN: The Aunt Jemima brand, acknowledging its racist past, will be retired

DragoonWalker

Neo Member
Jun 12, 2020
126
147
155
Never thought the phrase "you die a hero or live long enough to become the villain" would ever apply to Aunt Jemima.

You know what would be a sign that we have actually progressed as society? Recognizing this brand's troubling origins, but acknowledging it was a stepping stone of progress in a less racially sensitive time, and whatever historical signifier it may have had is lost through time, becoming a neutral part of widely accepted culture. Aunt Jemima can't hurt black people, not anymore. But instead like so many other cases now there is a constant witchhunt of individuals/brands, reducing their value to only what they have done wrong in the past by the ever shifting standards of the present. A fool's errand. Lovecraft? Racist. Bruce Lee? created new asian stereotype. Disney? Made Song of the South. Volkswagen? Direct result of Hitler. Cancel them. Cancel them all.

(Worry not my friends. In a few decades when the tides of social norms turn again Aunt Jemima will be reinstated to her rightful place as top syrup mascot.)
 

Kev Kev

Gold Member
Oct 25, 2012
1,379
1,991
850
Daytona Beach, FL
we need to be out in the streets about this. this is FUCKING bullshit. it is a blatant infringement on first amendment rights.

I will be trying to organize a massive protest in my town about this this weekend. BLM terrorists cannot win. FUCK this shit. What are you all doing about this?
its not a big deal that they changed it, the same way it wasnt a big enough deal to change it to begin with

its a non issue all around. no one viewed aunt jemima as racist, and doing all this is only serving to make woke people stfu. but the truth is, no one else gives a fuck, bc the rest of us are sane and know that no one viewed it as racist. period.

so who cares
 

-Arcadia-

Gold Member
Aug 20, 2019
4,946
16,006
650
It’s kind of interesting, because without the Aunt Jemima branding, I won’t even know which one their syrup is.

I guess these gigantic mega-brands can afford to make just one product almost entirely disappear from public view? Seems awfully stupid to me though, even without considering the virtue signaling.
 

#Phonepunk#

Member
Sep 4, 2018
12,559
20,908
800
39
Right?!? Companies should replace "stereotype" characters with real life positive/successful black people.

Jemima = Oprah

Uncle Ben = Morgan freeman

Cream of Wheat = Samuel L Jackson
These are Hollywood’s modern mammies, always there to reassure white audiences with their magical soulfulness.
 

Tesseract

Crushed by Thanos
Dec 7, 2008
50,796
40,148
1,705
The Pentagon
its not a big deal that they changed it, the same way it wasnt a big enough deal to change it to begin with

its a non issue all around. no one viewed aunt jemima as racist, and doing all this is only serving to make woke people stfu. but the truth is, no one else gives a fuck, bc the rest of us are sane and know that no one viewed it as racist. period.

so who cares
never budge or kneel

crush the spines of these fools and snort their bone meal
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Kev Kev

Kagey K

Gold Member
Dec 18, 2013
6,908
8,151
840
If they cancel Aunt Jemima, Uncle Ben, aNd whoever else.

Wont there be nobody left?

They are cancelling themselves at this point.
 

Grinchy

Member
Aug 3, 2010
25,394
12,454
1,205
a cave outside of Whoville.
Air Jordans are kinda racist too if you really think about it. Michael Jordan could jump really high and far, so you could say he had a lot of hang-time. Probably more than anyone has ever had.

And there was a time when black men used to be hanged. So when you think about Jordan and his hang-time, it elicits the thought in your mind of a time when black men were hanged. I think we should remove that brand as well.
 

GnomeChimpsky

Member
Oct 26, 2017
296
656
380
Air Jordans are kinda racist too if you really think about it. Michael Jordan could jump really high and far, so you could say he had a lot of hang-time. Probably more than anyone has ever had.

And there was a time when black men used to be hanged. So when you think about Jordan and his hang-time, it elicits the thought in your mind of a time when black men were hanged. I think we should remove that brand as well.
No need to go that far. Air Jordan reinforces the harmful stereotype that black people are good at sports. Boom, cancel Nike.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cryptoadam

cryptoadam

... and he cannot lie
Feb 21, 2018
15,733
26,539
1,115
Jordans are troublesom for comical parody reasons. But who cares about the child and slave labor that went into creating them lol.

Oh boo hoo slavery 150 years ago. But gotta have my kicks made by a 7 year old bangladeshi boy who is chained to his sewing machine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: p_xavier

TeezzyD

Fantastik Tuna
Mar 18, 2020
1,470
3,021
580
It’s kind of interesting, because without the Aunt Jemima branding, I won’t even know which one their syrup is.

I guess these gigantic mega-brands can afford to make just one product almost entirely disappear from public view? Seems awfully stupid to me though, even without considering the virtue signaling.
I wonder how sales were prior to this upcoming (?) rebranding. Could just he a brilliant marketing ploy. I mean, we're talking about Aunt Jemima on a video game forum. No business does anything without profits in mind.
 
Last edited:

Scotty W

Member
Sep 29, 2019
751
990
325
" man fuck Aunt Jemima, that shit is racist".
Imagine trying to explain this sentence to someone learning English, and no awareness of the historical context. It would take a few hours.

First you would have to explain the various meanings of fuck, and then of shit. Who Aunt Jemima was, that she is nobody’s Aunt, that her name is a brand name, what a brand name is, the history of the brand, what racism is, and finally what it means to say that the syrup (shit) is racist. And there would be a hundred small snags along the way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: p_xavier

Halo is Dead

Member
May 20, 2018
3,647
5,670
630
Imagine trying to explain this sentence to someone learning English, and no awareness of the historical context. It would take a few hours.

First you would have to explain the various meanings of fuck, and then of shit. Who Aunt Jemima was, that she is nobody’s Aunt, that her name is a brand name, what a brand name is, the history of the brand, what racism is, and finally what it means to say that the syrup (shit) is racist. And there would be a hundred small snags along the way.
Imagine, forgetting the context that the company has already addressed the issue with her image before. Imagine that same company making a black woman a success story and allowing her to travel across the U.S. to spread the love and brand. Tell me exactly what is wrong whit her current image and why is it racist other than pointing out her origins. I have met black women looking just like her in the picture and never once met a black person who described that is was racist to me before any of this ever happened.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scotty W

Spukc

Gold Member
Jan 24, 2015
13,635
11,419
830
Jesus people this is just 1 fucking big advertisement. Everybody now thinking about this brand. Oldest trick in the book.
Also has been done MANY times.

They had a type of snack in holland i heard called negro-kisses. People forgot about them and sales where a bit stale.



Then sales skyrocketed after they announced recalling it kisses instead. EVERYONE was talking about it.

stop being a fucking marketing tool.


And have a kiss instead 😘
 
Last edited:

#Phonepunk#

Member
Sep 4, 2018
12,559
20,908
800
39
Jesus people this is just 1 fucking big advertisement. Everybody now thinking about this brand. Oldest trick in the book.
Also has been done MANY times.

They had a type of snack in holland i heard called negro-kisses. People forgot about them and sales where a bit stale.



Then sales skyrocketed after they announced recalling it kisses instead. EVERYONE was talking about it.

stop being a fucking marketing tool.


And have a kiss instead 😘
otm WAKE UP SHEEPLE BIG PANCAKE IS JUST USING YOUUUU!
 
  • LOL
Reactions: Grinchy

#Phonepunk#

Member
Sep 4, 2018
12,559
20,908
800
39
The Wikipedia article says the character is “based on the enslaved Mammy archetype” which is a simplification or distortion. While it is true black women were live-in maids while under slavery, this practice was common before and continued afterwards, and black women still employ as nurses and maids even today. Following the Emancipation many black women had experience keeping houses and used that to find employment in a society undergoing Reconstruction. Granted that housekeeper class has largely been taken up by Hispanic workers nowadays. but it’s sort of agenda driven to say it is a role that only belongs to enslaved people.

I’m seeing the narrative that the role grew out of slave plantations, yet this entirely ignores the history of personal servants and house laborers, which goes back hundreds of years. Before America the wealthy who did not keep capital-“s” industrial slaves often kept servants, who tended to be ethnic minorities. Just as well there during the Civil War there would have been upper class people in the North employing black housekeepers and maids for their New York brownstones.

So the reality is far more nuanced than “it’s a slave archetype”. Representative of the limited roles available to black women, it is a stereotype yes, but it also reveals a historic truth. And the fact that the actress being deplatformed was a former slave who ended up becoming one of the first black millionaires flies in the face of the narrative they are building. So she is deplatformed so that they might save face. Sadly they are erasing history and indulging in anti-representation policy.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: cryptoadam

ryan13ts

Member
Nov 29, 2006
2,075
136
1,240
Long overdue, she's always been linked to portrayal of the typical "mammy" image and the other racist connotations that go with it, so it's long past due for it to go.

And to the ones implying it's only happening now due to "virtue signaling" or whatever garbage you' want to call it, this isn't even the first time that there's been an attempt to get rid of it. The best progress with that until now was her overall imagine change in the late 80's (From the very overt mammy with the headdressing, to the design that exist now). The point is that this has always been a problem, and just one that's finally being addressed now.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: cryptoadam

Nymphae

Member
Jun 3, 2013
12,064
17,916
1,040
Canada
Long overdue, she's always been linked to portrayal of the typical "mammy" image
I really don't get it honestly, I understand that this is the truth apparently, but what is the actual imagery presented? A smiling black female face. You actually need to be taught how this is problematic.
 

Kamina

Golden Boy
Jun 2, 2013
5,644
3,483
830
34
Austria
Last edited:

ryan13ts

Member
Nov 29, 2006
2,075
136
1,240
I really don't get it honestly, I understand that this is the truth apparently, but what is the actual imagery presented? A smiling black female face. You actually need to be taught how this is problematic.
I can't blame you for not knowing just looking at the current design. The old one is where alot of the issues start from (Just google old aunt jemima) and leans into the "mammy" imagery. The whole mammy thing is pretty shitty since it gives idea of the happy slave content with being someone's servant... which is pretty far from the reality of back then.

Even when I look at it today, I still think of the old design (I was a kid before it changed) and that's a big part of the problem; It'll pretty much always be linked to that. Just one of those things that better to start fresh and get rid of the baggage.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Nymphae

Nymphae

Member
Jun 3, 2013
12,064
17,916
1,040
Canada
I can't blame you for not knowing just looking at the current design. The old one is where alot of the issues start from (Just google old aunt jemima) and leans into the "mammy" imagery.
Good thing they weren't still using the old design.

Even when I look at it today, I still think of the old design (I was a kid before it changed) and that's a big part of the problem; It'll pretty much always be linked to that.
People alive who saw the old designs will remember it of course, but it just makes me laugh because devoid of political context, I don't see any way you could make that visual representation more favourable. And I still think that the political context is forced and no one generally thought this was an issue until the Corporate Woke Off began.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cryptoadam

ryan13ts

Member
Nov 29, 2006
2,075
136
1,240
Good thing they weren't still using the old design.



People alive who saw the old designs will remember it of course, but it just makes me laugh because devoid of political context, I don't see any way you could make that visual representation more favourable. And I still think that the political context is forced and no one generally thought this was an issue until the Corporate Woke Off began.
Well like I said, this isn't just a thing that popped up out of nowhere now. It's been something that people have wanted (and tried) to change for a long time now, it's just that the current environment has helped push it through.

I know that looking at it without any context or having reason to be offended by it, it may seems unnecessary, but you have to think of it from the perspective of people who do see that imagine and it does invoke offense and the undeniable racist history surrounding it.

It's just better in the long run to move away from something like this with the negative baggage it has, especially when there's no down side to doing so.
 

ManaByte

Member
Jun 10, 2004
26,263
19,222
2,320
42
Southern California
mcucosmic.com
 
  • LOL
Reactions: Tesseract

Nymphae

Member
Jun 3, 2013
12,064
17,916
1,040
Canada
It's just better in the long run to move away from something like this with the negative baggage it has, especially when there's no down side to doing so.
No downside lol, they have to pay to completely redesign and manufacture all of their product , packaging, and branding everywhere it can be found because of this nonsense that will do less than nothing to ease race relations.
 

AfricanKing

Formerly 'AfricanKing' ... purposely obtuse
Jul 16, 2017
2,137
1,992
710
No downside lol, they have to pay to completely redesign and manufacture all of their product , packaging, and branding everywhere it can be found because of this nonsense that will do less than nothing to ease race relations.
PepsiCo made 67Billion dollars last year ... they won’t even notice a dent in their profits from rebranding it.
 

ryan13ts

Member
Nov 29, 2006
2,075
136
1,240
No downside lol, they have to pay to completely redesign and manufacture all of their product , packaging, and branding everywhere it can be found because of this nonsense that will do less than nothing to ease race relations.
You're intentionally missing the point, It has nothing to do with easing race relations, it's simply about not keeping a mascot that's historically based in racial caricature. And the whole packing and redesign thing is also completely moot, as most companies do this stuff every couple of years anyways to update their products, so it's not like they wouldn't have done something similar soon anyways even if they did keep the character. That and redesigns like that are a dime in the ocean for big parent companies like Pepsico.

And let's be honest, some people (definitely some here) trying to feign concern as a way mock this change honestly wouldn't have given two shits about it if it weren't for the reason it's being done and they know it. It's just the next notch in the endless "doing it to be woke" shitck that's past worn out into the ground and was never funny anyways.
 
Last edited: