Support J. K. Rowling but cancel Bud Light? How about the reverse? Seems hypocritical.

Support J. K. Rowling but cancel Bud Light? How about the reverse? Seems hypocritical either way.

J. K. Rowling of Harry Potter fame has made some controversial statements about the LGTBQ community while Bud Light is in the news for its support of the LGBTQ community. Liberals made national news over their stance against Rowling during the recently released Harry Potter game, which I have played and give it a 9 out or 10! Conservatives are currently in the news for their stance against Bud Light… I am more a Porter or Stout fan myself.

So why have I not canceled Rowling or Bud? Because if I start canceling products of people that have views I do not like then I fear I may have to abandon most of my possessions. I do not like many things about China, so I guess I must throw out everything I have that was made in part or whole in China. Some Bud drinkers switched to Coors or Miller which also support the LGBTQ community and some in the LGBTQ community play games made in part or in whole by LGBTQ opponents.

Anyone else sick of this cancel culture hypocrisy practiced so prolifically by both sides?

 

I have no problems with cancel culture. To be honest I think it is the best way to get social change. What I hate are politicians poking their noses into these culture wars. Societal change is best left to the masses not politicians. The interesting thing is Rowling has been on both sides of the cancel culture attack. I remember when I was young many churches encouraged their members to not let their children read the Harry Potter books because of the magic. I remember seeing flyers and such at the local church. It was a strange cause for the adults considering we were all playing Dungeons and Dragons at the time.

 

I find it all very amusing. I am also not stupid enough to express controversial opinions for the world to see...

 

Cancel culture certainly has its utility and is an innate part of our nature. I guess what gets my Irish up is when each side acts as if it largely or only happens on the other side. Far too few seem to understand that human nature is systemic.

 

As a rule I don't boycott things. If Joseph Stalin had a pie shop that made the best pies in town, I'd shop there despite thinking he's one of the most evil people to ever live. I just want a good pie, ******n!

 

Very sick of cancel culture. Even more sick of wokeism.

 

So long as cancel culture remains simply culture and doesn't become law I am ok with it. If you do something controversial and people want to boycott, they have every right to do so.

 

Alissa Heinerscheid believes that too many rednecks drink Bud light. We'll, she doesn't have that problem anymore...lol

 

Boycott? Some cancellations cost people their jobs, others cause violence. Nothing new about people being able to spend their money as they please.

 

Maybe I'm not following your argument, but it seems that the groups who want to cancel Rowling and the ones who want to cancel Bud Lite are different groups, so I'm not sure what the hypocrisy is.

 

This is just my feeble attempt to get some on the right to see that the right practice cancel culture too. Yet I also want the left to realize that if it is OK to be outraged by Rowling’s words then it is also OK for the right to be outraged by the Bud drama.

The selective outrage and blowing things out of proportion is just getting old. I am not too proud to admit that I have been more a part of the problem than the solution during my time here on the forums. I am trying to change that.

 

If it costs their job, they should have recourse against the employer. If it is a case of violence, then laws against assault etc should kick in.

 

I'm sure the right would like to cancel folks, but they don't have the institutional power to do such things. If the left really wants to cancel someone, they can because they control all of the institutions of power in our society. What institutions do the right control? They don't even control the churches.

So it's not really a case of both sides do it too because only one side can really do it.

 

I am indifferent to it at this point. I choose to do business with whom I choose to do business with. I don't obsess about their this that or the other. A company has to really screw up before I will give it a second thought. As for the two things you brought up, I think they are both silly protests.

 

The right controls SCOTUS, conservative universities, some hospitals, and many Churches. Seems to me they control a lot. Both sides vie for control then lament the sad state of the nation when theirs is in the minority.

 

The "right" controlling SCOTUS is a fairly new phenomena. It was controlled by the left for decades. And how has the "right" used that power? By simply adhering to the constitution, which is the actual job of SCOTUS. The left has a much broader view of court power, including pushing their agenda.

There are only a handful of conservative universities and hospitals. All of the major denominations lean left, and meanwhile, the left controls...everything else. It's not remotely even. Certainly not enough to make the right a threat when it comes to cancelling.

 

Rowling was boycotted by the Bible thumpers for glorifying 'witchcraft.' Then she said 'a man isn't a woman' and her 'hatebase' repolarized from Bible thumpers to trans worshippers overnight. In both cases, the stupidity and fickleness of the market is alarming.

 

Does Rowling put political banners all over her books though?

BIG difference to ignore such things when they aren’t plastered to what you are physically buying.

In Bud Lights case, not only did they plaster it all over their actual product, directly connecting their consumers and the act of buying beer to their political stance, there are a million other alternatives to Bud Light in the world of cheap beer

 

Much like a lot of these backwards ass boomers out there, cancel culture needs to die out. But I know that's not gonna happen.

 

Personally, I am of the opinion that if you are a celebrity, or selling something etc, you should absolutely take great pains to ensure that nobody knows your stance on ANY controversial issue. In most instances, it is a bad business decision to alienate any potential customers.

There are perhaps some exceptions such as the My pillow guy appealing very hard to one particular segment, and then marketing vociferously to that target market. How he just keeps coming up with new products to sell to his small but fiercely loyal base is probably a stroke of marketing genius, and I am sure that he knows he is alienating a wide swath of the population but does not care. I could see a similar logic being applied to something like Prius supporting Dylan Mulvaney. There is no doubt a fair amount of overlap between Prius drivers and those that support Mulvaney.

With Bud Light specifically, it is difficult to imagine a more tone-deaf marketing decision. If there is one group in this world that would most oppose the entire normalize transgender movement, it would be aging good old boys and the frat crowd. That group also just so happens to be the primary target market for Bud Light. The bulk of young people who would tend to be Dylan Mulvaney supporters, are either drinking White Claw, wine, or if they do drink beer, it would be IPA's and other craft beers. they most certainly do NOT choose to drink light domestic beer. The notion of getting the LGBTQ to consume domestic beer is even more far-fetched. With that undeniably being the backdrop, Bud Light had FAR more to lose versus what they had to gain by making this decision. I suspect they have already learned their lesson, and it is unlikely that you will see another mass market domestic beer doing something similar going forward. The Bud Light marketing director was rightfully fired, for being an abject IDIOT.

I realize that your position is that both sides do it, and at this point that statement is correct, but I would submit that it has historically been almost primarily a leftist endeavor. I think that leftist cancel culture has driven a lot of corporate decisions, but up until recently rightist cancel culture has not driven a lot of corporate decisions because it has not been nearly as well organized or get as much press as it does for leftist causes. I am not wanting to get into a drawn out debate as to who started it because in truth it does not matter. What does matter however is that this latest Bud Light response has likely sent a message that it is a bad idea to take a stance that opposes the positions of the right, just as they already know is a bad idea to oppose the positions of the left.

Perhaps now these people will finally learn to stop taking a stand on controversial issues, which is how it should be. I would far prefer that marketers stop trying to force feed their opinions down our throats and act as if my purchasing decisions are not going to be impacted as a result of them sharing their controversial opinions.

 

Rowling is a genius. She got to trigger EVERY lib on the planet with her 100% NON CONTROVERSIAL comment. ( i notice most of you aren't mentioning her actual comments, just repeating what your MSM lords have told you) , showed the world how crazy they are because they got triggered over nothing, AND she continues to rake in money from them!
That's how its done folks.
She is a true woman who isn't afraid to back down. (the kind the left hates the MOST)

 

For anyone who's under the impression that Bud Light was crazy to try and pander to LGBTQ people or that any other company won't do something similar in the future, let me point out that multiple beer companies support and even partnered with the LGBTQ crowd long before anyone knew Dylan's name. So this isn't the big "go woke, go broke" moment people think it is.

https://www.newsweek.com/half-ameri...ob Ultra have all,LGBTQ+ facility in the city.

 

Yet they went WOKE, are going BROKE, and it is pretty BIG news. Wrong on ALL THREE accounts. You know what those 3 things add up to? DENIAL
Would you use a male nascar driver to promote women's lingerie? NOPE, thats why the bud lite thing is so strange? What were they hoping here? That 1% of the population would start buying bud light?
Just call this what it is, woke and entitled marketing VPs thinking they can use their position of power to virtue signal

try again

 

Indeed they have marketed to the LGBTQ segment in the past. I would argue that the Trans issue is not exactly like run-of-the-mill LGBTQ issues and it got a more harsh response as a result. Most people accept homosexuality as perfectly legitimate, but an awful lot despise the notion of normalizing the concept of going along with the transgender delusion.

To whatever extent other beer companies have supported trans issues in the past, I suspect that may likely change going forward, specifically due to recent events. Even if Bud Light sales return to normal now that they have fired the marketing exec that made this decision, the message has already been sent.

 

Simple really. If you disagree with Rowlings don't buy her books; if you disagree with Bud Light drink something else.