Covergirl's cover boy Africa and Ebola controversy

[baptism 2,670]

I think this is a case of the Internet being way too ****ing sensitive and annoying. 

[Seeka 12,372]

1 hour ago, The Fame Joanne said:

He says he's a cis male? Does this mean he's not gay or does cis only refer to gender? 

Cis only refers to gender.

[Charliie 1,988]

Another immature, shallow, rich kid. Since he is a "public figure" he could use his words to change our society but he is  giving  our LGBT community a bad reputation. 

Yes, people still stereotype our community. Just like this young man is "joking" and making stereotypes in his tweets.

[PunkTheFunk 125,703]

22 hours ago, JFK said:

As a group that should promote online kindness

We stopped promoting online kindness after ARTPOP flopped 

[TSUNAMI 21,297]

Just now, PunkTheFunk said:

We stopped promoting online kindness after ARTPOP flopped 

 

[PunkTheFunk 125,703]

Not defending him at all -- his comment was ignorant, but you all are acting like you've never said stupid things at 17 years old  Heck some of you are still ignorant af

Get off your high horses hennies, and go find something  actually worth your outrage 

20 hours ago, SKANK said:

You are going to boycott Cover Girl products because you don't feel they condemned strongly enough a joke that one of their spokes model's made when he was seventeen. (Side note: the butt of the joke is obviously not Africans, but his dumb friend who didn't understand the difference between E.coli and Ebola.)

Yet you have no issue being a moderator on a fan forum dedicated to an adult who used her position of power to raise the public profile of Terry Richardson and R. Kelly? You will boycott Cover Girl over an ignorant joke made by a kid, but have no problem spending money on Lady Gaga products in spite of the fact that she put on her payroll a man who was accused by numerous women of the exact same predatory sexual relationship that so scarred her? You are more offended by a lackluster apology for a kid's joke, then you are by Lady Gaga making a profit from an anti-rape anthem directly after lining the pockets of two rapists with money?

That is weird to me. He apologized. The company disavowed the joke. Why is that not enough?

SnatchedT

[Zilla 13,451]

2 hours ago, SKANK said:

 

I think the people who spent their time feigning outrage while they combed through his twitter history, cherry picking his ignorant comments and sharing them on forums, leading campaigns to get him fired, and vowing to boycott products he is associated with - used far more vitriolic energy than I did, when I reminded a moderator on this forum that everyone is imperfect, including Lady Gaga. 

Matthew 9:10-11 "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick." 

 

 

Why do you need to keep bringing this up? You don't need to be reminding people that you "schooled" me like it's some kind of contest. Which it's not, you just played devil's advocate. You made good points, but cmon dude

 

[SKANK 14,288]

2 hours ago, Zilla said:

Why do you need to keep bringing this up? You don't need to be reminding people that you "schooled" me like it's some kind of contest. Which it's not, you just played devil's advocate. You made good points, but cmon dude

 

 

"Why do you need to keep bringing this up?"

I mentioned it once.

I don't think I schooled you. I don't think this is a contest. I have nothing but respect for you and your opinion, which is why I engaged you in conservation to begin with.

When you play devil's advocate you adopt a position you do not agree with in order to fuel debate. I'm not doing that. I don't think what this kid said was malicious, I think his apology was sincere, and I think Cover Girls' response was sufficient.

[Yuko 1,010]

17 hours ago, nytimes said:

People did educate him online for hours after that tweet, but all he did was to block those users. It wasn't until Covergirl people spoke with him that he deleted the tweet and issued his 'apology'. 

He's already had a track record of racist tendencies/insensitive tweets, and whenever people pointed this out to him (as well as about endorsing cosmetic companies that consistently abuse animals for testing) he ignored, blocked, and fought back each and every time instead of listening.

Don't assume that people didn't already try to get through to him the 'right' way, just because things like this become the social media storm of the day these days.

I am sure I would have commented differently had I known. I did not assume people didn't try, I simply encouraged them not to immediately send hate and rudeness to him. I mean immediately. Consider my comment as one that would be made before there was time for people to educate and for him to block, ignore, fight back, etc. Because I didn't even know when or whether all of that happened.

And I don't know what you mean by "things like this become the social media storm of the day these days."

If educating doesn't work then ofc these measures should be taken. I agree with that fully. I simply stated that I believe the first response should be to educate, which (I am glad) it was. I think your response is more based on what happened after, which I didn't take into consideration.

And yes I should have, but you know, you could have just let me know that things have in fact happened. You could have ended it at the second paragraph and I would have learnt just the same. I am very willing to learn and be informed; I just don't happen to follow every minor-celebrity scandal out there and ofc I often make mistaken assumptions regarding them. So I would have been glad to hear what you said, without that accusing tone of the last paragraph. It wasn't necessary.

I didn't mean to upset you if I did, I know how frustrating these things can be; and my comment might have come off as dismissing the gravity of the (full) situation; and I didn't intend that at all.