Let’s talk about beauty brands that aren’t making much sense....

[dynamite 50,362]

4 minutes ago, kukuryku666 said:

This whole world is about race

When angry black woman is a common stereotype used against them daily

Calling that a random girl talking about make up can be problematic

Ugh, she's a person angrily reacting about makeup that she didn't even buy, not an angry black woman. I would say it if it was a white man.

[Enigma 7,182]

10 minutes ago, dynamite said:

She makes points but omg lol so angry

Also the "using Gaga's big name to sell your products" comment... isn't it her company?

Just because it’s her brand doesn’t mean it’s her company. At the end of the day its owned by a bigger corporation, is partnered with Amazon, and Sarah is doing half the talking... so that leaves very little place for Gaga to actually have the lead, and the creative direction is not convincing me at all that she had much say in this brand.

[js4754394o9823 6,882]

.

[dynamite 50,362]

Just now, Enigma said:

Just because it’s her brand doesn’t mean it’s her company. At the end of the day its owned by a bigger corporation, is partnered with Amazon, and Sarah is doing half the talking... so that leaves very little place for Gaga to actually have the lead, and the creative direction is not convincing me at all that she had much say in this brand.

Ah ok. True, it's all very ordinary

[Enigma 7,182]

3 minutes ago, dynamite said:

Ugh, she's a person angrily reacting about makeup that she didn't even buy, not an angry black woman. I would say it if it was a white man.

Maybe you have to revisit your definition of angry. She’s a beauty reviewer doing a negative review and playing it up for the camera. No one wants to watch a stale ass emotionless person talk about how good/bad something is without conviction.

And yes I do think it’s iffy to call a black woman angry when she’s passionate AT BEST. It’s not necessarily racist but to me there can be implicit bias. I doubt a white man would get the same comments with that tone. He’d probably be called funny, sassy or whatever.

[dynamite 50,362]

Just now, kukuryku666 said:

I didn't say you are problematic or your comment is

But calling a black girl that CAN be

And no one needs to make it about race, it's just reality we live in

I agree that racial issues are pretty much everywhere but in this instance it has nothing to do with race and everything to do with the specific reaction of this person over a trivial matter, no matter who they are. It would be understandable if she actually bought it and felt ripped off but eh I guess she's passionate about makeup brands.

[dynamite 50,362]

6 minutes ago, Enigma said:

Maybe you have to revisit your definition of angry. She’s a beauty reviewer doing a negative review and playing it up for the camera. No one wants to watch a stale ass emotionless person talk about how good/bad something is without conviction.

And yes I do think it’s iffy to call a black woman angry when she’s passionate AT BEST. It’s not necessarily racist but to me there can be implicit bias. I doubt a white man would get the same comments with that tone. He’d probably be called funny, sassy or whatever.

There's clearly a subjective line between angry and passionate.

But implicit bias - not from me. I find YouTubers irritating in general, specifically because they play up to the camera. I would not call any of them funny or sassy.

If you think it's iffy that's your problem but I know what I said and I know what my intentions were. Idgaf that she's a black female and it pisses me the **** off when people being race into things where it doesn't apply, my comment would be the same no matter who said it.

[Summerboi14 807]

There are a lot of beauty brands that makes no sense and actually disappear after some time.

[Jill 25,280]

5 minutes ago, Enigma said:

Just because it’s her brand doesn’t mean it’s her company. At the end of the day its owned by a bigger corporation, is partnered with Amazon, and Sarah is doing half the talking... so that leaves very little place for Gaga to actually have the lead, and the creative direction is not convincing me at all that she had much say in this brand.

She said she invested in the brand so a percentage must be hers, but she isn't obligated to have a final say in the company decisions if she doesn't want to, she can just hire someone to do it for her.

[Suuus 5,632]

2 minutes ago, Enigma said:

Maybe you have to revisit your definition of angry. She’s a beauty reviewer doing a negative review and playing it up for the camera. No one wants to watch a stale ass emotionless person talk about how good/bad something is without conviction.

And yes I do think it’s iffy to call a black woman angry when she’s passionate AT BEST. It’s not necessarily racist but to me there can be implicit bias. I doubt a white man would get the same comments with that tone. He’d probably be called funny, sassy or whatever.

We should be able to call anyone angry no matter what their skincolor is

[js4754394o9823 6,882]

.

[Suuus 5,632]

1 minute ago, kukuryku666 said:

And black women should be able to express themselves without being called angry all the time 

Except in this case it has nothing to do with this

[dynamite 50,362]

6 minutes ago, kukuryku666 said:

And black women should be able to express themselves without being called angry all the time 

Unless someone has a habit of telling only black women to calm down then I don't think it's a problem to pass comment on this specific video. In fact I think this is the first time I've ever said something like this and she happens to be a black woman and until you pointed it out wasn't even aware of the "angry" connotation.

But are you saying it's ok to say it about anyone else but not black women? Because if it was James Charles or any other random white guy I'd equally have turned the video off and blocked his channel before finishing... It's more about the fact they are YouTubers for me rather than anything else... Can't speak for anyone else though...

[holy scheisse 19,995]

Scalp them sis. 

Issa unnecessary "creative" venture. 

[js4754394o9823 6,882]

.