I abhor puns with a passion but I couldn't resist "wades in," when it comes to Lush, the soap brand who decided to remove products from their window displays to have a discussion about race. Sorry! That was Starbucks. I meant trans rights. Using the hashtag #TransRightsAreHumanRights, Lush wanted everyone to discuss this and launched a campaign four days ago. Normally this would be the part where the article would tell you that things predictably didn't go well and that there was a backlash. And there was a backlash, indeed. But not because people object to trans rights. No, the majority of the backlash came from women-- Lush's target market-- who objected to the word cisgender used to describe themselves.
I’ve been a Lush customer for over a decade, but I won’t be purchasing from you in the future. Calling me “cis” is ridiculously offensive. Pacifica does cruelty free as well as you and doesn’t insult me.
— LunaWanders (@LunaWanders) February 17, 2018
Rather than, you know, actually having a conversation about it, Lush doubled down to explain what cisgender means to women who already know what it means and are offended by it.
It was definitely not our intention to cause any offense. The term cisgender is defined as people who identify with the gender that aligns with the sex assigned to them at birth.
— Lush North America (@lushcosmetics) February 18, 2018
I know what it means. As I’ve learned from being a liberal, it doesn’t matter if you meant to cause offense. Impact over intent. I’ve seen others comment that they were also insulted. It’s offensive. Please stop.
— LunaWanders (@LunaWanders) February 18, 2018
Some in the trans community were also upset. At women who were upset at being called cisgender.
My feedback as a trans person is that Luna needs to shut up. Almost everything in society is made to benefit cis people. I’m so happy about this mission.
Also, these are sold out online, will there be a restock within original run of the product?
— lil boo-boo flu (@SusCallie) February 18, 2018
If you would learn to read, you would see that I didn’t comment on the campaign. I commented on Lush calling people “cisgender”, which is offensive. I realize y’all think everything is about you, but get over yourself. ?
— LunaWanders (@LunaWanders) February 18, 2018
They also offended the black community. Keeping in mind it's Black History Month in America.
Never seen lush do anything for the mistreatment of black people. Nope we busy.
— Freedom Speaks (@SelebritywithaS) February 17, 2018
Lush then had to Lushsplain itself.
Hi there, we campaign for many issues across the spectrum of human rights, protecting the environment and supporting humanitarian causes.
— Lush North America (@lushcosmetics) February 18, 2018
But it didn't stop there. The trans community also weren't pleased. And why should the be? This is nothing more than lazy slacktivism on Lush's part.
If you really wanted to help trans people: Stop hiring us for short term seasonal work. Pay us a livable wage. Offer us healthcare so we can get our hormones. Help us thrive. Don't use our community in this bullshit PR campaign.
— Jay Greygz (@jaygreygz) February 16, 2018
And then the boycott Lush hashtag showed up.
Cisgender is a sexist term. I don't identify as a woman. I don't have a "woman brain". I was simply born female. Cis erases all of my efforts to rise above and struggle against the sexism and misogyny of the world. #GenderIsTheOppressor #BoycottLush
— Goody Freitas (@Mocha_Soul) February 17, 2018
And there was much snark.
Hi there! I don’t have a gender identity because “gender” is misogyny. I have a sex- female, and a personality. I don’t align with the idea of what women are supposed to be
— Centering Women (@CenteringWomen) February 18, 2018
Translation: "We're pimping the #transgender community to shamelessly promote our brand. Please RT to give us free advertising." @lushcosmetics #gender https://t.co/nHNAE7VJqU
— TheLondonLiberal (@YeLondonLiberal) February 17, 2018
Let's recap: Lush launched a new campaign and ended up offending: Its largest audience by calling them by a name they didn't like. The trans community who saw this as a cheap cynical plot to sell more product. Other identities who felt excluded in this campaign. With all that great social media chatter, I can only imagine how well the deep dive will go in-stores.
Adland® is a commercial-laden heaven and hell for advertising addicts around the world.
This advertising publication was founded in 1996, built on beer and bravery, Adland® now boasts the largest super bowl commercials collection in the world.
Adland® survives on your donations alone. You can help us out by buying us a Ko-Fi. Adland® works best in Brave browser
What kind of gigantic dumbass gets offended at being called cisgender
- reply
PermalinkMost women
- reply
PermalinkHow about: anyone who has even the slightest clue about feminist analysis of gender and hates the oppression of women?
"Cis woman" is the latest box men have invented for women (female-born people).
"TERF" is the slur that is used to shut up the woman who want to get out of this box (feminists).
The notion of a "female gender identity" is a new fancy repackaging of the same old 50s style "lady brain" sexism. One is not born, but rather becomes a woman. The pernicious socialization into a subordinate social role is what turns girls into "women" under the rules of a sexist society. The notion of a "female gender identity" obscures this fact by suggesting that a feminine (read subservient) personality type is natural for the majority of women (female-born people).
Further, the notion of a "male gender identity" naturalizes men's oppressive social position within the gender hierarchy. It is the exact same story as with girls/women, only the other way around: boys become men by displays of callous sadism under a male supremacist society, such as paying money to aggressively penetrate a prostitute who's doing this most likely out of poverty. The notion of "male gender identity" posits that men's identification with manliness is natural, when in fact it is socialized and sadistic.
- reply
PermalinkWell, as the article points out, it's the target market who is getting offended.
- reply
PermalinkLush's target audience isn't radical feminists. Its target audience is at least mostly women, if not entirely women.
Surely you realize that hardly anyone cares what radfems think. Otherwise there'd be way less misogyny in the world.
I think it's good whenever anyone points out that 'cisgender' is a term that implies that some women identify with their oppression, and I believe that gender is how we make males and females into oppressors and the oppressed, respectively. It's the name for a system of oppression, not an internal feeling.
But no one cares what radfems think, unfortunately, so radfems disliking Lush's publicity stunt hardly indicates anything about how consumers in general will respond to it, or how people feel about transgender people.
- reply
PermalinkNeither I nor the article made the claim that Lush's target market was radical feminists.
- reply
PermalinkWhat kind of gigantic dumbass thinks that the colour pink and barbies make girls girls rather than their biology? Obviously Donk does. Take your sexism elsewhere, little man.
- reply
PermalinkNever mind the blowback, I'm still trying to figure out why Lush thought removing their window displays was somehow a sensible way to make a stand on any issue. Except maybe the issue of overcrowded shop windows.
- reply
PermalinkExactly. The pinkwashing, greenwashing and whatever-else-washing is tedious, people see through the crude attempts to latch on to a social cause while still just being your run of the mill capitalist shop. It's different when products are fair trade, when words are tied to actual actions.
- reply
PermalinkJust another reason for me to avoid those stinkbombs they call shops. The smell makes me gag.
- reply
Permalink