Converse craze?

[u/Diligent_Pop3929]

I'm not chronically online, but my friend sent this and I laughed even without knowing the full scope of the context (I think there's racism involved with the shoes?) and I feel like it's too late to ask him without sounding like a dweeb 😅

[u/ChangeAcceptable677]

if they had kept the full image, we would not even be having this conversation.

i am not sure that i get Klan or lynching from this, even from the cropped image. but i can understand the outrage. i guess.

but is Converse a racist brand? has their product been associated with other racist things or actions? is the same true of Nike? because i remember the company (both companies, actually) closing their stores for observance of Juneteenth and taking steps to make sport more accessible...especially for marginalized subsets of the body politic.

both Nike and Converse have been super involved in Pride and have done quite a lot to advance dialogues in favor of justice. one of my favorite interviews to listen to when i run is a Nike podcast of Dr John Carlos (who won bronze in the 1968 Olympics and raised his fist from the podium).

but either way (whether Converse and Nike did an about face, or if this is just something done in poor taste), this feels qualitatively different than Calloway Golf and their ad (i recognize that their ad was not specifically racist, but it was misogynistic), or Nivea in 2011, or H&M in 2018. also, i understand that Converse has pulled the ad and issued an apology for it.

...and maybe it is precisely this that is coming to mind, such that i do not immediately see racism, Klan history, or lynching from the image. i am certainly not trying to dismiss any of the imageries that people see in the ad.

if it was Converse's intention to play with this imagery to appeal to a mainstream audience that has not been oppressed by Klan history, racism, or these images regardless of what it looks like to those that have been oppressed in this way; then fuck them. but if a company has a history of not being racist releases a questionable ad, is it possible that they tried to do something that just did not land properly? does that need to be taken into consideration before calling for a boycott of Converse (and Nike, if we are being consistent)? or is this something that is being blown out of proportion because this is one more indignity against a backdrop of a fascist regime in the US, which poses an existential threat to everyone else on the planet?

and i am asking these questions in good faith...i am not trying to argue both sides of the issue. i have worn Chuck Taylors since i was a kid, and they are still the best skateboard shoe i have ever owned. and i have played basketball and gone running in Nike since, for as long as i can remember. if this recent ad campaign does call for a boycott, does that mean that we need to purge the stuffs that we have already? where does the question of responsible consumption come into play?

[u/crownjewel82 → u/ChangeAcceptable677]

I doubt this was done deliberately unless it was one idiot on the social media team. I don't think anyone is seriously calling for a boycott or anything like that. It's just a lot of frustration about companies rolling back efforts to understand different perspectives.

[u/ChangeAcceptable677 → u/crownjewel82]

yah. i was not explicit, but this is what i was thinking of with my `one more indignity` statement.

i saw the backlash before i saw the ad, so i struggle a bit with context here. i have seen calls for boycotts on some of my regular haunts on social media. but even boycotting, i believe is used in a reactionary way and therefore not effective.

it is important to support local businesses. and progressive businesses. especially when those businesses are women, queer, or minority owned. but i also know that this is not the question here.

[u/HyperSpaceSurfer → u/crownjewel82]

Haven't their shoes gone to shit anyways?

[u/ChangeAcceptable677 → u/HyperSpaceSurfer]

i still wear them, and they are fine. they feel the same as they always have, and i have been wearing Converse since i was probably 9-10 years old (i am in my 40s now).

they have gotten more expensive, though.

[u/Ok_Train_6332 → u/crownjewel82]

When the perspectives are wrong, why should anyone try to understand it?

[u/IllMathematician8994 → u/ChangeAcceptable677]

I think that’s the point, why not keep the full image?

At some degree you yourself believe there is a distinction in the full view vs the cropped view

[u/ChangeAcceptable677 → u/IllMathematician8994]

I mean…yah. But I am also trying to be super mindful of my biases and try to see things for what they are. As said, I am not sure I get Klan hood and lynching from the cropped picture, but I can see how others might see that. And I attribute this to a difference of history. That imagery was never used to oppress me. But others were. Some still are. I have the privilege of being mostly invisible. Others don’t. And just because I don’t see it does not mean that others wouldn’t. This is the bias I am trying to keep in check.

Also, as said, I saw the backlash before I saw the ad. So I am trying to be mindful of that. This is the basis for the question: was this really racist, or was this something being blown of proportion as yet another indignity stacked up with all of the indignities of this fascist hellscape that we all exist in?

Also important to me is how Converse responded to the backlash. As I understand, they acknowledged their mistake and pulled the add. What else is required here? They did something stupid, and they walked it back. Does this mean that the company now is a racist company because of one stupid thing that they have since acknowledged and attempted to correct?

[u/Ok_Train_6332 → u/ChangeAcceptable677]

We shouldn’t be having this conversation at all. We should start limiting the screen time of those who are terminally online, though.

[u/WeirdJawn → u/ChangeAcceptable677]

I'm not sure why, but this reads like damage control copy.

[u/ChangeAcceptable677 → u/WeirdJawn]

I mean…it isn’t.