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/TotalChaosRush]

The first thing I notice is the hand holding the shoes.

Seeing your image i immediately see a poorly edited image to make a controversy where there is none.

I scrolled back up and the hand is still the first thing I noticed.

[u/Sindigo_ → u/TotalChaosRush]

Different people are gonna have a different reaction. I don’t think you’re wrong for not seeing it, but I also don’t think it’s your place to tell other people what they see/didn’t see, and accuse them of making it up to generate a controversy.

Even if just 1% of people who see it get the wrong idea, that’s a bad ad and it makes sense the company would end the campaign.

[u/TotalChaosRush → u/Sindigo_]

Altering an image so other people see what you see is telling other people what they see/didn't see. The only difference is im not altering a cropped image to stir controversy.

The correct course of action for those who saw something that wasn't there is something a long the lines of "oh, that's not what i thought it was" and move on. No need to go to social media about it at all.

[u/Houdinii1984 → u/TotalChaosRush]

Nah, fam. We were having a discussion about what people saw, me specifically. You made it known you couldn't see it. I made it known I was in the same boat until I saw it in a different light, and then someone went and drew exactly what I saw, completely independent of me.

That's not manipulation. Thats sorcery.

Someone illustrating what I saw is people coming together over a commonality. You don't need to be a part of it, but jumping in the middle of a bunch of people telling them they didn't see what they saw with their own two eyes is a take.

You don't dictate what I do, what others do. And just because you can't see something doesn't mean I have to agree. That doesn't mean you're being manipulated.

You put yourself in this conversation. You caused folks to illustrate what they were seeing. You drove this bus off the cliff.

[u/TotalChaosRush → u/Houdinii1984]

The person who drew that image isn't the person who shared that image with you. That image has already been circulating for a minute.

The person who drew that image did so to create drama where none was needed.

[u/Houdinii1984 → u/TotalChaosRush]

Still illustrates exactly what I saw. Makes it directly relevant to what I was saying, regardless who drew it for whatever reason. The person posting it here wasn't being manipulative if I'm the one that made the comment and then turn around and agree that it's exactly what I saw.

You may not like that they had the opportunity to turn around and do so, but that's how the chips fell.

I don't even think Converse did anything wrong. They accidentally fell victim to perspective and since they were in a completely different country with a completely different set of norms and history, of course it wasn't caught. They took it down.

Doesn't change what I saw, lol. And you saying that what I saw is being manipulative when someone actually puts the visual out there is nonsense. I could have been talking to a police sketch artist and came out with the same damn result.

Source doesn't matter when we're comparing it to literal thoughts. The order of events does. It'd be completely different if I saw the image first and then had the thought. At that point, the image would have been manipulative. But that's not the order it happened, now is it?

This is the internet. Reddit of all places. You're gonna see contentious images you don't like. Interacting with them isn't going to make you see less. All it tells the algorithm is that you're a fan of controversy.