Los Angeles Magazine - "Budweiser Made Another Cringey Grope at LGBTQ Cash and the Internet Really Hated It"

[scarletlatitude]

https://www.lamag.com/culturefiles/budweiser-asexual-ad/

 

4 June 2019

 

Another company that went bananas for pride month... this time with asexual flags. Maybe not the best of ace news but... visibility is visibility I guess. At least we are getting recognized? 

 

 

Quote

In a weird attempt by Budweiser to glom good Pride vibes, the brewer tweeted photosof Pride flag-inspired cups, with handy explanations of what the various colors represent—to which the ‘verse responded with a resounding nope. One post, aimed at explaining the asexual flag, is getting is getting special attention.

Pictures of the cup at the link above. 

 

Quote

During the month of June, social media is flooded with corporations’ ham-fisted attempts at queer solidarity, but some just come off as more cynical than others. Like when it’s Budweiser—a brand with a rich history of heteronormative, horny-man advertising campaigns—suddenly courting the sexless.
 

Of course, the phenomenon of companies random companies reaching out to the community during Pride Month is nothing new. Last year, “Taste the Rainbow” candy Skittles removed the rainbow from packaging in a strange attempt at solidarity. Regarding the beer giant, a writer for Study Breaks magazine notes, “Companies like Budweiser exploit Pride Month by sponsoring their products at gay festivals, but their allyhood doesn’t seem to be as strong any other month of the year. Normally, Budweiser is a brand that reinforces gender norms and heteronormativity, teaming up with Playboy during the Super Bowl and portraying straight, patriarchal advertisements.”

 

A Vox writer noted last year that Adidas, McDonald’s, J. Crew, Nike, Bloomingdale’s, and H&M were all baldly seeking Pride dollars, and wondered, “But what exactly are these stores and brands supporting? More important, what happens to the money we spend in these stores? Does brand support for LGBTQ issues have any real impact, or is it just, well, branding?”

 

In 2016, Bud Light advertised their wares in a promo featuring Amy Schumer and Seth Rogan at a gay wedding. At the time, a Slate writer said, “If I sound a touch jaded about something that is, on balance, probably a good thing, it’s because this particular synergistic matchup between a brand and LGBTQ rights feels even more cynical than normal. A Wall Street Journal piece about the ad notes that it will only air for one night in the queer-friendly markets of New York and California.”

 

As a 2017 Vice article points out, policy changes passed under the Obama administration such as legalized gay marriage and the expansion of trans rights has made it safer for companies to go after the LGBTQ market. And they’d better: “As LGBTQ acceptance increased, more companies were incentivized to target LGBTQ consumers, who in 2015 represented an estimated buying power of $917 billion, or 6.8% of total U.S. buying power.”

 

[Skycaptain]

https://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/185833-ace-space-in-london/

 

 

 

The thread above shows the strength of feeling British Aces thought about Budweiser sticking their oars in. 

[LeChat]

I don't know whether it not it might have to do with the fact that Americans are marketed at a lot by companies and some are tired/skeptical of it; it becomes difficult to know which companies are sincere about their claims and which aren't.

[RoseGoesToYale]

1 hour ago, InquisitivePhilosopher said:

I don't know whether it not it might have to do with the fact that Americans are marketed at a lot by companies and some are tired/skeptical of it; it becomes difficult to know which companies are sincere about their claims and which aren't.

This. It's a problem when visibility comes from a profit-making company (with campaigns likely put together by a committee instructed by a higher up to figure out what XYZ is) because corporations, even well-meaning ones, always have ulterior motives. And if you look at corporate America's track record in public relations, no one's having it anymore.

[scarletlatitude]

3 hours ago, RoseGoesToYale said:

This. It's a problem when visibility comes from a profit-making company (with campaigns likely put together by a committee instructed by a higher up to figure out what XYZ is) because corporations, even well-meaning ones, always have ulterior motives. And if you look at corporate America's track record in public relations, no one's having it anymore.

Exactly. I mean I'm glad aces were included but... I also know it was all only for profits. 😕 So hooray that we are visible enough to be useful to American capitalism?  

[AmazingGrAce]

I'm in a UK Facebook ace group, and the reaction over there has been mostly positive. There have been lots of people posting pictures of their ace flag cups and the visibility has been really appreciated in that group. 

 

Personally I think I'm just happy to see us getting represented and the visibility of asexuality being boosted. 

[Lonemathsytoothbrushthief]

38 minutes ago, AmazingGrAce said:

I'm in a UK Facebook ace group, and the reaction over there has been mostly positive. There have been lots of people posting pictures of their ace flag cups and the visibility has been really appreciated in that group. 

 

Personally I think I'm just happy to see us getting represented and the visibility of asexuality being boosted. 

Yeah. Honestly I think the outrage comes from a lot of people(as a group not individually) who just don't value us as much in the community. But it made a positive difference to the aces who could meet up with each other so far as I know, and many aces also commented that it was funny because so many aces don't drink alcohol. Even the people organising the event said it's funny because of that, so the fact that it's such a weak cash grab but also genuinely positive attention is pretty nice.  I have to say a cash grab during pride aimed at the ace, aro, intersex, non binary and pan communities doesn't really have much of a negative to it, we're all rejected by most corporations, other LGBT+ people and cis straight society all the time anyway it's not like we'll ever be a major boon to corporations.

[Karst]

I think this kind of advertising is stupid, but I don't see the point in getting angry about it.  It's not actually harming anyone.

[CadenLynch]

On 7/23/2019 at 7:20 PM, Ardoise said:

I think this kind of advertising is stupid, but I don't see the point in getting angry about it.  It's not actually harming anyone.

Yeah everyone is all getting up in arms but tbh idgaf. It seems most people are just bored and looking for something to be outraged about. Any group with substantial numbers behind it has always been advertised to and, to be frank, it's only recently* that the LGBT+ movement gained a real following. If you want recognition and legitimacy this is what comes with it

*I am a supporter of LGBT+ as well as asexual and glad that we are where we are now