MOO

[JONATHAN B SPARKS]

You go to be kidding me - when will all this "madness" stop?

Cries of sexism in every day language seem to have subsided. I remember when the womens were complaining about words like "history," that should be changed to "personstory," and "huMANity" should be "huPERSONity."

The biggest tragedy in all this is I'll never get to pull the ole' Land O Lakes boob trick on anyone.



I like boobs. They're magical.

 

[Markthebroker]

T and A man?

I was just making a little joke, and now you guys are milking it. Maybe you should beef up on your humor, because now its getting udderly cheesy. It's not that funny you should pull a calf over it.

 

[adjusterjack]

T and A man?

Within reason. Too much is too much.

 

[wynne]

Another company caves to the left wingnuts. Unbelievable!

 

[Life Hawk]

I was just making a little joke, and now you guys are milking it. Maybe you should beef up on your humor, because now its getting udderly cheesy. It's not that funny you should pull a calf over it.

Okay, now you've gone and got all up under my hide. I hoofed it in here and saw your post. Wonder what your heffer wold say if she saw your pun? She'd probably call you on this bull and put you out to pasture. I know it looks like I've got a chip on my shoulder, and you might be right, cause I've herd much better puns than this.

 

[Markthebroker]

I have obviously been outdone, and I very much enjoyed it.

 

[titeye]

You go to be kidding me - when will all this "madness" stop?

Just out of curiosity, what other business decision or change has this company made in the history of its existence that bothers you as much as this does? Considering they are more than 100 years old, surely you can name at least one other occasion.

 

[FETalk]

Just out of curiosity, what other business decision or change has this company made in the history of its existence that bothers you as much as this does? Considering they are more than 100 years old, surely you can name at least one other occasion.

I'm not necessarily bothered by MOO's decision to change their logo - even though I don't think that they should've "caved" - but more so with the small minority of individuals/groups/organizations that are going around trying to change the names, logos, phraseology etc. of every little thing under the sun that they imagine is somehow offensive to most people, when in reality there not.

 

[titeye]

I'm not necessarily bothered by MOO's decision to change their logo - even though I don't think that they should've "caved" - but more so with the small minority of individuals/groups/organizations that are going around trying to change the names, logos, phraseology etc. of every little thing under the sun that they imagine is somehow offensive to most people, when in reality their not.

The point I was hoping to make in the way I presented the question is that there is nothing wrong with MOO's decision. Sarcasm and negative remarks in response to anyone's conscious decision to effect a positive change, reveals more about us than it does them. Regardless of how few the number of people offended, after 100 years MOO has apparently determined that even those few are too many. From their perspective, it is the right thing to do. I don't see the upside in interfering with someone's decision to say, "I may have offended you and I am sorry."

 

[bill3173]

I don't see the upside in interfering with someone's decision to say, "I may have offended you and I am sorry."

Is that what they're doing? Do they really care whether Native Americans were happy or unhappy with these symbols? I seriously doubt it. It seems to be more of what the other posters were saying, and that is siding with the leftists. A movement that cares much less about offending anyone, than me or most any other normal business person alive.