American Express: Don't munch carpet without it

[Starbucks Spunk Bucket]

I think you might be digging a little deep here. People that have American Express cards are likely educated and socially progressive, or at least agnostic about gays. And they've been putting good looking people in ads since ads began, I doubt gayness will change that philosophy.

It's not really about good looking people, though. An effeminate gay guy can still be good looking. A butch woman doesn't have to be ugly, even if she doesn't appeal to heterosexual men.

The whole thing to me just reeks of pandering, where they (and I mean all of these companies, not just Amex) wants to make it clear they support the gays, but they aren't yet ready to show a realistic gay couple for fear that it won't play well for marketing. My point is that if you're not willing to depict gay couples as they typically are, don't depict them at all. Don't try to come off all progressive and then only show gay couples which are more "comfortable" for straight people to view.

And I still don't see the point of this. Gay couples are a small percentage of Amex users, yet that's the image they specifically choose to depict on the front page. It's not like they're depicting a group of people (like on a cruise where 2 of the 20 people shown are a gay couple). This is like, "Look at us! We are showing a gay couple instead of a straight one, so it means we're tolerant", when in the meantime something like 90% or more of their clientele is heterosexual.

I just laugh at marketing departments trying to look sensitive and progressive. I guess it works with certain people, though. A girl I know couldn't stop praising Target because they stopped separating toys into "boys' toys" and "girls' toys" sections, as if any 3-year-old is going to give a shit what section you buy his or her toy from.

Firstly, I remember years ago people saying 1 in 10 people are gay, I believe these figures are now on the rise as it has become more socially acceptable and more homosexuals come out of the closet- I would posture that nowadays at least 10% of people identify themselves as homosexual.

Secondly, I don't know where you are coming from here, as companies are constantly falsely portraying their image. This is hardly news

Frankly, ***although I enjoy your ramblings and jokes on the subject very much (such as the title of this thread)***, I do feel you come off as homophobic both in this thread and in the radio show. For example, when Brandon keeps saying how he couldn't give a flying fuck who's gay and who's not, as long as it doesn't affect him, you go very quiet. This has happened twice to my recollection.

Don't shoot the messenger, I know you probably aren't homophobic really, and political correctness is overrated anyhow: I'm just calling it as I see it.

For the record, I am neither gay nor homophobic.

[big dick]

HMMM I think you might be gay. I am pretty sure mr druff doesn't care for homos very much

[big dick]

lolz I like it

[phantom]

To be honest i dont interpert that pic as a gay couple.
Imo theyve gone on a girls weekend away, told there husbands they are going to have mud baths and massages etc. And they are so excited upon arrival that they embrace and are smiling thinking about how much dick they are gonna smash over the next 48 hours.

[Starbucks Spunk Bucket]

"handicapme: 10% is not greater than 1 in 10.... do you even math?"

Do you even anything bro? I said at least 10%, fucking dumbass. Go chew some more tobacco and wonder why you have no opposable thumbs

[handicapme]

"handicapme: 10% is not greater than 1 in 10.... do you even math?"

Do you even anything bro? I said at least 10%, fucking dumbass. Go chew some more tobacco and wonder why you have no opposable thumbs

I don't chew tobacco, don't confuse me with SlimT, although I'd bet he would know that 10%=1&10

[MumblesBadly]

I think you might be digging a little deep here. People that have American Express cards are likely educated and socially progressive, or at least agnostic about gays. And they've been putting good looking people in ads since ads began, I doubt gayness will change that philosophy.

It's not really about good looking people, though. An effeminate gay guy can still be good looking. A butch woman doesn't have to be ugly, even if she doesn't appeal to heterosexual men.

The whole thing to me just reeks of pandering, where they (and I mean all of these companies, not just Amex) wants to make it clear they support the gays, but they aren't yet ready to show a realistic gay couple for fear that it won't play well for marketing. My point is that if you're not willing to depict gay couples as they typically are, don't depict them at all. Don't try to come off all progressive and then only show gay couples which are more "comfortable" for straight people to view.

And I still don't see the point of this. Gay couples are a small percentage of Amex users, yet that's the image they specifically choose to depict on the front page. It's not like they're depicting a group of people (like on a cruise where 2 of the 20 people shown are a gay couple). This is like, "Look at us! We are showing a gay couple instead of a straight one, so it means we're tolerant", when in the meantime something like 90% or more of their clientele is heterosexual.

Re the bolded part above:

1) How many such couples do you personally know to make such a statement? Or are you basing it on the more vocal ones that you are basing an extremely biased opinion on?

2) Ads depicting straight couples don't even show realistic ones! Else we see more couples like Honey Boo Boo's parents in them!

[Starbucks Spunk Bucket]

"handicapme: 10% is not greater than 1 in 10.... do you even math?"

Do you even anything bro? I said at least 10%, fucking dumbass. Go chew some more tobacco and wonder why you have no opposable thumbs

I don't chew tobacco, don't confuse me with SlimT, although I'd bet he would know that 10%=1&10

You're a fucking retard. /Thread

[gauchojake]

Some years ago I worked in a car rental business that happened to be in the heart of West Hollywood. All the gay dudes carried Platinum Amex. The dykes from Minnesota who would come in for the Pride Parade didn't though, so maybe this is a market they are going after.

[hongkonger]

Add American Express to the list of companies which have decided to pander to liberal and gay customers by presenting imagery of a happy gay couple, while pretending they are just depicting something totally mainstream.

This is what you see on the front page right now of americanexpress.com:




While you can't see the face of the woman on the left, it's clearly a woman from the body type and style of dress.

They even doubled down on their political correctness by making the lesbian couple interracial.

How progressive!

Strange how they decided not to depict one of the women as butch, even though at least one butch exists in most lesbian couples. I guess that's not aesthetically pleasing enough for the front page of americanexpress.com.

Who needs lesbian porn when you can simply log in to pay your credit card bill?

What you see as "pandering" I see as capitalism. On average compared to the general population gays are slightly better educated, have somewhat higher incomes, and more of that income is disposable because most gays don't have kids. They're trying to capture a lucrative segment of the market. The same as companies always giving you an option to speak in Spanish when you call. I've heard people complain about that too. There are lots of Spanish speakers and they spend money too. I find it rather amusing that so many pro-business Republican types complain about stuff like that when it is just companies trying to make money.

[FR1GHT]

What you see as "pandering" I see as capitalism. On average compared to the general population gays are slightly better educated, have somewhat higher incomes, and more of that income is disposable because most gays don't have kids. They're trying to capture a lucrative segment of the market. The same as companies always giving you an option to speak in Spanish when you call. I've heard people complain about that too. There are lots of Spanish speakers and they spend money too. I find it rather amusing that so many pro-business Republican types complain about stuff like that when it is just companies trying to make money.

What proof do we have of the above statement? I'm not disputing it, because I don't know. I just have not seen proof of it.

Do we believe that gays have above average intelligence, because of media portrayal?

Do we believe that gays have above average intelligence, because we only encounter them in our professional jobs?

How many gay people do you know that you haven't worked with or seen on TV?

I believe we haven't encountered the majority of gay people, because we don't run in their social circle.

Basically, I believe it's a skewed sample that the conclusion is being drawn from.

[FR1GHT]

OSA: making more money leads to believe better educated no?

Yes, I would believe so in most cases, but what are the statistics? Also, is that just a small subset of the population? I know gay people who make minimum wage.

Maybe?, the gay people in professional jobs make more money than their straight counter parts (Is that a subset?), but what about the rest of the gay population?

Should I think that black people as whole make more money than whites, because they make more money in the NBA?

lol wow: goto palm springs the gays are killing it and the restaurants are baller

"palm springs" gays <> gay population

That would be like me saying, I'm not sure if all black people are athletes and then you come back and say, "goto the NBA the blacks are killing it and the plays are baller."

The best part about the whole thing is that I didn't take a stance on the issue either way. I asked questions. Saying that I believe the sample is skewed is not taking a stance. It's just simply stating that I believe our beliefs are skewed until I see data. Rather than think about those questions or try to answer them you went on the defensive.

Thanks for contributing nothing. Idiot.

[lol wow]

so what youre saying is you havent been to palm springs the tram is delightful

[lol wow]

lol have you even had brunch in palm springs like i go cheekys for a more american fare but if its a weekend la tablita in cathedral city and you are just getting a pitcher of margs

[lol wow]

also fright with a number in it the move is vrbo around the deepwell road area, youll catch some queers that might frighten you but the houses are suuuuper dank

[FR1GHT]

also fright with a number in it the move is vrbo around the deepwell road area, youll catch some queers that might frighten you but the houses are suuuuper dank

Cool story, bro.

[lol wow]

awwwww sweetheart did you figure out i was trolling you with great restaurant reccs and houses you cant afford to rent vs your hilarious pablum posts then bae congratulations and cheekys is goat

[Dan Druff]

Add American Express to the list of companies which have decided to pander to liberal and gay customers by presenting imagery of a happy gay couple, while pretending they are just depicting something totally mainstream.

This is what you see on the front page right now of americanexpress.com:




While you can't see the face of the woman on the left, it's clearly a woman from the body type and style of dress.

They even doubled down on their political correctness by making the lesbian couple interracial.

How progressive!

Strange how they decided not to depict one of the women as butch, even though at least one butch exists in most lesbian couples. I guess that's not aesthetically pleasing enough for the front page of americanexpress.com.

Who needs lesbian porn when you can simply log in to pay your credit card bill?

What you see as "pandering" I see as capitalism. On average compared to the general population gays are slightly better educated, have somewhat higher incomes, and more of that income is disposable because most gays don't have kids. They're trying to capture a lucrative segment of the market. The same as companies always giving you an option to speak in Spanish when you call. I've heard people complain about that too. There are lots of Spanish speakers and they spend money too. I find it rather amusing that so many pro-business Republican types complain about stuff like that when it is just companies trying to make money.

I actually think they are pandering more to liberals who want to pat themselves on the back for "supporting" gays than actual gays.

Though maybe gauchojake is onto something where he claims that Amex is popular in the gay community. Of course, I also have an Amex Platium like all the gays he described in West Hollywood, so perhaps I'll be joining OSA at Thunder from Down Under on his next Vegas trip.

[zealanddonk]

Could possibly be Krypt on the left if he has long hair.

Cant possibly be Krypt, the one on the left has had sex with women.

[FR1GHT]

What you see as "pandering" I see as capitalism. On average compared to the general population gays are slightly better educated, have somewhat higher incomes, and more of that income is disposable because most gays don't have kids. They're trying to capture a lucrative segment of the market. The same as companies always giving you an option to speak in Spanish when you call. I've heard people complain about that too. There are lots of Spanish speakers and they spend money too. I find it rather amusing that so many pro-business Republican types complain about stuff like that when it is just companies trying to make money.

I actually think they are pandering more to liberals who want to pat themselves on the back for "supporting" gays than actual gays.

Though maybe gauchojake is onto something where he claims that Amex is popular in the gay community. Of course, I also have an Amex Platium like all the gays he described in West Hollywood, so perhaps I'll be joining OSA at Thunder from Down Under on his next Vegas trip.

Obviously, they are pandering to liberals. That's not even worth debating. Everybody just say it, because it's true. Nobody has challenged that. The challenge has been whether or not they should or how they should.

We hear you loud and clear, they are pandering with "ideal" gays, but who doesn't? That's like being mad at ESPN for not putting a scrub player on their front cover. It's advertising. The root of the problem is that you aren't happy they are pandering to a crowd that differs from YOU so you are grasping at straws like, why not put two butch girls in the commercial if you want to be realistic? It's the same way that NO magazine or commercial puts an ugly guy on the commercial for their beard shaver even though 90% of the guys who will buy/use that shaver are not of Hollywood quality. It's very simple.

Next time an Under Armor commercial runs with a super fit black guy why don't you complain that it isn't a fat high school football player, because that's who they are trying to get to buy their gear. Or do you think that Under Armor only wants cut division 1 players to use their gear?