As if the culture/gender/woke wars weren’t ridiculous enough, they have a new battlefield that takes the cake when it comes to the level of ridiculousness.
On Monday of this week, M&M’s announced that it was “taking a break” from its “beloved spokescandies.” The Tweet is below:
America, let’s talk. In the past year, we’ve made some changes to our beloved spokescandies. We weren’t sure if anyone would even notice. And we definitely didn’t think it would break the internet. But now we get it—even a candy’s shoes can be polarizing. Which was the last thing M&M’s wanted since we’re all about bringing people together.
In case you weren’t up on your woke ridiculousness, the “polarizing” changes that M&M’s is talking about are some slight physical changes to the M&M “spokescandies.” Green M&M’s too-sexy heeled boots were replaced with sneakers, and Brown M&M’s stilettos were swapped for more sensible pumps. The eyelashes of both were also made shorter and less alluring. All of the M&Ms got new arms and legs that matched their shell color, replacing the tan arms and legs. And in the spirit of “inclusivity,” Purple M&M was introduced. With her lace-up combat boots, she was intended to represent “acceptance and inclusivity,” and even comes with her own song—“I’m Just Gonna Be Me.” Orange M&M is embracing his anxiety disorder. Mars (the parent company of M&M) is also leaving behind gendered prefixes like “Mr.” or “Ms.,” instead focusing on “their personalities, rather than their gender.”
Among others, Tucker Carlson went a little nuts—calling the candies “woke M&Ms.” Twitter users had a fun time, with many calling for the return of the “hot” Green M&M. But Mars nonetheless suspended the “spokescandies,” instead announcing its new spokesperson—SNL comedienne Maya Rudolph. Is the candy giant serious? Is this just one big publicity stunt, intended to increase excitement for the M&M/Rudolph Super Bowl ad? Has America gone truly mad enough to care about what a candy company chooses to do with its “spokescandies”?
Or, perhaps, all of the above.
Discussion about this post