The new “normal” of woke culture really is normal for at least one mega-company.
Thus, “normal” is out.
The BBC reports that on Tuesday London-based Unilever – which among its 400 global brands makes personal care goods under the labels of Dove, Axe, and Lifebuoy – is dropping the word “normal” from its beauty products.
The BBC notes, “The word ‘normal’ is typically used on shampoos, conditioners and face products, such as for ‘normal or oily skin.’”
Indeed, WebMD points out that there are “normal, oily, dry, combination, or sensitive skin types,” for instance.
The website defines “normal” skin as “not too dry and not too oily,” and features “no or few imperfections; no severe sensitivity; barely visible pores; a radiant complexion.”
On the other hand, dry skin, for example, is noteworthy for “almost invisible pores; dull, rough complexion; red patches; more visible lines.”
While science may try to distinguish differences so people can improve their health or appearance, Unilever told the BBC that it is striving for a “more inclusive definition of beauty.”
Sunny Jain, the company’s president of beauty and personal care products, added, “We know that removing ‘normal’ from our products and packaging will not fix the problem alone, but it is an important step forward.”
The BBC reported that instead of “normal” Unilever would try out different adjectives to exhibit “particular” qualities in its personal care products. For instance, shampoo meant for “normal to dry” hair would be branded for “dry and damaged” hair.
No word yet on whether anyone is offended by the term “damaged” in describing their appearance. But give it time.
Unilever, according to the BBC, announced that it would take other steps to encourage “a new era of beauty that’s inclusive, equitable and sustainable.”
Jain suggested to the network that consumers were “increasingly” rewarding firms for social justice practices and that Unilever was poised to become a “more successful business.”
While all businesses obviously seek to be “more successful,” Unilever certainly cannot claim poverty.
Last month, the company released its 2020 financial report, noting that profits were down 5.8 percent – something easily attributable to a global pandemic.
Yet Unilever also banked $11.1 billion in profits in 2020, the report indicates.
Perhaps more correct was the take by Sophie Lund-Yates, a London financial analyst.
“The world’s consumer base is becoming increasingly aware of social issues, and the threat of boycotts and backlashes means giants like Unilever are right to try and avoid PR headaches,” she told the BBC.
Lund-Yates admitted that with a market powerhouse like Unilever, “a tweak like this is unlikely to move the dial at the operating level.”
Still, she continued, “What it does show is a heightened awareness of the issues that matter to consumers, and a proactive approach suggests management has its eye on the ball.”
Or, alternatively, management has its eye on the cantankerous SJW types who, once revved up, never give companies a moment of peace until they utterly capitulate – in which case Unilever is not responding to changing market forces, but acting more like shopkeepers who cough up protection money to the Mafia.
Subscribe to our newsletter!
Android users, find us on Conservative News by clicking here and downloading the app today. Coming soon for IOS.
Check out the ‘Cancel Corner‘, a new section launched where we report on the latest Cancel Cases and stories from around the globe.