Just offer her a can of:
I can pick up a can for you when I go to Omega Mart in August.
I hear that the drink tastes exactly like you want it to.
“Transvestites”? Seriously? Please state why you consider that an acceptable thing to say.
This is a very strange example that you picked, considering that this very thing has existed for many years courtesy of (checks notes) Anheuser-Busch.
Maybe I hang out with more hunters who drink shitty beer than most people, but the Camo Can has been a thing for quite a while. And never once have I heard a peep about it.
(I’m sure someone out there has complained. For the record, I find any such complaint to be really silly. But there certainly isn’t the kind of backlash you suggest would ensue.)
And the reaction was very other than positive,
So much to unpack in this post. I think its very illuminating but not in the way you think.
First off
No one was being meddled with. The trans influencer who started the whole hubbub was attempting to influence other trans friendly people. If it hadn’t discovered and amplified across the right wing social media and Fox News none of these people who complained about how they are sick having woke forced down their throat would ever have heard of it. Bud Light wasn’t meddling, the right was going out of their way to seek out things to be outraged about.
But the rest of this post is where things get really interesting, as you attempt to make a straw man hypothetical of how horrible it would be if the roles were reversed but in fact actually portraying something close to reality driving home the point of how over the top the rights reaction is.
If only that were all that Christians wanted.
Then Christians start demanding not just tolerance, but acceptance and approval. They want you to wear a cross to show support. Crosses start getting drawn on sidewalks, etc. Still, you’re glad that so many people are showing support for an oppressed group.
Suddently everyone is sporting crosses, If you don’t, you are a bigot. Suddenly everyone who isn’t Christian is called ‘Non-Cris’.
Not to far from where things are now. In many places in the US, not being a Christian is seen as meaning you are inherently immoral.
Big difference between, teaching your employees that they shouldn’t discriminate against Christians vs forcing them to convert to Christianity, although again some employers do require regular prayer meetings for their staff.
Again, there are openly Christian characters in tons and tons of shows, and nobody gives a damn, but put one transgender person in and suddenly Oh my god! And yes we do have large number of athletes thanking god for their victory making a cross when they make a touchdown, no major boycotts.
No they aren’t teaching the bible and babptising, but they aren’t transitioning them either. On the other hand they do learn about the Puritans, and John Brown, and the influence of Christianity had on America. Its not as if they are prevented by law from mentioning it. Finally if a child from a Muslim family expressed an interest in Christianity, I would hope that the law wouldn’t require that the parents be informed.
No what they want is to continue to exist in a world in which their perspective as a White Cis, Heterosexual Christian (WCHC) is the only one that exists. The fact that other world views are also starting to emerge in the national consciousness bothers them because they are no longer being pandered to in the way to which they have become accustomed. It had always been understood that others gave way to their ideas not the other way around.
Which is why you thought it would support your point to point out what it would be like to have (WHCH) forced on you without realizing that that is the way its been for hundreds of years. Or to put it another way, you are a fish living in the ocean complaining about all the bubbles, and asking a drowning rat how it would feel if it were surrounded by water?
I saw in the paper the other day that Miller Lite priced around $22.99 for 30-pack was greatly outselling Bud Light at $8.99 per 30. Back when I drank cheap beer, I couldn’t IMAGINE paying nearly 2.5x as much for one extremely mediocre beer than another. (As I recall, Stroh’s was the cheapie back then.) Really boggles my mind that anyone buying and drinking this swill would pay such a premium out of some gender identity fear/anger.
I think you are wrong there. Any time a non-Christian, non-white, non-straight person is given any amount of attention and air-time, for whatever reason, the right wing snowflakes are forced to see that there are other Americans in existence that are not part of their camp. Therefore having to know “others” are out there, hence meddling with their belief system. It’s just too much woke sometimes! 
“You don’t like the Goths?"
“No! Not with the persecution we have to put up with!”
“Persecution?”
“Religious persecution. We won’t stand for it forever.”
“I thought the Goths let everybody worship as they pleased.”
"That’s just it! We Orthodox are forced to stand around and watch Arians and Monophysites and Nestorians and Jews going about their business unmolested, as if they owned the country. If that isn’t persecution, I’d like to know what is!”
L. Sprague De Camp ~ Lest Darkness Fall
I agree with your main point, but the point that I was trying to make was that this wasn’t even a case of Right Wingers being upset about being confronted by transgendered people. It was them going out of their way to find transgendered person to be upset about.
Its like a person who is upset by all this rap music he hears. Every where he goes there is a boom box, or a car stereo playing it. But what gets him really mad is that he went over to his neighbors house, put his ear up against the window and hear that they were playing it inside their home.
you know what’s so interesting about this boycott? in some areas bud light became popular is a lot of labor unions had boycotted Coors and the owners for being publicly racist homophobic bastards among other things ,
Is it not?
Totally agree. They didn’t even go looking for something to be outraged about. No, they’re too lazy for even that. As you said, it had to be amplified by someone, somewhere for them to even take take notice.
Great posts over all, but minor note: “Transgender person,”’ not “transgendered person.” Same way its “Black person,” not “Blackened person.”
Thanks, I’m still learning the proper grammar on this and appreciate the correction.
A “transvestite” or “crossdresser” is a man dressing as a woman, either as a performance or for their own kink. They’re still a man. A transgender person has transitioned to another gender, and is not an entertainer or doing it because it turns them on. It’s their identity.
As a Canadian I am somewhat isolated from American goings-on. The only other place I heard about this was daily articles in the New York Post over a week or two, saying how this reaction had affected sales (possibly fanning the flames). I did not read the articles and did not know the reaction was to a simple social media video. I don’t think most people did. Maybe my views are naïve - socially liberal, economically conservative, somewhat libertarian and certainly they matter little. But IMHO the smart future for conservatism (given changing demographics) is pushing free speech, individual rights and fewer people unreasonably telling you how to be and what to do while still generally supporting traditional institutions. Reasonable people might disagree with parts of this, of course.
So it is hard to believe the optimum response by Bud was to greatly lower prices and hire some NFL players. A response pleasing and informing nothing (though sales and stocks will probably rebound eventually.). Though maybe there aren’t any great answers, taking out full page ads, telling people what this was a reaction to, stating their side of the story and affirming some sort of commitment to free speech and your freedom and how anyone can enjoy a “delicious Bud Light” or other principles (should such a thing ever exist, ads contain puffery) may or may not have been better, but could scarcely have been worse. Better perhaps for companies to keep business and public politics more separate since it has always been hard to please everyone and these are challenging times.
Short memory?
It is not. It’s a term that has fallen out of favor, and it really only refers to someone who wears clothing that’s usually associated with the opposite gender (i.e., cross-dressing), and has nothing to do with their gender identity.
As others have already noted, “transgender” or “transgender person” are the words which are both more accurate, and non-offensive.