Look at all the angry, pathetic men raging about a product line that isn't for them.

Just because it's not targeted at you - doesn't make it bad, ffs. Grow up.

dgianstefaniKeep playing word games and projecting, the rest of us will most likely shop elsewhere.

Love it, now simple conversation and asking someone to explain themself is "word games".
Just admit it if you are wrong or explain why you arnt man jeez.

There's nothing wrong with releasing products that are aimed at an alternate, or under-represented markets. There's nothing wrong at all with releasing a product and configuring it for a specific demographic. However, I can see why some people here are reacting in an unfriendly manner. The PR blurb is nothing less than fluff and nonsense which contradicts the very same thing it is trying to project. If you actually read parts of it, the marketing drivel is remarkable.

This for example:

The Aurora Collection was conceptualized based on the feedback from women gamers .... the design process was guided by the following three principles:

• Comfort: In the design phase, the team made sure to take things into account like longer hair, glasses, earrings, and smaller hand sizes.

Glasses? I wear glasses. I'm a male. Longer hair--are girls not allowed short hair? Is Logi telling woman to grow long hair? And only women wear earings. What about pirates? See the freaking contradiction?

I state again, it is only correct that gaming periperhals reflect the broad tastes of separate identities, regardless what they are. And those tastes ought to be accepted and the gaming community ought to be inclusive.

But this PR piece from Logitech is a blatant, tone-deaf, and manufactured piece of crap.

C’mon people. It’s just a peripheral set.

Nice feminine name and appearence.

dgianstefaniHaving fun projecting?

Sadly there's no projection involved, only a very basic interpretation of the views and opinions being expressed here. "Things should stay as they are", "our culture is not discriminatory", "we don't need more diversity" etc. are very explicitly not apolitical statements.

Heck, it's kind of hilarious how this grand irony of all of this is lost on you and the others expressing similar sentiments - you're explicitly and unequivocally providing proof for the value and importance of initiatives like this (no matter if this specific example might be ham-fisted, cynical/exploitative, or otherwise flawed).

dgianstefaniRetarded, or to retard means slow in French. Simple. It's not a catch all term for people with down syndrome? People will use the descriptive language they want to, and you have no rights to tell them otherwise.

... last I checked we're all writing in English in an English-language forum? That kind of silly pedantry is incredibly transparent and dumb, so please refrain from it. "Retarded" in English is a derogatory term for someone with intellectual or physical disabilities, and that was precisely the way the word was being used here. Trying to hand-wave it away as "technically it means yadda-yadda" is the most transparent bad-faith rhetorical move known to mankind. Please stop, you're just making yourself look even worse.

dgianstefaniKeep playing word games

Maybe take a look in the mirror, dude? This literally made me laugh out loud, coming from just having read the previous quote.

dgianstefaniKeep playing word games and projecting, the rest of us will most likely shop elsewhere.

That's your right, and AFACT nobody has shown any interest in denying you that right. All we've done is disagree with your put-downs and crying over how terrible it is that our hobby is diversifying.

BSim500Honestly, no never. I've always liked that "minimalist" plain black look. No RGB, no window, no fuss (think Carbide 200 style and before that 'old school' Rosewill Line-M. Turns out blowing cold air straight onto the hottest components via 2x side intakes actually makes sense...) Same for mice - been using a Logitech G300/G300S for years. Ambidextrous, 9 remappable buttons, highly functional, onboard memory = no bloated software needed running in the background. Cost £25. Never had any urge to buy an "dirt magnet art piece" mouse for 3-4x the price, then frame it, hang it on the wall and invite people round only for them to leave with "Damn, that is one weird guy" mutters under their breath...

You seem to have missed about half my questions here. Your own preferences aren't especially unusual, but are you actually claiming that you are unaware of the massive amount of effort spent by tons of PC enthusiasts on making their rigs look good? Remember, your statement that I questioned was that

BSim500gamers usually don't "self-express" over hardware

which, while it might be true for you (though your statement above says otherwise - you're clearly putting a significant amount of thought and personality into your component choices, and while these might not be oriented towards looks and showing off primarily, none of that makes it any less of a self-expression - not all self-expression is extroverted, and "function before form" is an aesthetic ideal in and of itself), your initial statement was a generalization about (all) gamers. Which even a 30-second look on these forums, Reddit, or whereever else will show you is demonstrably untrue.

BSim500I think you'll find people are more bashing the "bandwagon jumping" marketing phrases than the minorities in question. Example - "Approachability = It needs to be white not black". So 'black is unapproachable' now, is it? Probably not quite what they mean but amusing as to how that could be interpreted...

The thing is, bashing the "bandwagon jumping" is a reactionary rhetorical move done - consciously or not - to try and avoid the consequences of representing said reactionary beliefs. Why is "jumping on the bandwagon" bad? Only if you think the thing represented by said "bandwagon" itself is bad, but you're avoiding attacking the subject directly by instead framing it as being anti-trendy rather than being anti-inclusive. Which, to even the most casual observer, is plain-faced, obvious and transparent BS. And, of course, framing it as "jumping on the bandwagon" is in and of itself a bad-faith and highly selective framing of reality, simplifying complex societal developments into "trends" and "fashion", again only worthy of criticism if you think the thing represented by said "bandwagon" is bad.

It's really, really simple to differentiate between good-faith and bad-faith applications of this type of critique: a good-faith approach will focus on the conflict between the nature of bandwagon-jumping and the cause nominally being represented, while a bad-faith approach will lump both together into a rejection or critique of both. Why? Because the fundamental thing that makes "jumping on the bandwagon" bad is the implication that the person/entity involved doesn't actually mean what they're saying or doing. Which only works as a critique if you agree with what they're saying they are doing in the first place. Otherwise? You're just looking for cheap tricks to dismiss something you don't like.

the54thvoidThere's nothing wrong with releasing products that are aimed at an alternate, or under-represented markets. There's nothing wrong at all with releasing a product and configuring it for a specific demographic. However, I can see why some people here are reacting in an unfriendly manner. The PR blurb is nothing less than fluff and nonsense which contradicts the very same thing it is trying to project. If you actually read parts of it, the marketing drivel is remarkable.

This for example:



Glasses? I wear glasses. I'm a male. Longer hair--are girls not allowed short hair? Is Logi telling woman to grow long hair? And only women wear earings. What about pirates? See the freaking contradiction?

I state again, it is only correct that gaming periperhals reflect the broad tastes of separate identities, regardless what they are. And those tastes ought to be accepted and the gaming community ought to be inclusive.

But this PR piece from Logitech is a blatant, tone-deaf, and manufactured piece of crap.

I agree that the PR blurb from this is ... something (I brought this up, though indirectly, in my first response here), and some of your critiques here are absolutely valid. However, you are being far too generous with the people being "critical" of this still. Why? Because the rhetoric and responses are straight out of the online reactionary/borderline far-right edgelord playbook, including but not limited to
- "If [company] keeps doing [things aimed at others than me in addition to the things they're already doing which are aimed at me] I will shop elsewhere"
- "We don't need more diversity"/"There's no lack of diversity here"/"the way things have always been, and which suits me and my demographic, is obviously neutral and inclusive (despite clear evidence to the contrary)"
- "Emotional"/"retarded"/"crying" etc.

Not to mention that the discussion hews quite clearly towards criticizing the initiative rather than the ham-fisted, transparently cynical and borderline self-parodying way it is presented - with the exception of a couple of posts. I completely agree that that press release is rather absurd, but ... well, it's a corporation. They are, generally, absurd. Their logics and modes of expression generally do not align with my experiences of how humans think or function. This is no more or less extreme than most other press releases, it just does the same thing differently. It might thus be more surprising, but the posting here makes clear that a lot of the people responding take offense just as much to the views being presented as to the absurdist form of it.

OperandiThe problem I see with this is the marketing campaign behind it. There is a group of gamers where the typical all black aesthetic is not something personally care for because it dosn't fit their personality, or for whatever reason its not to their preference. This addresses that and thats a good thing because nobody should feel unrepresented in society but this marketing and identity politics as a whole which this falls into is doing everything they are supposedly against by exploiting stereotypes and promoting exclusiveness twice as hard literally saying out loud the type of person that should be buying this. Its all very clumsy, heavy handed, insulting and ultimately counter productive to the people that felt marginalized in the first place.

I mostly agree with you here. The good thing about this, that makes me not bother being too critical about the ham-fisted, borderline self-parody of the PR here? That most people won't ever see this PR, or at most, they'll be exposed to a few promo shots in passing. Press releases are generally not read by ... well, people. So, the end result is mostly the availability of a broader, more diverse selection of equipment for a hobby already enjoyed by a very diverse group of (literally hundreds of millions of) people. Beyond that, to me this is standard fare corporate nonsense, no different than the thousands upon thousands of un-selfconsciously hypermasculine PR blurbs for other, comparable stuff. Yet, somehow, people only really get riled up when this stupid PR BS is framing something different. Almost as if ... oh, I don't know, some of these people take more offense at the thing being expressed than the ham-fisted corporate appropriation of it?

m2geekLook at all the angry, pathetic men raging about a product line that isn't for them.

Just because it's not targeted at you - doesn't make it bad, ffs. Grow up.

Did you ever think that the motivation behind this has nothing to do with gender equality/inclusivity and everything to do with marketing? Logitech wouldn't do something (like many other for profit businesses,) if they didn't think that they could make a buck off of it. Let's be realistic here, marketing keyboards isn't helping anyone except for the money Logitech will be making off of it. This product isn't going to change any pre-existing social constructs that are trying to be changed. This is 100% about money under the guise of gender inclusivity.

Can you at least turn off them lights without having to go through the G-Hub app every single time this time around?

AquinusDid you ever think that the motivation behind this has nothing to do with gender equality/inclusivity and everything to do with marketing? Logitech wouldn't do something (like many other for profit businesses,) if they didn't think that they could make a buck off of it. Let's be realistic here, marketing keyboards isn't helping anyone except for the money Logitech will be making off of it. This product isn't going to change any pre-existing social constructs that are trying to be changed. This is 100% about money under the guise of gender inclusivity.

I don't think anybody doubts that this is at least partly a cynical move to sell more products - heck, this has been said by pretty much everyone in the thread so far, and more explicitly by the people saying more diversity is a good thing than those opposed to it. It obviously isn't going to have any kind of tangible impact on society, but it does affect the low-level baseline of available options within this hobby, making it a smidge more accessible as time goes on (alongside all the other options that have been and are continuing to appear).

However, what stands out in this thread isn't criticizing the cynicism involved, but the degree of criticism and how it is formulated. Do we ever see companies being called "retarded" or people sayign they'll never buy from them again for putting out yet another red-and-black-and-covered-in-dragons or angular black+RGB design? People calling them joke products? Generally not - though the more extreme cases do tend to get made a bit of fun of, there is a major disparity in the intensity and tone of responses. And, of course, there are the tired-ass "people get so emotional", "we don't have a diversity problem" or the sweet, sweet irony of people shouting "NOBODY CARES" (then why are they shouting?) - all of which speak eloquently to this triggering a dislike that goes well beyond any reaction to cynical corporate PR nonsense.

The marketing is well worth criticising, but the people making the best case for that in this thread so far are not the people most critical of this announcement overall. And that says something.

ValantarI mostly agree with you here. The good thing about this, that makes me not bother being too critical about the ham-fisted, borderline self-parody of the PR here? That most people won't ever see this PR, or at most, they'll be exposed to a few promo shots in passing. Press releases are generally not read by ... well, people. So, the end result is mostly the availability of a broader, more diverse selection of equipment for a hobby already enjoyed by a very diverse group of (literally hundreds of millions of) people. Beyond that, to me this is standard fare corporate nonsense, no different than the thousands upon thousands of un-selfconsciously hypermasculine PR blurbs for other, comparable stuff. Yet, somehow, people only really get riled up when this stupid PR BS is framing something different. Almost as if ... oh, I don't know, some of these people take more offense at the thing being expressed than the ham-fisted corporate appropriation of it?

Yeah, nothing particularly standout about as far as the level of over the top marketing stupidity. The standout issue of which this is part of is how backwards and persuasive identity politics has become in western society. As far as what this is, its just some PC peripherals so under normal circumstances who gives a fuck, but the approach the marketing team took with this is just such a standout text book example of how completely nonsensical and divisive this social phenomenon has become which is why people are loosing their minds over this and everything else similarly attached to identity politics.

ValantarThe marketing is well worth criticising, but the people making the best case for that in this thread so far are not the people most critical of this announcement overall. And that says something.

Does it though? In this day and age, fringe beliefs are out in the open and hyperbole is commonplace. I just try to call things out for what I think they are and I would like to think that I'm thinking about it critically. I'm all for social development, but even that can be taken to extremes... just like this marketing. :laugh:

I remember when we used to come here to drink

OperandiYeah, nothing particularly standout about as far as the level of over the top marketing stupidity. The standout issue of which this is part of is how backwards and persuasive identity politics has become in western society. As far as what this is, its just some PC peripherals so under normal circumstances who gives a fuck, but the approach the marketing team took with this is just such a standout text book example of how completely nonsensical and divisive this social phenomenon has become which is why people are loosing their minds over this and everything else similarly attached to identity politics.

Meh - identity politics are nothing new. Literally all politics have identitarian elements baked into them - the only new thing is the explicit focus on this aspect and the increasing number of groups refusing to bow to the hegemonic "default" identities or accept their purported "neutrality". Patriarchal politics are identitarian. The WASPy-ness of American mainstream politics for the past ... century? is extremely identitarian. Current identity politics are only special in how they clearly and explicitly refuse to bow to the hegemonic power of white patriarchal societal structures, and instead explicitly call these out and work towards changing them. There's nothing at all backwards about the current verison of this - it's how politics works. The current backlash to the growth of identity politics is extremely similar to the backlash to previous roughly comparable progressive social movements, from women's suffrage to the US civil rights movement. The responses are similar, the rhetoric is essentially the same, etc. By framing this as a "divisive" social phenomenon you're essentially putting the blame on oppressed people for receiving pushback to them trying to claim their fundamental human rights, rather than putting blame where it belongs: hegemonic structures of power and privileged in-groups. While a very mild version of it, some of your reasoning here is essentially the same old tired "but why do they have to make so much trouble about it? Couldn't they be more civil and constructive about making change" line, which has never been anything but a bad-faith attempt at stopping change. It's literally an impossible requirement, as the system doens't allow you the power to lobby for change without kicking down some of the walls propping up that system. If you don't make trouble, nothing ever changes, as those in power have no interest in sharing it, and a society structured around privileging one group isn't going to change that fundamentally unless you make enough trouble to show that such a system isn't sustainable.

AquinusDoes it though? In this day and age, fringe beliefs are out in the open and hyperbole is commonplace. I just try to call things out for what I think they are and I would like to think that I'm thinking about it critically. I'm all for social development, but even that can be taken to extremes... just like this marketing. :laugh:

It very obviously can, and there are definitely parts of current progressive social movements that I see as taking specific things too far, or just plain going in the wrong direction. But the thing is, the alternative is unequivocally worse, more extreme and more explicitly harmful. When, broadly speaking, you have one side saying "we want to be treated as people and have our fundamental humanity respected", and another saying "yeah, no thanks, we very much enjoy dehumanizing you, thank you", then it's pretty clear to me which side of that debate deserves the majority of critical attention, even if all sides obviously need that. The problem is that, both due to bad actors and the general tendency of it being easier to criticize the unfamiliar than the familiar, the opposite is typically the case - the current norm is treated as the default, "normal" (in the prescriptive meaning of the word, rendering others abnormal), and from that: good. Which, IMO, is quite messed up.

Unlike, say, greenwashing, I see no fundamental issue with marketing like this - it's superficial, silly and transparent, but the creation of the products has the actual real-world positive effect of giving more choice, so as long as one accept that (for now) we're living in a borderline dystopian capitalist hellscape in which there is no such thing as ethical consumption, at least this provides a tiny sliver of freedom in another direction. Capitalism, as always, eats everything, and will take whatever matters the most to you, strip it of its soul, meaning and worth, and sell it back to you in as high quantities and with as high margins as possible, so obviously the marketing is going to be hyperbolic, feel weird, but try to appeal to whatever some group sees as good. That's universal, and I see no reason to critique that more in this case than any other, save for the copy perhaps being slightly more stupidly written than normal. But for a press release trying to be anything but dry as a bone, that's once again expected.

ZoneDymowhy people get so emotional about this stuff ill never understand

Because I do not want my keyboard politicized. It has nothing to do with getting emotional. I just think that keyboard companies should stick to making keyboards and stop telling me what to think.

They’re not telling you what to think, they’re selling peripherals to femmes…

AdmiralThrawnBecause I do not want my keyboard politicized. It has nothing to do with getting emotional. I just think that keyboard companies should stick to making keyboards and stop telling me what to think.

The stock conservative talking point of "stop telling me what to think" is so fascinating to me. I mean, are they? In any way? No. They're saying something. It's not necessarily directed at you, nor are you somehow mandated to agree with what is being said. You're entirely welcome to think differently, and even to debate that if you're able to do so in a sensible way. But no, you can't handle someone saying something you disagree with, because apparently your belief system is so fragile that even the utterance of other opinions is tantamount to "telling you what to think". So instead we get straw men, ridicule, and other bad faith nonsense. As for "not wanting your keyboard politicized": too bad. By existing in human society, it already is and has always been, by default. Just because something is "like it's always been" does not in any way, shape or form render that thing apolitical. Not in the slightest. Believing that any human creation is or can be apolitical is one of the greatest self-delusions possible.

Two pages, mostly of identity crisis management. All because Corsair marketing went OTT with what should have been a simple product announcement.

That be a closure coming.

Ok here we go. When video Games became a part of society it first was in Arcades. I don't remember there being many girls in the Arcade. When consoles became available they were marketed towards boys and girls. Society decided that they would be Xmas and summer presents for boys. In North America the vast amount of Video Games were made for perceived male activities. In Japan they made Games for everyone as growing up, there were just as many Girls who played Mario as Boys. Indeed Nintendo was known as the Family console. The PC is different because they were marketed and bought by everyone. As society advanced and PC Games became more prolific Games like the Sims, JRPGs and puzzle became things that were played by more Girls than Doom or Wing Commander. Today we live in a world where in just about any Game you can choose to be male or female. I do not see these any different than Pink cases or Japanese anime/manga girl specific decals. The funny thing is plenty of us have daughters that we ourselves have introduced to the World of Gaming and I am willing to bet that more Women than Men have played Candy Crush. We have just come out of the Greatest civilian expenditure on PC parts in History. That means that there will be things that Companies will make and market for niche customers. F me didn't we get Gundam and Evangelion focused PC parts? Adding emotion to berate or lessen these items is foolish as no one reading this article is obligated to buy it. Maybe the focus should be the marked decline in the quality of Logitech products and the hope that this is a sign of something good. I am not trying to inflame anyone with that comment either as my G510 and G700 are still going strong. I bought the MX800 wireless combo for like $189 and loved it until after about 8 months the keyboard started not registering certain keys and reassigning where others were.

Gotta love that this SJW bullshit found its way even here. True individuals doesn't need identity politics or laughable marketing, regardless of gender. This whole charade results in the exact opposite effect it intends to cause, for a good reason. Girls/women can find proper, even downright girly (and also good!) peripherals for a long time now, without any of this gender-inclusive, woke crap. Nice colors, gentle slopes (or the exact opposite, if that's what floats your boat), small, medium, big, you name it, and they are awesome.

Logitech was on my "meh, no thx" list in the past few years (even though they revolutionized the industry in 2018 with the G PRO Wireless, and the G915 TKL is really lovely – well, except those abysmal ABS keycaps, which are joke in that price range), but this press release... I'm slowly starting to feel inclined to wish bankruptcy on them. Or on any company, that even remotely rides this wave, which poisons gullible minds with empty buzzwords in the second half of the past decade for that matter. Just based on principle alone. I'm a male btw, who played a lot of Sims back in the day and love JRPGs, and also a hardcore (classic) Doomer and competitive ex-Quaker, who absolutely adores colorful peripherals, even in light pink, if it's tasteful. This is nothing special. Associating colors with genders might hold some truth in itself, but also a pretty sexist concept as well, if it's specifically targeted.


Also a new, small ergo mice, which could be interesting, but it weights 85 (EIGHTY-FIVE) grams. Really, Logitech? In 2022? Why? If you spew this gender trash (Razer was much more elegant about it, never had a negative thought regarding that, but quite the contrary), shouldn't it be more lighter, since females tend to have significantly less physical strength than males in general? Oh wait, you are EMPOWERING them I reckon, for the purpose of building some serious muscles. This is also the reason for the female model to have a buzz cut, right? Get lost...

Just make that damned G305 Superlight with ~53ish grams already, without stupid ads, and bath in money, more than you do now. Also, please start using good microswitches and virgin grade PTFE instead of cheap Omron (20/50Ms) and leukoplast on your 100 $(+) mice, since THAT would be way more "gender-inclusive"...


/rant off, going back to Pulsar, G-Wolves and Atompalm : D

Man, it's fun to see how consistent the "this makes me angry and I am entirely unable to recognize that my preconceived notion of what is 'normal' and 'default' is itself inherently gendered and distinctly non-neutral and is couched in a decades-long history of exclusionary marketing and cultural constructions' crowd is. Same "arguments"? Check. Same "I'm actually not stereotypical, but..."? Check. Same "Why can't we just leave things alone"? Check. Same deeply, deeply flawed representations of how diverse product selections have been historically? Check. Same doom-and-gloom predictions about the future of the company? Check. Same failure to recognize that appealing to a more diverse audience increases the size of the potential buyer group, and that this is by no means counteracted by the small, loud group of people who have reactionary knee-jerk reactions to this? Check. Failure to recognize that the fact that you are taking offense at products being marketed towards someone who is explicitly not you is an incredibly hypersensitive and deeply irrationally defensive thing? Check.

ValantarMan, it's fun to see how consistent the "this makes me angry and I am entirely unable to recognize that my preconceived notion of what is 'normal' and 'default' is itself inherently gendered and distinctly non-neutral and is couched in a decades-long history of exclusionary marketing and cultural constructions' crowd is. Same "arguments"? Check. Same "I'm actually not stereotypical, but..."? Check. Same "Why can't we just leave things alone"? Check. Same deeply, deeply flawed representations of how diverse product selections have been historically? Check. Same doom-and-gloom predictions about the future of the company? Check. Same failure to recognize that appealing to a more diverse audience increases the size of the potential buyer group, and that this is by no means counteracted by the small, loud group of people who have reactionary knee-jerk reactions to this? Check. Failure to recognize that the fact that you are taking offense at products being marketed towards someone who is explicitly not you is an incredibly hypersensitive and deeply irrationally defensive thing? Check.

@Valantar - you ought to understand that Corsair are using gender identity as a sales tactic, and worse, their PR spiel is very off-colour.

I'm for equality but I also despise marketing campaigns from corporations that try to manipulate relevant and important social issues. I think that is what pisses most people off. It's not the product demographic, it's the awful and misjudged marketing.

the54thvoid@Valantar - you ought to understand that Corsair are using gender identity as a sales tactic, and worse, their PR spiel is very off-colour.

I'm for equality but I also despise marketing campaigns from corporations that try to manipulate relevant and important social issues. I think that is what pisses most people off. It's not the product demographic, it's the awful and misjudged marketing.

I absolutely see that side of it - which I've also brought up myself earlier in this thread. The problem is that this simply isn't the main thing being complained about - not in terms of words used or arguments, not in the tone of writing, not in the subtext of the posts. These posts are not mainly posts about... well, we could call it pinkwashing, or at least something related to that concept. But that's not the main thing being brought up or argued against by people here. Instead, that genuine problem is used as a way of complaining about progressive social movements and their purported harms (for which exactly zero evidence exists, but I guess never mind that?). This is a basic play straight out of the contemporary reactionary right-wing handbook, and is immediately transparent, especially when the surrounding arguments or points brought up are either hollow or just factually incorrect.

It is obvious that whenever a corporation adopts any kind of progressive language, it will be a lie on some level. Corporations literally cannot be actually progressive, as they are in a hegemonic position of power - they are intrinsically a part of the structure of the system, and thus can't actually work for radical change of the system. That doesn't mean that people working for them can't hold these values or opinions, or can't work to meld these values into their work. This is how slow societal shifts happen without major societal structures changing. And, crucially, capitalism eats everything - i.e. it will take whatever anyone comes up with, including explicitly anticapitalist politics, churn it up and try to sell it back to you. A huge part of how capitalism sustains itself as a global hegemonic system of dominance is through its ability to include performative oppositionalities and rebellions within its overall structures, as that makes it nearly impossible to differentiate between "real" or "fake" resistance - and to some extent makes the distinction meaningless. An exploited population is less likely to rebel if you can keep them satisfied by showing them someone else seeming to do so in a visible, performative manner.

So: it's obvious that this is mainly marketing. Does that make it disingenuous? Sure, to some extent, though it is impossible to judge to which degree. But does that matter? No. Why? Because it is literally no different whatsoever from everything else we're surrounded by at all times, outside of the single difference of which groups or values are referenced. And that's what makes the "counterarguments" here fall apart. If these people were against corporate appropriation for marketing purposes as a general principle, then they wouldn't only be complaining about these types of moves - they'd be equally up in arms about anything targeting stereotypical gamers, or dads, or sysadmins, or whatever - any appeal to a group, value, or emotion. Instead, their posts carry a level of affect and emotion that doesn't match the purported "I'm just protesting against corporate lying" logic, a level of affect worded in such a way that it typically either expresses a feeling of being threatened, or a feeling of having something taken away from you. Both of which are not only complete nonsense, but incompatible with this being any kind of principled argument against corporate PR BS. These are not principled arguments, they are reactionary knee-jerk reactions with a thin skin of "rational" "justice" in order to hide the fact that they're mainly just being defensive and feel threatened. And when what is threatening is corporations trying to sell stuff to people belonging to different groups than you? Well, that speaks to a rather thin skin and oversensitive threat detection mechanisms.

ValantarMan, it's fun to see how consistent the "this makes me angry and I am entirely unable to recognize that my preconceived notion of what is 'normal' and 'default' is itself inherently gendered and distinctly non-neutral and is couched in a decades-long history of exclusionary marketing and cultural constructions' crowd is. Same "arguments"? Check. Same "I'm actually not stereotypical, but..."? Check. Same "Why can't we just leave things alone"? Check. Same deeply, deeply flawed representations of how diverse product selections have been historically? Check. Same doom-and-gloom predictions about the future of the company? Check. Same failure to recognize that appealing to a more diverse audience increases the size of the potential buyer group, and that this is by no means counteracted by the small, loud group of people who have reactionary knee-jerk reactions to this? Check. Failure to recognize that the fact that you are taking offense at products being marketed towards someone who is explicitly not you is an incredibly hypersensitive and deeply irrationally defensive thing? Check.

Nothing flawed here, just cold, hard truths, it's not my fault that you don't know your product selections. Defending this ridiculous crap like crazy, while massively projecting, trying to look being oh-so-informed and eloquent? Check.

See ya, bring your pseudo-moralistic stances™ elsewhere, I'm not buying them. Maybe you should try getting a job at Logitech's PR department; they'll desperately need such a talent if they are planning on keeping up with this shit. Check. Mate. : D

SynthwaveNothing flawed here, just cold, hard truths, it's not my fault that you don't know your product selections. Defending this ridiculous crap like crazy, while massively projecting, trying to look being oh-so-informed and eloquent? Check.

See ya, bring your pseudo-moralistic stances™ elsewhere, I'm not buying them. Maybe you should try getting a job at Logitech's PR department; they'll desperately need such a talent if they are planning on keeping up with this shit. Check. Mate. : D

Lol, "cold, hard truths", that literally made me laugh. I can't see a single one in your post. Fee free to post some credible sources for some of those statements, maybe?

As for the whole "oh, you don't mean this, you're just acting this way for cred" spiel, that is such a thin, washed-out, used-up, blind, ridiculously bad-faith derailing tactic that ... do you actually think that riles people up, or somehow scores you any points? If that's all you've got, then you really need to do better. Also, suggesting someone voicing an explicit critique of capitalism wants to get a job in a PR department is ... man, you're cracking me up :laugh: I've got to remember that one.

Kind of amazing that a person can perform a caricature to a t only to assert that their “objectivity” releases them from their affectation.

ValantarAlso, suggesting someone voicing an explicit critique of capitalism wants to get a job in a PR department is ... man, you're cracking me up :laugh: I've got to remember that one.

TBF, I know plenty of Marxist feminists who are also awful bosses, work in PR and HR, and or are just awful misogynists. Interpellation is a mother fucker.