Oreo Insulted Its Customers In An Attempt to Get Woke Points, but There's a Larger Problem

FILE - In this Feb. 9, 2011, file photo, a shopper selects Oreo cookies by Nabisco, which is part of the Kraft Foods Inc. family of brands and products, at a supermarket in Los Angeles. U.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump is railing about what’s wrong in corporate America as he woos voters fed up with the status quo. He is blasting drugmaker Pfizer’s tax-saving plan to move its headquarters overseas, refusing to eat Oreo cookies made in Mexico and vowing to get Apple to make iPhones in the U.S. His tirades about unfair competition, tax evasion and lost jobs trumpet a familiar tune, but going further than many others running for president have dared. (AP Photo/File)

Of all the packaged cookies out there, Oreo rates as my absolute favorite. Holding them in milk like I’m trying to torture information out of the cookie and then eating the soft saturated aftermath is one of my favorite desserts. If it didn’t make me fat, I’d drown a bunch in a bowl of milk and eat it like cereal on the daily.

That said, I bought the cereal. Not as good. Don’t get it.

I tell you all this because I want you to understand that this recent political stunt that Oreo pulled put me in a position that I didn’t want to be in and that now I’ll be avoiding Oreo cookies for the foreseeable future. The reason is that the political stunt they pulled either showed me that they’re cowards or that they think I’m an ignorant idiot who needed guidance about social issues.

The problem started when Oreo decided to tweet out what constitutes defining what a “loving world” looks like and how we should be “respecting others.” That was mistake one.

It’s not up to Oreo to define these things. It’s a cookie maker, not a philosopher or a religious official. It hasn’t dedicated hours and hours to concepts of goodness or love.

It makes cookies.

Its second mistake was using a divisive example of what we could do to make a loving world more respectable. It immediately pointed to the transgender community’s demands on how we should utilize “pronouns,” complete with examples.

So not only did Oreo attempt to guide its customers with instructions on how to be more loving and respectful, it did so using one of the most divisive issues in the country. It effectively told us that the pronoun issue important to the trans community must be obeyed.

I use the word “obeyed” very deliberately. Few groups become as mob-like as the transgender community and their allies. Few groups adhere to cancel culture as it does. Careers and lives have been destroyed because of the transgender activist community’s lack of ability to reason and overt sensitivity. I, myself, lost a gig at one point because of the transgender mob.

There is a myriad of issues here but one of the biggest is the implication that “respect” and “love” look like using pronouns of those who disassociate with the gender they were born as, implying that disrespect, hate, and intolerance look like the opposite.

It’s implied because the transgender activist community has flat out said that any disagreement with this is, in fact, disrespect, hate, and intolerance.

Speaking from a person who looks at transgender issues in opposition from its activists, my refusal to embrace the transgender culture, including its pronouns, doesn’t come from a position of hate or intolerance. Having done the research, I’ve seen what the mental disorder “gender dysphoria” does to people and it’s not healthy. It carries with it a 40 percent suicide rate and off-the-charts rates of depression. These suicide rates climb for teenagers.

My care and respect go deeper than shallow references to them via pronouns, it’s absolute care for their life and quality of it. If you’re scaling which person cares the most here, those who consider transgenderism a mental disorder have a very valid argument about how they care more.

Oreo made it seem like care and love look like one thing, which just so happens to look like how the transgender activists demand it appear with repercussions to those who disagree. In doing so, Oreo did the exact opposite of what it was trying to set out to do. It divided, not united.

It could be Oreo did this for two reasons. One is that Oreo did so out of fear and obedience of being canceled and labeled as a brand who doesn’t care about transgender people or the LGBT community at large. A lot of horrible things could be lobbed at Oreo for the transgression of not capitulating to activists and mobs.

The other possibility is that Oreo agreed that people needed to be educated on this. They look out at their customers as uneducated and ignorant, possibly even in need of an intervention with the path to acceptance being normalization of the concept of pronouns and transgenderism.

No matter which reason, it’s not good. Either Oreo is a bunch of cowards or they think they’re better than others, enough to begin defining right and wrong to them.

The problem is that Oreo is just one of many companies that have taken this route. Merchants have become preachers. People who huck wares have taken it upon themselves to define right and wrong. Philosophy now comes with a logo.

It’s disturbing that we’ve gotten here because a company is either believes in its own self-importance or out of fear of being punished for not doing it. Either way, it’s all done in the name of keeping sales afloat which makes it feel all the cheaper. If tomorrow the entire world collectively turned against the LGBT community wholesale then Oreo would be one of the “woke” brands denouncing them right alongside everyone else.

I love Oreo but this participation in divisive politics has left such a bad taste in my mouth that no amount of Oreos and milk can get it out. I’ll be refraining from purchasing Oreos for some time, or at least until they get their act together.