Dear Vogue Magazine,
Trying to appease SJWs with a ‘diverse’ cover is a lesson in futility. Nothing and no one is EVER diverse enough for an SJW.
Regards,
Everyone
So, Vogue tried to do the whole diversity thing for their March cover touting the fact that the new norm in beauty is no norm. And as you can probably already imagine, the Left (predominately SJW types) were not happy with the cover.
The next wave of models are redefining beauty: the new norm is no norm. https://t.co/804dMdgWGI
— Vogue Magazine (@voguemagazine) February 9, 2017
But then again, are they really ever all that happy with anything?
The cover should've been more inclusive w/variety of skin tones,sizes,heights & ages,as well as more diversity every month?
— BibaGirrrl (@BibaGirrrl) February 9, 2017
Uh oh, the diversity cover wasn’t more inclusive!
And YEAH, shame on Vogue for trying to appease the beast that is feminism, lol.
What does "redefining beauty" mean when you have some of the most overused, most conventional-looking models on your cover?
— elena (@sadgirlsag) February 9, 2017
Conventional-looking. What exactly does that mean? They’re lovely women of all shapes, sizes and skin tones … what, there’s not some hairy-legged cat hoarder on the cover? Sorry, a lot of people don’t want to look at that on purpose.
this is exactly why I don't support Vogue. This is not the "norm."
— … (@stop_stalking_1) February 10, 2017
This is not the norm … HA HA HA.
a bunch of lightskin slim women, nothing new here.
— chubby chica chillin (@MichelleIsWeird) February 9, 2017
Like we said, these people are never happy.
photoshopped! This isn't promoting women!!
— John Wilson (@JohnWil35249712) February 9, 2017
Yeah, John here is offended that Vogue would Photoshop a cover … GIRL POWER!
Luckily some on Twitter decided to mock the whole thing.
Are any of them transsexuals? Transabled?
Haters.— Flyover Prole (@jswilt) February 10, 2017
Eeek!
where's the diversity? there's not a single blonde!!!
— Omaha (@tcloetingh) February 10, 2017
Yeah! Where’s the blonde!?
No diversity of gender.
— Razor (@hale_razor) February 10, 2017
Right? With like eleventy billion genders out there surely they should have put a few more on the cover.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member