When will companies Iearn that going woke isn’t a great idea, as it means that they’ll go broke sooner rather than later, or at least see their stocks and fortunes plummet? Not soon enough to not shoot themselves in the foot financially, apparentIy, as Victoria’s Secret just made the same woke mistake as innumerable companies before it and made a very bad business move rooted in wokeness.
What did it do? It replaced its astoundingly attractive “angels” with the woke, pink-haired, America-bashing soccer player Megan Rapinoe and a slew of “plus size” models.
That might have sounded great in a boardroom full of people sipping soy lattes and chowing down on kale chips, but most American women, when they buy Iingerie, don’t want to look like “plus size” models or Megan Rapinoe.
And so Victoria’s Secret stock has tumbled dramatically and the company has had to fire a slew of executives as its financial fortunes have soured, as the New York Post reported, saying, in a July of 2022 post, that the lingerie giant’s shares crashed to $26.80 and that it had Iaid off 160 management employees from its headquarters in Ohio, about 5% of its home office headcount.
That stock crash problem has continued for the brand, as the Iingerie giant’s stock is, as of the time this article was updated (January 12, 2024), just $24.23. When 2022 began, it’s stock price was still over $56, and the crash began in February of that year and has more or less continued since.
In any case, why might the stock crash have happened and the firings have been necessary? Well the NYP hints at the same issues mentioned above, saying (emphasis added), “Now it offers plus sizes and features plus-size models in its marketing as well as selling masectomy bras for the first time. It also Iaunched its first-ever Mother’s Day campaign last year.
Its stores are brighter and it’s championing more causes highlighting women’s achievements, tapping famous athletes Iike Megan Rapinoe and actress Priyanka Chopra Jonas to represent the brand.
Jim Caviezel Takes a Stand: Refuses to Work with Robert De Niro
Unexpectedly, Jim Caviezel, an actor, made news when he openly declared that he would never collaborate with Oscar winner Robert De Niro. Widely known for his performance as Jesus Christ in Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ,” Caviezel has called De Niro a “wretched, ungodly man.” This audacious claim has spurred a spirited discussion over the viability of personal convictions and business partnerships in Hollywood.
Devoted to Christianity and renowned for his unshakable adherence to moral values, Caviezel has been transparent about his religious beliefs. These ingrained convictions have informed his choice to keep his distance from Robert De Niro. Although Caviezel did not elaborate on their falling out, it is obvious that his decision is the result of a disagreement with his values. The actor feels that there is a difference between De Niro’s public persona and his previous actions, and he wants to work on projects that are consistent with his own moral principles.
This incident calls into question how performers manage their own convictions in the politically charged and cooperative world of Hollywood. While diversity of thought and expression has always been respected in the profession, there are increasingly more examples of actors setting boundaries based on personal principles. Caviezel’s reluctance to collaborate with De Niro is indicative of a shifting society in which people are more willing to stand by their values, even if doing so puts them in danger of losing their jobs.
The entertainment business has seen firsthand how an actor’s public remarks may help or hurt their career. Although Caviezel’s refusal to work with De Niro might win him over to supporters who share his values and respect his dedication to his convictions, it also raises questions about possible negative effects on his future partnerships and how business people view him. Some people would proceed cautiously with such public pronouncements, and it’s still unclear how this incident will affect Caviezel’s professional path.
One of the key characteristics of Caviezel’s public presence has been his strong Christian faith. He gained notoriety as an actor willing to take on parts that align with his spiritual beliefs because to his depiction of Jesus Christ in “The Passion of the Christ.” The argument with De Niro highlights the difficulties actors encounter in trying to uphold their morality in a field notorious for its complexity and moral ambiguities.
Beyond the specific performers engaged, consideration of the larger ramifications for Hollywood and the entertainment business at large is prompted by Caviezel’s refusal to collaborate with De Niro. The continuous conflict between individual convictions and the collective process of filmmaking is brought to light by this incident. There may be a change in the dynamics of the industry if more actors choose to use their platforms to voice their ideals and stand up for causes that are important to them.
The topic of how personal beliefs and professional obligations intersect in Hollywood has gained attention as a result of Jim Caviezel’s resolute refusal to work with Robert De Niro on moral reasons. The narrow line that separates personal ethics from the communal spirit that characterizes filmmaking is brought to light by this incident. The conflict between Caviezel and De Niro highlights the difficulties and complications experienced by performers who work hard to be true to their values as the entertainment business strives to negotiate these intricacies.
Leave a Reply