@Insomnolant @bleedingphoenix It's both/and NOT either/or. It is financially motivated, because there's an inclusivity push at a lot of levels controlled by investors. Nobody wants this at the consumer level. Marketing is a mixed bag of talented people who want to make sales and agenda driven hacks, as well as people in between. But marketing was always the sneaky weasel in the room, regardless of what was being presented. A company like Unilever could put out body positivity ads for women while also putting out Axe/Lynx ads showing flocks of girls groping on a guy who smells like their cologne. The agenda was a soft touch because results were what mattered. You can tell it's off the rails because the results today are shit. They keep doing it because they're out of touch and they're stuck in a feedback loop where the people most responsive to their focus group type testing—Twitter and Reddit types—are increasingly disconnected from normalcy.

That they don't can the people involved in this or the CEO is because of the investors. Most of the big companies are majority institutionally owned. The mutual funds, ETFs, etc. that people own in their investment accounts or 401ks and pensions dont give you the votes. State street, Blackrock, vanguard are getting your votes. A lot of companies end up 25%+ controlled by those three, which effectively gives them full domination of the board.

That there's a motive to do this pushed by institutions at all is because of anti-White biases and hatred. That's their motive. The means are through Capitalism. Destruction of legacy brands and social capital is a bonus.