Anti-racism groups plan to sue Guerlain

[99 Apples]

please to be thinking before you speak, JPGuerlain?

pretty much the moral of the story.

 

[Karen0193]

Am I going to hell for laughing at that?

you and me both.
Yeah, it was politically incorrect, but to the point of suing an 72-year-old man that is not gonna change his convictions upon race issues... yeah, its ridiculous.

 

[tiffany]

^It is ridiculous

He sounds like such an a s s

 

[LabelWhore4]

Heir to Guerlain cosmetic empire convicted of making racist insults

By Associated Press, Updated: Thursday, March 29, 7:33 AM

PARIS — A French court convicted longtime perfume maker Jean-Paul Guerlain of making racist insults on national television and fined him Thursday €6,000 ($8,000).

The 75-year-old Guerlain, an heir to his family’s cosmetics empire, provoked anger among French minorities with the comments in a 2010 interview on France-2 television. He used a French word for black people in a derogatory way as he described how hard he worked to create one of the company’s most famed perfumes.

Several anti-racism groups filed legal complaints, and protests were staged in front of the Guerlain store on the Champs-Elysees avenue in Paris. Some called for a boycott of Guerlain products.

Guerlain apologized to France’s black community during the trial, calling it an “imbecilic” remark.

He was convicted in a Paris court. The judge did not sentence him to any prison time, though the charge could have allowed a sentence of up to six months behind bars.

“I am from another generation,” he said during the trial, so part of the remark was “a common expression at the time.” He also said he did so during a TV interview because he “wanted to make the journalist laugh and I regret it.”

“I was anything but racist,” he said, standing before the court with the help of crutches.

Lawyers for the SOS Racism association said Guerlain abused the national platform he was given.

The company distanced itself from Guerlain, who had retired at 65 but remained a consultant.

Guerlain is the great-great-grandson of the founder of the Guerlain cosmetics company, now owned by LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton.

LVMH was embarrassed last year when designer John Galliano — who worked for LVMH subsidiary Christian Dior — was convicted of anti-Semitic comments.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/heir-to-guerlain-cosmetic-empire-convicted-of-making-racist-insults-on-national-television/2012/03/29/gIQAzMSfiS_story.html

What he said was really disgusting and highly racist but I doubt he'll be fired like Galliano...

 

[VogueParisLover]

^ He won't be fired because he's already retired...

Though unacceptable and also quite unfortunate, I think it's funny that LVMH has had to deal with two of these incidents.

 

[Squizree]

This is so pathetic. It's become a game of "Spot the Racist". There's simply no tolerance or patience any more. As soon as someone says the N word these days you have these anti-whatever twats biting up your as$ because you were being "racist". Did anyone stop to notice that he used the word in a historical sense? I know the word has bad history and probably should be avoided anyway, but there's just absolutely no patience or forgiveness in the slightest.

 

[cologne_rocks]

^I agree completely.

 

[BornToBe]

the reason why alot of people aren't so tolerant is because they don't want it("casual rasist comments") to become socially acceptable again. It's not like they are arresting any jim and jack who is suspected of being rasist, they are making examples of public figures so that normal people see that not even money can exempt you from the law....at the end of the day he broke the law and so he was fined it's not like he got thrown into prison for the rest of his life.

 

[Squizree]

the reason why alot of people aren't so tolerant is because they don't want it("casual rasist comments") to become socially acceptable again. It's not like they are arresting any jim and jack who is suspected of being rasist, they are making examples of public figures so that normal people see that not even money can exempt you from the law....at the end of the day he broke the law and so he was fined it's not like he got thrown into prison for the rest of his life.

I'm not talking about his fine, that's a fair punishment for throwing such a nasty word around so casually. I'm talking about these "anti-racist" idiots suing him. Seriously? A whole court case because a man in his 70s made a slip? Racism is no long socially acceptable. Far too much has happened for it to ever go back to what it used to be.

 

[MulletProof]

Squizree, I see your points completely and I think it's great that you think there is no place in modern society for racism, but thing is, racism, just like most social issues, evolves.. the man here was at his prime in the 50s, his type of racism is probably the kind he's not even completely aware of how destructive it can be because at the time of his formation, legal segregation dominated most of the west. Things change, he's obviously bringing us a 50s relic that conveys a type racism that indeed will hardly come back and is not acceptable anymore, you may even take it with a pinch of salt, the downside of this 'relic' is that it indirectly supports MODERN racism, which is built different but essentially the same thing, people 60 years ago dealt with segregation, now people deal with immigration, racial profiling, going to school or work with people of different backgrounds and walking on eggshells to carefully move on from stereotyping, because stereotypes are still as strong as they were 60 years ago, they have hardly evolved because they get passed on through generations informally, it's the stuff you hear at home, I won't lie and say my grandmother didn't openly express herself much worse than this man and precisely for that, for being so close to a generation that is still alive and still obviously has the means to propagate or influence or strengthen ideas now that we're probably more vulnerable than ever (tension/immigration), newer generations unfortunately have the responsibility (I would say compromise) to be as aggressive as they can on its dismissal, kick all they want and work in every possible way to reject it and enforce a social structure that does not invite or allow such behavior.. evidently those of us born in the 20th century are already tainted in some way or another, but I am wishful that the society my children or grandchildren get to experience will be 99% free of archaic rumors based on color.. I hope they look at them the way I look at arranged royal marriages.

I definitely don't think the man is a monster and I certainly don't expect a 1950s teenager to act like he came of age in 2003 but.. that's law and society, when trying to adjust the bad weed, sometimes perfectly stupid, perfectly old or innocently ignorant types will filter in.. you're still giving public education and that's the point of it all, activists included.. it's not about the target.. but toxicity and working to eradicate it.. for the sake of the future.

 

[tangerine]

Good points Squizree and MP. There's another thing, and this is a bit cynical, but poor and unknown people say the same and worse to each other every day. They may get in fights and may even kill each other over it but it gets next to no publicity.

High profile figures like Galliano and Guerlain get the attention because there is money in it, plain and simple. That's not to excuse their behavior or mean it's a bad idea to publicly criticize them for speaking hateful words, however blindly said. But it does nothing in the unseen, poor and working class families that continue to harbor fear and hatred of those who are different than themselves.

I doubt the invisible majority are following the cases of Galliano or Guerlain; they are fighting a bitter struggle of their own, where neither money nor recognition play a part except as a faintly glimpsed brass ring, access to which is perhaps partly blocked by members of the hated targets of their own racism.

This is getting into politics though so I'll stop right there. My point is just that these cases draw attention because there is money at stake.

 

[MulletProof]

^ the second to last part is as real as it gets.

About the money, I think it's also true but perhaps I am less cynical .. the Galliano issue is not crystal clear for me so I do think there is money and lots of power and untold stories behind it but in the case of this man, it was on national television.. so even if he just happens to be rich and an administration does benefit from publicly 'solving' situations like this (I know legal procedures are long but it all came to a fair end in an ambitious year where everyone wants to come off as sensible- how's that for cynicism), I do think that a public, if slightly staged/cartoonesque struggle, by its own simplicity, ultimately does impact and influence the ideas of the more 'fortunate', who also have the chance to pair it up with better access to education and who, as always, will be the ones in charge of making some difference in lower classes (*back to naive*).. obviously I'm talking long run here, 50-60 years into the future..

 

[AD122915]

I agree with SOS Racism association. I'm pleased to see that French people are not afraid to speak up and also proceed necessary steps on national level. In this case, i think France is bit ahead of United States and USA has something to learn from it...
I'm also pleased to see many members here being very open-minded and having interesting discussion as well...