Reynand Wu
Over the course of the past year, M&M’s, the iconic candy brand, has found itself at the epicenter of a swirling public debate, dominating news cycles, social media feeds, and even Super Bowl commercials. This unexpected cultural flashpoint began with seemingly minor alterations to the beloved anthropomorphic candy mascots, sparking a surprisingly fierce backlash that quickly transcended confectionery and delved into deeper societal discussions about gender, representation, and corporate responsibility.
A Chronology of Candy and Cultural Shifts
The genesis of the controversy dates back to January 2022, when Mars Wrigley, the parent company of M&M’s, announced a rebranding initiative aimed at promoting a more "inclusive" and "belonging" message. Central to this effort were subtle but significant changes to the appearance of its female spokescandies. The Brown M&M, traditionally portrayed with high heels, saw her footwear shortened to a more sensible, lower block heel. More notably, the Green M&M, long characterized by go-go boots and a flirtatious demeanor, had her boots replaced with a pair of practical sneakers. Mars Wrigley stated these changes were designed to emphasize the characters’ personalities rather than their physical attributes, fostering a sense of community and self-acceptance among consumers.
However, what followed was not universal applause but rather a wave of intense outrage, primarily from conservative commentators and segments of the online community. Leading the charge was Fox News host Tucker Carlson, who swiftly became a prominent voice of the backlash. Carlson derided the changes, stating, "M&M’s will not be satisfied until every last cartoon character is deeply unappealing and totally androgynous." This sentiment resonated with many who perceived the alterations as an example of "wokeness" or "political correctness" infringing upon popular culture and traditional aesthetics.
The criticism wasn’t confined to conservative media. In a Rolling Stone article titled, "Let the Green M&M Be a Nasty Little Slut," senior writer EJ Dickson articulated a different, albeit similarly critical, viewpoint. Dickson argued, "The green M&M has spent decades building her brand as a horny, sexy bitch, and for what? For her creators to give her Larry David footwear in the name of feminism?" This perspective, while from a different ideological standpoint, highlighted a shared discomfort with the perceived sanitization or desexualization of a character whose established persona was, for some, part of her appeal.
The narrative evolved further in September 2022 with the debut of the Purple M&M, the brand’s first new female character in a decade and the first female peanut M&M. Introduced with a focus on self-acceptance and individuality, the Purple M&M’s arrival reignited the "culture war" surrounding the brand. Tucker Carlson, once again, seized upon the development, remarking on FOX News, "The green M&M got her boots back, but apparently is now a lesbian maybe? And now there’s a plus-sized, obese purple M&M." These comments, while widely criticized for their derogatory nature, reflected a broader anxiety among some about evolving gender representations in media and the perceived push for diversity.
The sustained and escalating criticism eventually led Mars Wrigley to announce a "temporary pause" on its spokescandies in January 2023, stating that the brand intended to "take a backseat" and allow its new human spokesperson, comedian Maya Rudolph, to represent the brand. This move was widely interpreted as an attempt to de-escalate the controversy and shift focus away from the divisive character debates. In an official statement, Mars Wrigley acknowledged the difficulty of navigating cultural conversations, noting, "We weren’t sure if anyone would even notice. And we definitely didn’t think it would break the internet. But now we get it — even a candy’s shoes can be polarizing. Which was the last thing M&M’s wanted since we’re all about bringing people together."
The Historical Lens: Sexualization in Advertising and Brand Personification
The M&M’s saga is not an isolated incident but rather a contemporary manifestation of long-standing patterns in advertising, particularly concerning the personification of food products and the gendered presentation of characters. For decades, brands have employed anthropomorphic mascots to create emotional connections with consumers, and often, these characters have been imbued with human characteristics, including gender and sexuality.
One prominent historical example is the Chiquita Banana. Making her debut in the 1940s as the world’s first branded fruit, Miss Chiquita Banana was deliberately racialized and sexualized to appeal to the American market. Her femininity was hypersexualized through flirtatious winking, eye-rolling, frilly dresses, and prominent lipstick, establishing a persona rooted in conventional attractiveness and allure. This strategy, common across various industries, aimed to make products more appealing by associating them with desirable human traits, often reinforcing prevailing gender norms.
M&M’s has historically utilized a similar strategy, particularly with its female spokescandies. The Green M&M, in particular, has been depicted in overtly sexualized ways in various advertisements over the years, including scenes of pole dancing, stripping, and suggestive interactions with other chocolate products. These portrayals frequently featured male M&M characters ogling her in the background, a clear example of reinforcing the "male gaze." The male gaze, a concept deeply rooted in feminist film theory, describes how women are often depicted in visual arts and literature from a masculine, heterosexual perspective, presenting them as passive "objects" of male sexual desire rather than as autonomous subjects. This perpetuates a dynamic where women’s value is often tied to their physical attractiveness and their ability to appeal to men.
Sociological Frameworks: Emphasized Femininity and Hegemonic Masculinity
To understand the intensity of the M&M’s controversy, it is crucial to examine it through sociological lenses, specifically those of emphasized femininity and hegemonic masculinity.
Emphasized femininity refers to a set of traditional feminine norms that encourage women to accommodate men’s sexual appetites and desire for control. These norms often include traits like submissiveness, nurturing, empathy, and physical attractiveness in ways that appeal to men. This framework legitimizes existing gender hierarchies and upholds various forms of patriarchal oppression. The original portrayals of the Green and Brown M&M’s, with their specific footwear and flirtatious mannerisms, arguably fit within this construct, presenting characters designed to be conventionally appealing within a male-centric framework.
The backlash to the M&M’s changes can be largely understood as a reaction from those who subscribe to the ideals of hegemonic masculinity. Hegemonic masculinity describes the dominant form of masculinity in a given society, often characterized by traits such as aggression, competition, emotional suppression, and the assertion of dominance over women and other marginalized groups. When female characters like the M&M’s mascots deviate from "stereotypical cultural notions" of emphasized femininity – becoming less conventionally attractive or "sexy" in the traditional sense – it can be perceived as a threat to those invested in hegemonic masculine identities. This creates a "dilemma of incorporating women’s resistance into their masculine identity projects." The anger expressed by some commentators, therefore, stems from a perceived challenge to their established gender norms and expectations, even in the context of fictional candy characters.
The language used by critics, such as Carlson’s remarks about characters being "unappealing and totally androgynous," or the implication that the Green M&M might be a "lesbian" or the Purple M&M "plus-sized, obese," reveals a deeper societal anxiety. It suggests that women who possess characteristics deemed "masculine" or who deviate from traditional beauty standards face the prospect of being labeled "socially undesirable." In a patriarchal society, when a woman exhibits defiance, authority, or simply moves away from expected subservience, men may feel threatened unless they can "stigmatize and feminize their behavior." This often manifests as derogatory labels – a "good girl" becomes a "bitch," a "lesbian," or a "slut" – effectively reasserting male dominance by diminishing the woman’s perceived value or agency. The implication is clear: for women to be valued by some men, they must remain subservient to the male gaze and uphold specific, often restrictive, gender norms.
Broader Societal Impact and Implications for Youth
The hypersexualization of women in media, even through seemingly innocuous characters like candy mascots, carries significant and demonstrable harm, particularly for young people. Adolescents’ constant exposure to a sexualized media environment contributes to their recognition of women primarily as sex objects. When women and young girls consistently see their bodies objectified and their value tied to their physical appearance, they begin to internalize the idea that their most valuable attribute is their body. This can lead to body dissatisfaction, self-objectification, and a heightened awareness of being perceived as "sexual playthings waiting to please men’s sexual desires." Such internalization can foster feelings of unworthiness if they do not meet society’s often unattainable beauty standards. It is not lost on children when even the candy they consume is sexualized.
The intense public reaction to the M&M’s shoe changes sends a disturbing message. While a "culture war" waged against candy mascots might seem ludicrous on the surface, the underlying dynamics and the power behind the words used by prominent figures have real-world implications. The controversy underscores how deeply ingrained gender expectations are within society and how resistant some segments are to even symbolic changes that challenge these norms.
From a marketing perspective, Mars Wrigley’s efforts to modernize its brand identity and align with contemporary values of inclusivity represent a common trend among corporations seeking to appeal to a broader, more diverse consumer base. However, the backlash demonstrates the complexities and risks involved in navigating these cultural shifts, especially when traditionalists feel alienated. The decision to temporarily replace the spokescandies with a human spokesperson, while a short-term solution, highlights the challenge of pleasing all demographics in an increasingly polarized cultural landscape.
The M&M’s controversy ultimately serves as a microcosm of larger societal tensions regarding gender, identity, and representation. It forces a critical examination of how media, even in its most playful forms, contributes to and reflects our understanding of gender roles. The vicious cycle of sexualizing women, whether mascots or not, for commercial profit must be critically addressed. Moreover, prominent figures and media outlets bear a responsibility to recognize that using the oppression or objectification of others, even indirectly, is not a punchline but rather a perpetuator of harmful stereotypes and inequalities. The dialogue sparked by M&M’s, however absurd it may seem, underscores the ongoing necessity of challenging and redefining societal norms for a more equitable future.
