Aunt Jemima's new name mocked on social media: 'Doesn't sound like something edible'
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
The breakfast brand Aunt Jemima is removing its logo and will be renamed,
Facebook Share Twitter Share By Geoff Herbert | gherbert@syracuse.com
Aunt Jemima's new name is getting mocked mercilessly on social media.
Quaker Oats, a division of PepsiCo Inc., announced Tuesday that its iconic pancake mix and syrup will be renamed the "Pearl Milling Company." Aunt Jemima products will continue to be sold until June when the brand name change takes effect; products will still have the same familiar red packaging.
Pearl Milling Company is named after the company founded in 1888 in St. Joseph, Missouri, that originated the self-rising pancake mix.
Quaker said last year it would retire the Aunt Jemima name because the character's origins are "based on a racial stereotype." The image and character were inspired by the 19th century "mammy" minstrel character, a Black woman content to serve her white masters; "mammy" was often portrayed by white actors in blackface.
A Syracuse woman, Anna Short Harrington, portrayed Aunt Jemima from 1935 to 1954 after being discovered while cooking pancakes at the 1935 New York State Fair. She was hired as an actress to dress up like Aunt Jemima and travel North America, serving pancakes and promoting the brand. Nancy Green, a former slave, originated the role with an apron and head scarf in 1893.
The new logo features an illustration of the Pearl Milling Company instead of Aunt Jemima's smiling face, and the packaging features the new name in a similar font.
This image provided by PepsiCo, Inc., shows Quaker Oats' Pearl Milling Company brand pancake mix and syrup, formerly the Aunt Jemima brand. Aunt Jemima products will continue to be sold until June 2021, when the packaging will officially change over. (PepsiCo, Inc. via AP)AP
Many social media users agreed a new name was needed, but didn't like the choice the company landed on.
"Aunt Jemima was a legend. Pearl Milling Company? You go woke and become a joke. Never will I buy this wannabe knock-off of the legend. You just lost a life long customer," one Twitter user wrote.
Another joked that it sounded like the Dunder Mifflin Paper Company from "The Office," and shared a Photoshopped image of "what I'm gonna think EVERYTIME I hear the name Pearl Milling Company."
"Pearl Milling Company sound like the plantation they had Aunt Jemima... at! I'm not falling for the trap!" a third tweet said.
"I'm not writing Pearl Milling Company on my grocery list," a fourth tweeted.
"Pearl Milling Company is a bad name for pancake mix and syrup. It just doesn't sound like something edible," a fifth Twitter user said.
"Aunt Jemima was very problematic. But Pearl Milling Company sounds like something undelicious that needs to be cleaned off the factory floor," another agreed. "Think I'll stick with maple syrup."
Others joked that Pearl Milling sounded like a mining company or a gravel manufacturer.
The Associated Press reports Quaker Oats bought the Aunt Jemima brand in 1925 and modified its logo over the years to distance itself from negative stereotypes. However, social justice initiatives in the wake of George Floyd's death and Black Lives Matter protests sparked many brands to make bigger changes, like Uncle Ben's rice, now known as Ben's Original.
Quaker said it sought input from customers, employees and external cultural experts in developing the new name for Aunt Jemima. The company said it's also donating $1 million to groups that empower Black women and girls as part of the Pearl Milling Company rollout.
Great-grandson of Syracuse's Aunt Jemima angry at her removal: 'This is an injustice'
Tags
Who is online
442 visitors
LOL. It doesnt sound that appetizing, Pearl Milling Company, but I think I know why that type of name. They are trying to make the product sound "boutique" or "upscale". Let's face it if you made a small change in the title it would probably draw attention. PEARL MILLING CRAFT BREWERY.
Whether this new name for the pancakes will be effective will depend on how good their word of mouth campaign is on social media and ads.
I don't think "Aunt Jemima" sounds any more edible than "Pearl Milling". If you put the same picture on the box you'd think that was her name. I applaud Quaker Oats (Society of Friends Oats?) for their efforts though. I buy Bisquick and real maple syrup, not maple flavored corn syrup.
I only trust Aunt Jemima. I'll try Log Cabin instead.
Because of a name change? Did they change the formula too? It is the same product, is it not? ???
I used to feel the same way about Cadillac. I lost faith in that too!
For me, yes. I'm tired of busybodies forcing their views on everyone else. If they had a problem with Aunt Jemima then they should just not have bought it. This was a fine example of a solution in search of a problem.
This subject came up about 6 months ago with the Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's brands and I pointed out the following, ending with some reasonable questions:
I think we can all agree that the origins of these brands could be considered offensive to some today when looking back on how they came to be. But it is interesting to note that prior to the name change Aunt Jemima was a brand that is highly sought by the African-American consumer . Even more so for Uncle Bens . If those brands were so offensive on their face, how does one explain their appeal to those who should be offended by them?
I'm not bringing this up because I disagree with the corporate decisions to change course, nor do I dispute the shady origins of those brands. I'm just wondering who is really offended by them in today's day and age? And if so, why isn't that reflected in their purchasing decisions? What are your thoughts on this?
Pretty much what I said. This was a fine example of a solution in search of a problem. Your noting that the brand was highly sought after by the black community only adds to this. It just doesn't make sense.
Which is an excellent question. In one way, capitalism is a very democratic process in that people get to vote every time they spend a dollar. If someone was offended by the brand then they should simply not buy it.
I disagree with the corporate decision, however. Every day that passes certain members of society act more and more like the morality police, believing they are empowered to dictate conscience to everyone else. People are too afraid to resist them, even when what they are advocating for makes no sense whatsoever. It needs to stop.
So you are boycotting the product because they changed the name; you are protesting the name change? If so, I can see that as a reason. Vic wrote that he was moving because he only 'trusted' Aunt Jemima. It read as though he trusts the product but was moving on because the name change caused him to lose trust in the product. Very strange logic as it was written.
But if this is more of boycotting in protest of the name change, well, that is different.
Cadillac changed it's name ?
Couldn't figure that out either.
It would be more accurate to say that I would boycott it for buckling under the politically correct SJW police. Boycotting it for simply changing the name would be rather shallow, I think.
ICE?
ATF?
FBI?
Indeed, but so far you are the only one here who wants to discuss this honestly. Same thing happened when I brought it up 6 months ago. I really believe it is worth discussing.
And that is fine. My feeling is that it is their company and they can do with it what they want. If you or I were in their position, perhaps we would have looked a bit closer and asked a few more questions before giving in to what really amounts to mob demand. Maybe run a survey of their customers to see what they thought? And maybe they did that, and made their decision anyway, we don't know for sure. But to me the overwhelming purchasing decisions indicate that those who some insist were offended were for the most part not offended.
That's how marketing works, though. It might not seem rational, but every aspect of product presentation, from the shape, materials, and coloring of the package to the words on the label, is designed to tap into the subconscious of the customer and make them think they are buying something of quality. The brightest people are affected by it, in spite of themselves.
And the affect can manifest through any number of pathways. It can include the decision-making behind the marketing, if you are familiar with it. If you believe they changed something in the packaging for a dumb reason, then who knows what they might also be doing to the product itself?
Yup
Then again, if someone likes a product and the manufacturer stated that they changed the name because it was offensive, maybe they just changed the name because it was offensive.
I can see boycotting on principle, but it seems a bit silly to lose 'trust' in a syrup product (sugar water, etc.) simply because the company responded to societal pressures regarding its labeling.
If you mean the pressure the left puts people to conform to their political and social desires, I agree. We are being forced to believe the Emperor is wearing clothes when he isn't. Yesterday, someone told me that one day I might be arrested for not acknowledging a boy who presents as a girl is actually a girl. I told them we need to have a line we won't cross. For me, it is being forced to believe something I don't actually believe. It is as if our society is becoming like Orwell's 1984.
Well that might be partially what I mean, but I'm talking more about the basis for their argument that they use to apply said pressure. In this case, did they even bother to see if the majority of black folks today are offended by the brands, or do they in fact actually love those brands as is clearly indicated in the consumer data for those brands? Like you said, it seems they have created "a solution in search of a problem", and I'll add, does that actually create even more of a problem (even if just incrementally, precedent by precedent)?
I don't think it is possible for one to be forced to believe what one doesn't actually believe. I'm more concerned about force (mob/societal and eventually political) being used to ban certain types of free expression based on false premises or a lack of factual basis. Politically correct does not necessarily equal factually correct. In this case, the changes were made by the free decisions of the Owners of these brands, pressured or not by society, at least they weren't forced by penalty of the State which would truly be Orwellian. But I agree, the more we let a mob guide our decisions based on false premise, the more likely we are to eventually allow the State to force such compliance. I see nothing wrong with discussing that potential problem now before we get too far down that road.
That's mostly what I'm talking about. They didn't actually have an argument. They just declared it racist and demanded they make a change. They didn't care whether or not it was racist in fact so whether the majority of black people liked the product as is was irrelevant. They simply did it because it increases their political power every time they do something like this. They intentionally look for things like this in order to increase their political power.
Okay, point. What I meant was more toward being forced to accommodate desired behavior toward others I feel are wrong both factually and morally. For instance, being forced to use someone's preferred pronouns or recognizing a biological male or female as being the sex they wish to be rather than what they were born as (both of which I think is coming). Based on what you said, I think we agree on this, more or less.
I get what you're saying but, in my opinion, this is how we get to that Orwellian society. The far left is no longer fringe. It increasingly acquires more and more power. It is not paranoid to fear that these things will someday, perhaps soon, have the force of law behind them. You seem to agree with that as well.
I don't see anything wrong with discussing it either, but the left does. That's why you can find so many videos of leftists trying to ban conservative speakers or interrupting their presentations, for instance. You and I want truth and logic. They don't. They want a reactionary public that they can lead without thinking.
Of course, the right has similar groups on the far right who do the same thing, only they aren't anywhere near power or anywhere near as numerous. But the major threat to America is increasingly attributable to the post-modernistic and Marxist thinking of the left. They are everything they claim to be against. Currently, they are screaming as loudly as they can, waiving Trump into the faces of everyone to the extent that they can to distract everyone from what they themselves are doing.
What they've done to the Aunt Jemima brand is what they want to do to everyone. They want to dictate what is acceptable and what isn't without having a logical or moral concrete basis for either. They want a society that doesn't think for themselves but rather, just go with whatever the elitists in power tell them to do or how to behave. You're completely right that we need to discuss this but I think we need to realize that the Left isn't going to do so. The only people we can discuss it with are those to the right of center or those on the left who aren't very far left. Beyond that, they aren't going to listen.
Is it your belief that the "mammy" character is not a racist stereotype?
Are you under the impression that the pancakes and syrup will taste different now that they have a new name?
Utter nonsense. I could ask you why it bothers you so much that they changed the name. Does that make you feel like your youthful love of Aunt Jemima pancakes has been stolen from you?
We will get beyond "race" when we get beyond it. Part of getting beyond it is creating NEW names and images for troubling stereotypes from the racist past.
It's not about pancakes, I'm sure there is nothing inherently evil about having a pancake mix or syrup with a mammy on the package. But it is BETTER to accept the change. It's not going to hurt you.
It may well be, but that image was changed years ago and the current (soon to be eliminated) Aunt Jemima image is simply that of a smiling black women without the accouterments typically associated with the "mammy" character. So why wasn't that enough in your mind?
What do you make of the FACT that the Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's brands were EXTREMELY popular with the Black community as I clearly proved above with the demographic data? What do you think that means in terms of whether those communities were offended by the brand, or see it as a racist stereotype?
Did you read any of what I wrote??? It's as if you can't think outside your own worldview in order to understand someone else's point of view. As if you just see blank spaces where my words are. Or is it just an automatic response with you to create a strawman? I think that must be it. You don't like what I actually said so you just create a strawman so the argument can be on the footing you wish rather than the argument presented.
We will never get beyond it. The Democrats will make sure of that.
Nothing quite like a bunch of "woke" white folks telling blacks what they should be upset about, eh?
Defeatism plus victimhood. Toxic as can be.
Just concede defeat and blame Democrats!
No wonder progress is so slow for the gop...
That makes no sense.
If a thing does not exist, the voting public won't be bothered with it. If the voters get excited, it's because the thing exists.
That's an interesting claim. Apparently you think "Stop the steal" is based on something real, then? Because there's a lot of voters upset and excited because they think the election was stolen.
No.
You live in the land of maple syrup. Why on earth would you put either of these crap products into your body ?
There is quite a price difference.
... gee, a real log cabin republican ...
I haven't used Aunt Jemima for a long time due to the formula change years back where the first two ingredients are corn syrup and high fructose corn syrup. Log Cabin still has a real maple syrup one that's not bad for an economy model.
Then it's a go!
Personally, I just use Walmart brand syrup. Said name change is just another example of corporate political correctness run amok...
LOL
I agree "Log Cabin" Sounds much better on pancakes than "Pearl Mining Company" for Damn sure.
My tummy doesn't think a bottle of pearls that have been mined to put on my breakfast sounds to appetizing.
But having a "Log cabin" sitting on flat pancakes .... well I think I can kinda see that.
"flat as a pancake" .... Yeah Well, OK.
lol
If Aunt Jemima was edible, just how did they powder her?
Really really big food dehydrators
I would never use either Log Cabin or the Pearl Milling. I only used hand-harvested and pure maple syrup. A bit more expensive but well worth the price.
I get a small jar every year for Christmas from a family member that collects the sap from the trees on their land and boils it down for syrup.
I get mine for the Red Lake Ojibwe Foods in MN. We've been hand-harvesting it for centuries and there are no preservatives added. Also Maple Butter is great so is the chokecherry jam and wild blueberry jam.
Of course, the real wild rice not what they call wild rice in the store.
So you are getting the real thing, that's a good thing.
mmmm... Yeah, its not hard to find good wild rice around here. LOL! It's sooo different than what you can buy at the grocery.
Nothing better than Lake Superior whitefish or walleye on a bed of wild rice.
This is one of my favorites. Wild Rice (Manoomin) hash. Wild rice, beef, lentils, and roasted sumac tomato's.
Back in Canada I would never dream of using anything but pure maple syrup, but here it's a very expensive and almost never available import. These days we use honey on pancakes.
Here you go, Buzz.
Oh, if only...
You can buy it. Simply order it from the Red Lake Nation, or the White Earth Nation.
Oh YAY! Thanks Kav!
Really good prices too!
YAY!!! Exactly! Even though my family is no longer in the maple syrup business, I will ALWAYS buy REAL MAPLE SYRUP! MMMMM!
I rarely eat pancakes or waffles so whatever syrup is on hand, I use it the rare times I do need it. But when this name battle began, I bought a bottle of AJ's and a box of Uncle Ben's rice. Both will become collector items in the future.
I thought I was the only weirdo that bought AJ's pancake mix, syrup, and Uncle Ben's Rice for that reason! My husband thought I was a weirdo until he went to the store for me and realized that those containers had changed.
Why not name it after a real black woman and put an image on the bottle that people can respect?
Actually, I respected Aunt Jemima. I didn't know if she was a real person or not. When I gave it any thought at all I pretty much assumed that her story would be something like freed slave made good or something.
Works for me. A lot times with these things, some corporate person has gotten bent out of shape over something they don't actually understand and the change never needed to happen at all. Or it could be modified in some minor way.
In any event, it's not the name or the lady on the bottle that keeps me from buying it. It's the total lack of maple syrup.
This is a very interesting and informative read on the subject.........
There are a lot of modern great black women who are chefs. Any of them could have been the face of a new brand.
Why should any of them want to be the face of a cheap, crappy product full of high fructose corn syrup, sugar and preservatives ?
Because they would become rich beyond the dreams of avarice. It works for Martha Stewart.
I mean, Rachel Ray has her name on dog food. I don't think she feels bad about it.
The black cooks and butlers southern families called Uncle Jim or Aunt Ima were actual aunts and uncles s of the families they served. The products of white masters raping slave women who were brought into the home. Because of favored treatment and blood relationships they were believed to be more trustworthy. It is that imagery which Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben harkened back to. It is also the reason black Americans find such outdated advertising offensive. Does that help?
Nancy Green (March 4, 1834 – August 30, 1923) was a former slave, nanny, cook, activist, and the first of many African-American models hired to promote a corporate trademark as "Aunt Jemima". The Aunt Jemima recipe was not her recipe, but she became the advertising world's first living trademark.
We use Texas honey as an alternative, usually local from the farmers market with a piece of the comb in it.
Much healthier...
Sounds good!
My cousin makes and bottles real New York maple syrup under the New York State Maple Foundation label. So we buy from her. Just had some on some pancakes last weekend. I have to use it sparingly being diabetic and all, but it tastes so much better than any syrup made from high fructose corn syrup and other chemicals that wreak havoc on one's body.
One of my BF was an avid Beekeeper, and I went with him to tend the hives and work with the Bees. They are such amazing little critters, and while I got stung a few times, I never feared them. I guess that is why I was able to work with them and their hives didn't need a lot of protective clothing. As long as I didn't get close to where the Queen was they more or less ignored me. Mind you, I don't like honey, it is just way too sweet for me, so I only took some now and then for my elderly Grandmother who loved the honeycomb and she claimed the pure honey helped her arthritis. The honey he processed was never diluted or had any additives. The honey he harvested was put up in small jars and given as gifts for his Friends and family, and for his customers during the holidays.
While working with the Bees with him I learned a great deal about the Bee and honey industry, how to medicate the Bees against diseases, creating new combs, how to move the hives during the year for better nectar access, and how and what to feed and protect them during the winter months when there was limited nectar.
It was one of the best learning events in my life. I served the honey cakes at his wedding reception.
My husband also kept bees. When we got married, the bees had to stay where they were as I am allergic to them. He eventually sold them to a local keeper.
Bees can indeed be a dangerous threat to those who are allergic to their sting. And I had a few Friends at the time who are also allergic to Bees, but, loved the fresh, undiluted honey. So I would give them some of the honey when it was harvested. For me, I like the smell of the honey, but, I don't like the taste of it.
The only thing I use honey in is hot tea.
Same here. And in iced tea (honey premixed when the tea is still hot).
However, I have also used honey in espresso drinks as the sweetener and to sweeten hot chocolate (when the chocolate is unsweetened).
I can't stand sweetened iced tea.
To me it takes away the fringe tartness. I do not put in enough to make it sweet ... maybe a slight hint of sweetness at best.
How do I feel about it? OVERKILL.
Maybe Ben and Jerry's should be required to rename as Ben and Jamal's with suitable facial images.
I liked the old name
The should have just gone with something more neutral, like Aunt Hitler.
I think the new name reminds me of a name of flour, pancake mix, or the like from the late 1800s or early 1900s. If I had to guess, when they see their profits drop, they'll change the name again, but to just the initials of the current name (PMC) and change the designs. Then, when they see those profits drop more, can the products or completely change them, formulas and all and rebrand.
It's easier to get away with changing a products formula because people will try the New/Improved of a product they already know and like. A new name is a lot harder. Pearl Milling Co sounds like a brand they'd be selling at Aldi's, I happen to like many of Aldi's brands I find they are better than most other store brands but people who have been choosing Aunt Jemima over store brands are looking for name recognition they just assume a name brand is better so they won't try an off brand. These people if they can't grab a bottle of Aunt Jemima will grab another name they know like Log Cabin. I don't know why they just didn't put a white lady on the bottle, problem solved. I have a friend who'll buy Domino Sugar for twice the price of the store brand sitting right next to it on the shelf. He says the Domino doesn't stick together like the store brand, He's full of it. I'm betting there isn't a person on earth who can pick Domino sugar over store brands out of a line up of sugar bowls, not by sight, feel, taste, sweetness, or clumping tendency.
I'm with ya on the name brand / store brand scenario. I literally only bought the Aunt Jemima syrup and pancake mix and the Uncle Bens Rice because they were doing away with the names and pictures. At our local grocer, they have Spartan or Our Family brands, which are both MI based companies. I usually buy the local brands, because quite frankly, they're usually better and less expensive.
I agree that your friend regarding Domino vs. store brand... I was forced to buy Domino when we ran out of sugar during the panic buying earlier during the pandemic. It clumped just the same as the store brand. Granular sugar will clump any time there's ANY moisture in the air; sugar doesn't care who packaged it and branded it, it's sugar, it clumps with moisture.
Therefore, IF what your friend says has been proven, I'm betting that there's a chemical component that absorbs said moisture before the sugar can and in that case, I would rather deal with clumps, because it's just sugar without additives. 
Jesus, jut call it is "Well, here is some fucking syrup."
I avoid any brand that changes it's name to be politically correct, including sports teams