Loreal cuts ties with AxelleDespiegelaere(WorldCup girl)

#1 Posted by lightleggy (15836 posts) -

The hawtness had signed less than a week ago a contract to model for the L'oreal brand, today, L'oreal decided to cut ties with the girl, after pictures of her during a hunting trip surfaced in the internet.

L'oreal spokesman said that L'oreal doesn't do animal testing anymore, anywhere in the world, and that it will not tolerate the killing of animals.

Link

What do you guys think? This is the girl btw,

Shame, would have loved to see more of her, wouldn't have been long for her to join Victoria's Secret or do some minimal clothing photoshoot :p

#2 Edited by indzman (16470 posts) -

who fvcking cares abt these broads or what happens to them or after in FIFA WORLD CUP , everyone is more interested in watching the matches and favourite players.

#4 Posted by The-Apostle (12108 posts) -

Who the fuck cares if she went hunting? >_>

#5 Posted by lostrib (31771 posts) -

Who the fuck cares if she went hunting? >_>

L'oreal

#6 Posted by dave123321 (33379 posts) -

Damn liberals

#7 Edited by The-Apostle (12108 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@The-Apostle said:

Who the fuck cares if she went hunting? >_>

L'oreal

It's none of their damn business what she does in her spare time. >_>

#8 Edited by BranKetra (47523 posts) -

#9 Posted by Master_Live (13639 posts) -

L'oreal, as a private employer, is free to associate with whoever it deems fit. And that is that.

#10 Edited by Netret0120 (1907 posts) -

But we eat meat:-\

#11 Posted by one_plum (6305 posts) -

It's none of their damn business what she does in her spare time. >_>

Public image

#12 Posted by deeliman (2255 posts) -

Agree with master live here

#13 Posted by The-Apostle (12108 posts) -

@one_plum said:

@The-Apostle said:

It's none of their damn business what she does in her spare time. >_>

Public image

How does someone hunting hurt anyone's public image? Only an idiot would be offended by her hunting.

#14 Posted by LostProphetFLCL (16982 posts) -

This is one of those times where I feel like the animal rights people get a bit carried away.

Sure she hunts and I too dislike hunting if a person isn't going to actually use the animal for food and such, but I would not cost someone a job just because they hunt...

#15 Edited by MrGeezer (55942 posts) -

@one_plum said:

Public image

How does someone hunting hurt anyone's public image? Only an idiot would be offended by her hunting.

It doesn't matter if anyone is actually offended, that's still not the image that Loreal wants to present.

#16 Edited by RadecSupreme (4609 posts) -

But we eat meat:-\

There's a difference between killing to eat, and killing for sport.

#17 Edited by The-Apostle (12108 posts) -

@MrGeezer said:

@The-Apostle said:

@one_plum said:

Public image

How does someone hunting hurt anyone's public image? Only an idiot would be offended by her hunting.

It doesn't matter if anyone is actually offended, that's still not the image that Loreal wants to present.

Then they need to get over themselves because it's such a minor thing to get upset over.

#18 Posted by deeliman (2255 posts) -

@The-Apostle They are still well within their rights to cut ties with her.

#19 Posted by The-Apostle (12108 posts) -
#20 Posted by SaintLeonidas (25723 posts) -

@deeliman said:

@The-Apostle They are still well within their rights to cut ties with her.

In what way?

Companies have the right to protect themselves from any sort of financial loss due to their employees actions. This is the second thread in like a week in which someone doesn't seem to get that. Pretty simple. Unless the contract she had with them said otherwise, they are free to release her from it is they deem her a risk to their public image.

#21 Edited by The-Apostle (12108 posts) -

@The-Apostle said:

@deeliman said:

@The-Apostle They are still well within their rights to cut ties with her.

In what way?

Companies have the right to protect themselves from any sort of financial loss due to their employees actions. This is the second thread in like a week in which someone doesn't seem to get that. Pretty simple. Unless the contract she had with them said otherwise, they are free to release her from it is they deem her a risk to their public image.

I just don't see why it would hurt their image. It's not like she killed a person.

#22 Posted by Boddicker (2279 posts) -

But we eat meat:-\

Killing cows, pigs, chickens, and fish is ok. Killing Bambi is not.

#23 Edited by SaintLeonidas (25723 posts) -

@SaintLeonidas said:

@The-Apostle said:

@deeliman said:

@The-Apostle They are still well within their rights to cut ties with her.

In what way?

Companies have the right to protect themselves from any sort of financial loss due to their employees actions. This is the second thread in like a week in which someone doesn't seem to get that. Pretty simple. Unless the contract she had with them said otherwise, they are free to release her from it is they deem her a risk to their public image.

I just don't see why it would hurt their image. It's not like she killed a person.

...unless you live under a rock, how can you not know that hunting, especially in Africa (and esp. more recently) is viewed negatively by a lot of people? Also, if you read the article, you'd know the company already had problems with animal rights activists in the past due to testing on animals which they have been trying to fix; making the hiring and supporting of someone who is so public about her hunting all the more damaging to them. I am honestly not even sure why this is a thread. The article only assumes the images of her hunting was the reason they cut ties with her, but no one knows if that is in fact true. Plus...why does anyone care about some random beauty product companies association with some random woman from the World Cup?

#24 Edited by The_Last_Ride (69101 posts) -

Who the fuck cares if she went hunting? >_>

yup, and she didn't hunt anything illegal or endangered

#25 Posted by thegerg (14414 posts) -

L'oreal spokesman said that L'oreal doesn't do animal testing anymore, anywhere in the world, and that it will not tolerate the killing of animals.

Interesting. Where and when did they say that? Do they only employ vegetarians?

#26 Edited by Ackad (3132 posts) -

There's a little more to this.

#27 Posted by foxhound_fox (86960 posts) -

Who the fuck cares if she went hunting? >_>

Apparently killing animals for food, rather than going to the grocery store instead, is wrong.

#28 Posted by Aljosa23 (24317 posts) -

LOL daily mail.

Gonna need another source before I have an opinion on this.

#29 Edited by vl4d_l3nin (778 posts) -
@Ackad said:

There's a little more to this.

That's not gonna stop the dipshit comments! :D

#30 Posted by Korvus (2453 posts) -

First Kendall Jones, then Steven Spielberg and now this girl I'm supposed to have heard about? The horror...

#31 Posted by bforrester420 (1043 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@The-Apostle said:

Who the fuck cares if she went hunting? >_>

L'oreal

It's none of their damn business what she does in her spare time. >_>

It is if she represents them and brings negative attention to them.

#32 Edited by bforrester420 (1043 posts) -

@RadecSupreme said:

@Netret0120 said:

But we eat meat:-\

There's a difference between killing to eat, and killing for sport.

This. I'm going out on a limb and guessing she didn't dine on Gazelle that evening. There's something wrong with people that go out to kill animals for fun.

#33 Posted by Masculus (2801 posts) -

Yeah, lol. A cosmetic company doing that.

#34 Edited by ad1x2 (5408 posts) -

I was going to mention that she typed in the post she was ready to hunt Americans and that may have been the straw that broke the camel's back but it looks like somebody already posted the Twitter screenshot.

Obviously she was referring to beating the US in the games and not literally killing Americans but the company probably didn't want to take the chance of losing business over her. She is probably famous enough that she will find work elsewhere over this.

#35 Posted by lightleggy (15836 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@The-Apostle said:

Who the fuck cares if she went hunting? >_>

L'oreal

It's none of their damn business what she does in her spare time. >_>

I completely disagree. If she were whoring herself out, sleeping with 10 different men per day or getting into crazy orgies or something like that, I'd say that it's her problem (and I dont mean it in a "approve sex stuff 'cause she is hot" way, merely giving a example of questionable behavior) but this girl is HUNTING FOR SPORT, which is fucking despicable, I don't care if you think its something "conservative". But when you go to a foreign country to sneak on some unsuspecting animal who has not wronged you in any way and you put a bullet in its head and just let the carcass there to rot or you take it to turn it into a trophy...then there is something seriously wrong with you. Especially since the girl went out of her way to claim that "Hunting is more than a matter of life and death", fuck you girl, it's death for the animal and thats it. I completely understand hunting for food or culling animal population that threatens the human population (without the humans invading the animal's habitats first). But there are no valuable arguments to defend the killing of animals for fun.

And it baffles me how most people who do crap like that are fucking spoiled rich brats who think they own the world, like this girl.

#36 Edited by MrGeezer (55942 posts) -

I completely disagree. If she were whoring herself out, sleeping with 10 different men per day or getting into crazy orgies or something like that, I'd say that it's her problem (and I dont mean it in a "approve sex stuff 'cause she is hot" way, merely giving a example of questionable behavior) but this girl is HUNTING FOR SPORT, which is fucking despicable, I don't care if you think its something "conservative". But when you go to a foreign country to sneak on some unsuspecting animal who has not wronged you in any way and you put a bullet in its head and just let the carcass there to rot or you take it to turn it into a trophy...then there is something seriously wrong with you. Especially since the girl went out of her way to claim that "Hunting is more than a matter of life and death", fuck you girl, it's death for the animal and thats it. I completely understand hunting for food or culling animal population that threatens the human population (without the humans invading the animal's habitats first). But there are no valuable arguments to defend the killing of animals for fun.

And it baffles me how most people who do crap like that are fucking spoiled rich brats who think they own the world, like this girl.

I ate a ribeye steak today for pleasure. And I'm already overweight and I eat too much meat. That's essentially "killing for fun". My actions result in the needless deaths of animals, and my motivation is pleasure rather than necessity. Now, if you really put the spotlight onto yourself, think about the last time you ate chicken or beef. Did you really NEED that hsmburger or chicken sandwich, or was the act of eating it simply about the ENJOYMENT of eating a tasty piece of meat?

Sure, SOMETIMES people kill out of necessity. Usually people kill just because they CAN, and it's somehow convenient or beneficial to them.

#37 Posted by brimmul777 (1059 posts) -

The hawtness had signed less than a week ago a contract to model for the L'oreal brand, today, L'oreal decided to cut ties with the girl, after pictures of her during a hunting trip surfaced in the internet.

L'oreal spokesman said that L'oreal doesn't do animal testing anymore, anywhere in the world, and that it will not tolerate the killing of animals.

Link

What do you guys think? This is the girl btw,

Shame, would have loved to see more of her, wouldn't have been long for her to join Victoria's Secret or do some minimal clothing photoshoot :p

I find she is cute.I don't care if she goes hunting,I would care about the product,not the fact she likes to go hunting.

#38 Posted by ferrari2001 (16677 posts) -

@one_plum said:

@The-Apostle said:

It's none of their damn business what she does in her spare time. >_>

Public image

How does someone hunting hurt anyone's public image? Only an idiot would be offended by her hunting.

Have you ever watched any liberal media news stations? They see hunting as the spawn of satan incarnate. Plenty of people watch those stations and agree with every word they say.

#39 Edited by uninspiredcup (6940 posts) -

Looks a bit like Amanda Nox. Better keep British students away from her.

#40 Edited by GamingTitan (495 posts) -

Hmmmm. So is loreal planning on firing everyone on their staff who isn't vegetarian?

If not then that's pretty hypocritical.

#41 Posted by sonicare (53441 posts) -

Private company can associate with who they want even if their reasons are dumb.