Some Believe They've Caught 'Smoking Gun' Proving That Fruit Of The Loom Logo 'Mandela Effect' Was A Scam This Whole Time
Of all the Mandela Effect phenomena, one of the most hotly contested is the simple Fruit of the Loom logo.
While most examples of the "Mandela Effect" elicit more of a "huh, how about that"-type reaction, the factual truth that the underwear brand never had a cornucopia in its logo has been flat-out dismissed as wrong even against mountains of evidence proving otherwise. People are sure that a cornucopia was in that logo.
The debate raged again this weekend when Twitter / X user @Kurz_Prime tweeted what appears to be a Fruit of the Loom-brand shirt with a cornucopia in its logo.
Giving @Kurz_Prime the benefit of the doubt, it's possible he knew he would rile up the website by posting this shirt. In fact, it's the same shirt that has previously circulated as evidence that the cornucopia did exist, as Snopes documented in 2023, which @Kurz_Prime appeared to acknowledge in the replies to his post.
The shirt was first posted to Reddit in 2023 and is among many images that have been posted online featuring the Fruit of the Loom logo with the cornucopia.
While these photos have been latched onto as proof that the Mandela Effect surrounding the brand is a lie, some photos have been proven to be manipulated, but others, including this shirt, remain a mystery.
However, Fruit of the Loom has insisted the cornucopia has never been a part of its logo. Snopes compiled a list of every Fruit of the Loom advertisement that ran in print through the company's history, and sure enough, they have never had a logo featuring a cornucopia.
Twitter's Community Notes clarified this beneath @Kurz_Prime's rapidly spreading tweet, but this appeared to only make some on Twitter even madder.
One common, budding conspiracy theory is that Fruit of the Loom is intentionally gaslighting the world with a Mandela Effect to attract attention.
It's unclear what motive Fruit of the Loom may have to try to intentionally gaslight the world, as there have yet to be studies showing the effect such a practice may have on product sales.
However, it seems people remain steadfast in their belief that the cornucopia did exist, evidence to the contrary be damned.
Share Pin
Rhettorical
Something people have pointed out is that the collective memory of this isn't the same thing as misremembering an "e" vs an "a", if there was a hyphen or not, or which black guy played a genie in a movie no one saw. The specific cornucopia is seared into people's memories. If you had asked me to draw it from memory, I would have drawn that same cornucopia, as best as my limited artistic abilities would allow.
I grew up wearing a LOT of Fruit of the Loom. I probably still have an old shirt in a box somewhere that has this logo. I know for a fact that it existed.
I also want to point out that Snopes has a gap between 1996's and 2008's logos. 1996's logo was not on my clothing. 2008's, I have shirts in my dresser right now that have it. There's another logo they aren't mentioning.
Snopes is notoriously bad and corporations are notoriously untrustworthy, so there is zero doubt in my mind that there's a conspiracy going on here.
Drew
give us some pics or get outa here.
I would be willing to accept that there was a prominent bootlegger out there that had it on their logo, but no real evidence of that has ever cropped up either.
BudgieArchiver
I fully believe there's a bootleg brand with the cornucopia, as it makes the most sense.
As for the corporations lying about the logo, yes corporations are extremely dishonest and corrupt, but why would they lie about something as trivial as the logo? Most corporation lies are covering up a wide variety of unethical business practices such as slave labor made products or using poisonous chemicals or a plethora of other things, because of course no one would admit to that despite the corpos doing it all the time.
Rhettorical
I said I don't have pictures and I don't know if I ever will, but my mom used to buy my clothes at Wal-Mart so either the bootlegger was the most proficient and still undetected on the planet, or FOTL is lying.
view the rest of this conversation →
Panuru
More to the point, tagless tees weren't a thing until 2002. I don't think anybody is arguing that the logo had a cornucopia that recently, rather it did "back in the day".
Revic
Blank monochrome clothing is notoriously difficult to photoshop things onto.
jumpropeman
If someone can provide evidence like an ad or packaging instead of a bootleg shirt then maybe I'd pay attention.