Sydney Sweeney / American Eagle Controversy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Man! This forum isn't usually where I end up when I'm on dcum.But, as a heterosexual man, can someone..anyone, tell me why this woman is supposed to be the 'it girl' when it comes to looks. Is this supposed to be some kind of parody ? Can this Sweeney chick get more than one look from most boys on an American college campus ? Certainly not where I went to school. If she's what passes for hot these days,God help us all.

As for the ad, its very much in line with what a certain of this country believes in. There's an unmistakable double entendre there unless, of course, you CHOOSE to put on your blinders.

Oh please. She’d be the hot “it” girl on any campus. She is obviously gorgeous by any metric and what puts her over the top is her doe eyes, it factor and charm. She has a magnetic personality.

That’s not to say I think she’s an incredible actress. I honestly haven’t watched anything she’s in but she does pop on camera and she’s very charming.

You can tell how many posters on DCUM were nerds when they were growing up if they claim they can't see the sexual allure in Sydney Sweeney. Those who are nitpicking her appearance or eyes are missing the forest for the trees. The overall appearance of Sydney Sweeney is one of sexual allure. I'm a 40-something gay dude and even I recognize how sexy she is. To a typical hormonal teen or 20-something this is a sexy girl. Guys on college campuses all over the US would be turning heads at her. Except those in the library, I suppose.

6'2 African-American man who went to college in the SEC.I can assure that, almost every white woman I've dated in and after college has been objectively better looking than this Sweeney chick. I don't know how old you are but, since you're speculating about people's neediness, allow me to question your reading comprehension. I said her looks are nothing to write home about and youre here frothing about her 'sexual allure'? Two different things. Bleaching your hair blonde and buying yourself a cosmetically-enhanced pair of tits will certainly get you the male gaze that you crave but it still doesn't make you attractive. This isn't nitpicking.

You were triggered enough to use the word "frothy." Does Sydney Sweeney look like a cheap floozy blonde? Or a tall and think Slavic model? No. But it's indisputable that she has a sexual allure for significantly enough people, which is exactly why she was selected to be in the ad. It doesn't matter what you think, which is pretty irrelevant, but what the marketing team at AE thought and they chose her because they know sex sells.

Given your accusation of lack of reading comprehension, it's you who is ignoring that beauty and sexual allure are not the same. Beauty can be cold and off-putting, even if you respect it, and not terribly sexual. Which is why there are beautiful women who are also sexy, and beautiful women who are not sexy. And it's also why you rarely see sculpted runway models used for ads targeted to teens and young adults, or people in general.

You can start a thread on sexual allure if you want. I've been constant from the beginning in stating she isn't pretty and, you seem to agree. I mean, the comparison with the tall, thin Slavic model says it all.its quite rich to accuse anyone of not knowing what that pretty and sexy are not the same lol. Go back and read what I wrote or just maybe get a good grasp of what reading comprehension is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s nuts that saying somebody has good genes means my genes (your genes) are somehow inferior. That is backwards insecure thinking and I say that as a 5 foot one brown skinned, brown hair, brown eyed, Latina think this entire scandal is absurd. I think that says more about the complainers than anything else.

Aww did you get the much desired pat in the back you're so desperate for? It's only backwards insecure thinking for uncultured people like you with mediocre knowledge of history.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m starting to buy the theory that the most vocal people on the internet are hideous, often obese, loners and malcontents.

You're on the internet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It feels like a pushback to the body positivity/body inclusivity movement we've been on. It feels like a throwback to the toxic hyper-sexualization of one type of beauty ideal of the 90s/early 2000s.

If you really wanted to extoll someone with "great genes," putting some GOAT athletes in the campaign would be more fitting.

Thank goodness. It's about time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I keep getting Sydney Sweeney and Sabrina Carpenter mixed up.

I’d bunch a whole lotta nuts in either.

They're not attracted to fat, ugly, married men, so you don't have a chance.

Not accurate, so I have a chance!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s nuts that saying somebody has good genes means my genes (your genes) are somehow inferior. That is backwards insecure thinking and I say that as a 5 foot one brown skinned, brown hair, brown eyed, Latina think this entire scandal is absurd. I think that says more about the complainers than anything else.

Aww did you get the much desired pat in the back you're so desperate for? It's only backwards insecure thinking for uncultured people like you with mediocre knowledge of history.

You’re talking about a jeans ad. It’s not that deep.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s nuts that saying somebody has good genes means my genes (your genes) are somehow inferior. That is backwards insecure thinking and I say that as a 5 foot one brown skinned, brown hair, brown eyed, Latina think this entire scandal is absurd. I think that says more about the complainers than anything else.

Aww did you get the much desired pat in the back you're so desperate for? It's only backwards insecure thinking for uncultured people like you with mediocre knowledge of history.

See? ^ that’s the racist right there. Not the jeans ad.

[Anonymous]

Well, Sydney Sweeney is now a MAGA hero. Hope that works for her like it has for so many celebrities. /s

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So many hot people on TikTok are parodying her video because of how ridiculous she sounds, even if you don't think it has eugenic-related implications. But of course the losers here think it's because people are jealous and ugly. You're no better than the people who whine that the people who don't like their preferred media are racist/misogynistic.

It’s a weird ad campaign even with the genes comment taken out. This is their back to school season campaign with an ASMR clip of this girl unzipping her pants and zoom ins on her chest and lips. In one pic she is wearing two very baggy jeans on top of each other. At best it’s an odd advertisement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, Sydney Sweeney is now a MAGA hero. Hope that works for her like it has for so many celebrities. /s

Seems like it’s the other way around. How’s that Snow White actress doing these days?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, Sydney Sweeney is now a MAGA hero. Hope that works for her like it has for so many celebrities. /s

Seems like it’s the other way around. How’s that Snow White actress doing these days?

She's in a very successful West End production of Evita that's almost certainly going to transfer to Broadway?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, Sydney Sweeney is now a MAGA hero. Hope that works for her like it has for so many celebrities. /s

Seems like it’s the other way around. How’s that Snow White actress doing these days?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For decades, I've never taken offense if some totally average Black woman or man was praised as a "queen" or "king," but now some of you are having a complete meltdown because some randon advertising campaign plays on a white woman's attractiveness. Grow up.

+1
Black women and other WOC are celebrated when they're in ads/marketing campaigns. Now, apparently, it's ok to tear down white women if they are also featured in campaigns. Glad to see how many people think it's utterly ridiculous.

If anyone isn’t aware, Sydney isn’t just “featured” in the ad. Her lines are "Genes are passed down from parents to offspring, often determining traits like hair color, personality and even eye color. My genes are blue,"

This is eugenics.

No one cares that the white, blonde, blue-eyed actress who played Izzy Steven’s on Grey’s Anatomy is shilling pee pads. She’s not talking about genetics.

You people are ridiculous and exhausting the entire country. You are as silly and performative as the MAGA freaking out about “happy holidays.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this ad is a bit tone deaf, but not actually offensive. They could easily just add a couple more pairs of jeans/spokespeople and defuse all of this, so they may go that route.

But people don’t necessarily want that. A lot of people are tired of every add featuring an interracial couple.

Who cares what race she is? She’s objectively hot.

I always figured this was marketing trying to reach a broad audience. I personally don’t even notice it.

I’ve never noticed it at all! Is this really a thing?

Go look for Christmas cards on Shutterfly. The examples have almost completely morphed into interracial couples or same-sex couples. Which doesn't bother me, but I have noticed it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, Sydney Sweeney is now a MAGA hero. Hope that works for her like it has for so many celebrities. /s

Seems like it’s the other way around. How’s that Snow White actress doing these days?

And yet she’s still hotter than Sydney.