Read the Atlantic article. You see conservatives on DCUM state that certain things “liberals hate” and there is zero evidence given. It’s how conservatives operate, say inflammatory statement and repeat.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Libs did this to themselves by putting up a stink about Sydney Sweeney. The effect of it was to make people think the left hates hot women, which is an unpopular stance. The push to make sororities, especially southern sororities, a culture war issue came immediately after the Sydney Sweeney thing. I do think it's manufactured but I also definitely think the left will take the bait.

People didn't make a stink about Sydney Sweeney, they made a stink about the normalization and glorification of eugenics. Nobody gives a f@ck about Sydney Sweeney or white sorority girls. Get a brain, and a life.

Nothing about that ad was about eugenics and you know that.

Either you didn’t see the ad that had “GENES” crossed out and replaced with the word “JEANS” — or you saw it and didn’t understand the implications. (NP)

I agree it was about genetics because its a fun play on words. I don't see how Sydney talking about her genes is a call to arms to murder all non-blondes.

You know, you never see hot people getting upset about someone being proud of their looks. I'm just saying. You all are telling on yourselves, you got mad that she's hot and now you're pretending she's promoting advocating to abort all black babies or whatever. GTFO.

I’m hot, and I think it’s a terrible ad campaign.

It’s not about beauty. It’s about promoting certain genes as superior, against the current backdrop of Gaza genocide, white anxiety over birth rates, black and brown people being disappeared off the streets and gerrymandered into lack of representation, concentration camps being built, and discussions of sending autistic kids to camps for “reparenting”. White supremacy is on the rise, and this ad feeds right into it. The most charitable interpretation is that it’s tone deaf and in poor taste.

Framing it as “ur just jelly bc ur ugly” is childish.

Us "libs" don't care.

I think middle aged and old men love watching 18-22 year olds young enough to be their daughters dance sexy, which is the only thing that disgusts me about this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Libs did this to themselves by putting up a stink about Sydney Sweeney. The effect of it was to make people think the left hates hot women, which is an unpopular stance. The push to make sororities, especially southern sororities, a culture war issue came immediately after the Sydney Sweeney thing. I do think it's manufactured but I also definitely think the left will take the bait.

People didn't make a stink about Sydney Sweeney, they made a stink about the normalization and glorification of eugenics. Nobody gives a f@ck about Sydney Sweeney or white sorority girls. Get a brain, and a life.

Nothing about that ad was about eugenics and you know that.

The ad copywriters were well aware of the jeans/genes wordplay and who it would appeal to. Stop gaslighting.

While I agree it was deliberate, pp’s argument wasn’t gaslighting. Since you don’t know what gaslighting means, you probably should avoid accusing someone of doing it.

Gaslighting is the manipulation of someone’s perception of reality. One common technique is to try to persuade the person they aren’t seeing what they think they’re seeing, especially when it comes to dogwhistles. That is precisely what PP was doing.

Since you don’t understand what gaslighting is, you should probably refrain from lecturing others about it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Libs did this to themselves by putting up a stink about Sydney Sweeney. The effect of it was to make people think the left hates hot women, which is an unpopular stance. The push to make sororities, especially southern sororities, a culture war issue came immediately after the Sydney Sweeney thing. I do think it's manufactured but I also definitely think the left will take the bait.

People didn't make a stink about Sydney Sweeney, they made a stink about the normalization and glorification of eugenics. Nobody gives a f@ck about Sydney Sweeney or white sorority girls. Get a brain, and a life.

Nothing about that ad was about eugenics and you know that.

Either you didn’t see the ad that had “GENES” crossed out and replaced with the word “JEANS” — or you saw it and didn’t understand the implications. (NP)

I agree it was about genetics because its a fun play on words. I don't see how Sydney talking about her genes is a call to arms to murder all non-blondes.

You know, you never see hot people getting upset about someone being proud of their looks. I'm just saying. You all are telling on yourselves, you got mad that she's hot and now you're pretending she's promoting advocating to abort all black babies or whatever. GTFO.

At the same age as Sydney Sweeney is now, I (white blue-eyed blonde) was significantly hotter and beautiful, which she is not. I thought the ad was appalling. It was not her “celebrating” her looks. It was a not-at-all subtle suggestion of white supremacy and in the current political environment, extremely obnoxious.

Smart ad execs got what they wanted - people talking about their ad. Thing is they ultimately failed because most folks have forgotten or never knew what brand was advertising. MAGA that recall the brand will probably not buy the jeans because it’s not their demographic/out of their price range/too fancy. Liberals who know the brand will not chose it because of the racist implications.

Bottom line, its a failure for the brand either way and they will drop that advertising agency.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Libs did this to themselves by putting up a stink about Sydney Sweeney. The effect of it was to make people think the left hates hot women, which is an unpopular stance. The push to make sororities, especially southern sororities, a culture war issue came immediately after the Sydney Sweeney thing. I do think it's manufactured but I also definitely think the left will take the bait.

People didn't make a stink about Sydney Sweeney, they made a stink about the normalization and glorification of eugenics. Nobody gives a f@ck about Sydney Sweeney or white sorority girls. Get a brain, and a life.

Nothing about that ad was about eugenics and you know that.

Either you didn’t see the ad that had “GENES” crossed out and replaced with the word “JEANS” — or you saw it and didn’t understand the implications. (NP)

I agree it was about genetics because its a fun play on words. I don't see how Sydney talking about her genes is a call to arms to murder all non-blondes.

You know, you never see hot people getting upset about someone being proud of their looks. I'm just saying. You all are telling on yourselves, you got mad that she's hot and now you're pretending she's promoting advocating to abort all black babies or whatever. GTFO.

She said thinks her genes are good. Go ahead and buy the products she is hawking if you like that type of ad.

Anonymous wrote:I weighed where to put this and decided it was best in politics.

So apparently the right is trying to manufacture a new cultural war controversy: It has persuaded itself liberals are triggered and Big Mad about sorority rush videos, especially at white sororities.

The original piece is in The Atlantic but that’s behind a paywall. This is an article about the article that had the added benefit of being written in Singapore so we get an outside-the-US perspective:

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/conservatives-white-sorority-rush-videos_n_689f713fe4b0fd906c863d5b?utm_campaign=yahoo-recirc

I guess anything to distract from the Epstein files, I guess.

Seriously the cult is trying to make us forget. RELEASE the EPSTEIN FILES!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Libs did this to themselves by putting up a stink about Sydney Sweeney. The effect of it was to make people think the left hates hot women, which is an unpopular stance. The push to make sororities, especially southern sororities, a culture war issue came immediately after the Sydney Sweeney thing. I do think it's manufactured but I also definitely think the left will take the bait.

People didn't make a stink about Sydney Sweeney, they made a stink about the normalization and glorification of eugenics. Nobody gives a f@ck about Sydney Sweeney or white sorority girls. Get a brain, and a life.

Nothing about that ad was about eugenics and you know that.

Either you didn’t see the ad that had “GENES” crossed out and replaced with the word “JEANS” — or you saw it and didn’t understand the implications. (NP)

I agree it was about genetics because its a fun play on words. I don't see how Sydney talking about her genes is a call to arms to murder all non-blondes.

You know, you never see hot people getting upset about someone being proud of their looks. I'm just saying. You all are telling on yourselves, you got mad that she's hot and now you're pretending she's promoting advocating to abort all black babies or whatever. GTFO.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Libs did this to themselves by putting up a stink about Sydney Sweeney. The effect of it was to make people think the left hates hot women, which is an unpopular stance. The push to make sororities, especially southern sororities, a culture war issue came immediately after the Sydney Sweeney thing. I do think it's manufactured but I also definitely think the left will take the bait.

People didn't make a stink about Sydney Sweeney, they made a stink about the normalization and glorification of eugenics. Nobody gives a f@ck about Sydney Sweeney or white sorority girls. Get a brain, and a life.

Nothing about that ad was about eugenics and you know that.

Either you didn’t see the ad that had “GENES” crossed out and replaced with the word “JEANS” — or you saw it and didn’t understand the implications. (NP)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Libs did this to themselves by putting up a stink about Sydney Sweeney. The effect of it was to make people think the left hates hot women, which is an unpopular stance. The push to make sororities, especially southern sororities, a culture war issue came immediately after the Sydney Sweeney thing. I do think it's manufactured but I also definitely think the left will take the bait.

People didn't make a stink about Sydney Sweeney, they made a stink about the normalization and glorification of eugenics. Nobody gives a f@ck about Sydney Sweeney or white sorority girls. Get a brain, and a life.

Nothing about that ad was about eugenics and you know that.

The ad copywriters were well aware of the jeans/genes wordplay and who it would appeal to. Stop gaslighting.

+1. Some brands and activities are for magas.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Libs did this to themselves by putting up a stink about Sydney Sweeney. The effect of it was to make people think the left hates hot women, which is an unpopular stance. The push to make sororities, especially southern sororities, a culture war issue came immediately after the Sydney Sweeney thing. I do think it's manufactured but I also definitely think the left will take the bait.

People didn't make a stink about Sydney Sweeney, they made a stink about the normalization and glorification of eugenics. Nobody gives a f@ck about Sydney Sweeney or white sorority girls. Get a brain, and a life.

Nothing about that ad was about eugenics and you know that.

The ad copywriters were well aware of the jeans/genes wordplay and who it would appeal to. Stop gaslighting.

While I agree it was deliberate, pp’s argument wasn’t gaslighting. Since you don’t know what gaslighting means, you probably should avoid accusing someone of doing it.

DP stop gaslighting people and head back over to Fox your safe space.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Libs did this to themselves by putting up a stink about Sydney Sweeney. The effect of it was to make people think the left hates hot women, which is an unpopular stance. The push to make sororities, especially southern sororities, a culture war issue came immediately after the Sydney Sweeney thing. I do think it's manufactured but I also definitely think the left will take the bait.

People didn't make a stink about Sydney Sweeney, they made a stink about the normalization and glorification of eugenics. Nobody gives a f@ck about Sydney Sweeney or white sorority girls. Get a brain, and a life.

Nothing about that ad was about eugenics and you know that.

The ad copywriters were well aware of the jeans/genes wordplay and who it would appeal to. Stop gaslighting.

While I agree it was deliberate, pp’s argument wasn’t gaslighting. Since you don’t know what gaslighting means, you probably should avoid accusing someone of doing it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Libs did this to themselves by putting up a stink about Sydney Sweeney. The effect of it was to make people think the left hates hot women, which is an unpopular stance. The push to make sororities, especially southern sororities, a culture war issue came immediately after the Sydney Sweeney thing. I do think it's manufactured but I also definitely think the left will take the bait.

But that’s just it: The left isn’t taking the bait.

It doesn't matter if the left takes the bait - the right just has to act like they did.

And that will accomplish what?

So they can pretend they’re winning at pigeon chess.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Libs did this to themselves by putting up a stink about Sydney Sweeney. The effect of it was to make people think the left hates hot women, which is an unpopular stance. The push to make sororities, especially southern sororities, a culture war issue came immediately after the Sydney Sweeney thing. I do think it's manufactured but I also definitely think the left will take the bait.

People didn't make a stink about Sydney Sweeney, they made a stink about the normalization and glorification of eugenics. Nobody gives a f@ck about Sydney Sweeney or white sorority girls. Get a brain, and a life.

Nothing about that ad was about eugenics and you know that.

The ad copywriters were well aware of the jeans/genes wordplay and who it would appeal to. Stop gaslighting.

When did sorority culture ever take a backseat at southern universities and state schools?? Try NEVER.

When did pretty rich white girls stop being prioritized by sororities? Again, NEVER.

When did American pop culture stop “celebrating” pretty girls and young women? Definitely never.

This is nothing but the typical RWNJ manufactured crap that no normal adult, progressive or conservative, gives two hoots about. Frankly, grown ups don’t think about, care about, or worry about sororities.