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.

You know very well that it was. There is no such thing as good genes without bad genes. Blue eyes good...white baby voiced woman good... We know what the ad is about. You'd have to be a moron to not understand what it is about. Are you a moron?

What are you after? Should I tell my kids, of European heritage, that they can't be proud of their family and ancestors? There's Black Heritage Month, AAPC month, Hispanic Heritage month. And what, if they feel good in a similar way, that is undercutting other ethnicities? That's garbage. None of us celebrate or we all do. My kids speak the language of their family, have the traditional outfits, spend a lot of time with their family in Europe. If you have a problem with that, you are the racist.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

When did she say her genes are superior? She didn't. And if so, cancel all the #blackgirlmagic people.

Your false comparison ignores the actual reality of the history of eugenics. There's no historical reality where white women have been oppressed subjugated and abused on the basis that black womanhood is superior. The reverse very much has happened. Black girl magic is not the same as white eugenics and you should be ashamed of yourself for trying to assert that it is. Filth.

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.

You know very well that it was. There is no such thing as good genes without bad genes. Blue eyes good...white baby voiced woman good... We know what the ad is about. You'd have to be a moron to not understand what it is about. Are you a moron?

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.

The “left” is not paying attention to sororities in the ultra conservative southern schools. The only people watching those videos are 55 year old fat white men wearing a football jersey of 19 year old college quarterback. Talk about arrested development.

NP. You are unfamiliar with social media. These videos are wildly popular with Gen Z.

Anonymous wrote:The same people that have a problem with the Sydney ad are the same people that lost the election for us and I hope we learn our lesson before the next election.

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.

The “left” is not paying attention to sororities in the ultra conservative southern schools. The only people watching those videos are 55 year old fat white men wearing a football jersey of 19 year old college quarterback. Talk about arrested development.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

When did she say her genes are superior? She didn't. And if so, cancel all the #blackgirlmagic people.

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.

You know very well that it was. There is no such thing as good genes without bad genes. Blue eyes good...white baby voiced woman good... We know what the ad is about. You'd have to be a moron to not understand what it is about. Are you a moron?

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.

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.

Sydney Sweeney is only important to RWNJs and Gen Z. Some men may find her “hot” but she is not pretty or unique - i.e. doesn’t have long term Hollywood potential

Try harder.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

When did she say her genes are superior? She didn't. And if so, cancel all the #blackgirlmagic people.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Anonymous wrote:

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.