Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

No, love. The original PP may have insinuated the first pp was being deliberately obtuse, but she wasn’t trying to manipulate someone’s reality.

Were you born stupid or dropped on your head as a baby or what? Maybe refrain from posting anymore at all — you clearly lack understanding of basic concepts.

It’s cute when low IQ people try to be condescending.

Clearly they didn’t get the good genes.

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.

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.

I know plenty of GenZ kids who are indifferent to Sweeny’s ad and think she’s a bad actress. This GenXer agrees with them. This was a hugely successful ad! It got people talking about a mid brand selling basic jeans by a woman who can’t act. Success!

She’s only famous because she showed her tits a lot on Euphoria. She’s kind of like Gen Z’s Jamie Lee Curtis, only I doubt she will ever be nominated for an Academy Award, let alone win one in her 60s.

She's been a successful actor since she was a child. She was managing a career at an age when most people, likely you included, were picking at your zits and fretting about what so and so said before school. Reducing her to her tits is the kind of misogyny I've grown to expect from the left against any woman who refuses to conform to your rules.

+1

I didn’t understand until the Trump years that the left passionately despises women as much as the right does. It is shocking.

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.

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.

I know plenty of GenZ kids who are indifferent to Sweeny’s ad and think she’s a bad actress. This GenXer agrees with them. This was a hugely successful ad! It got people talking about a mid brand selling basic jeans by a woman who can’t act. Success!

She’s only famous because she showed her tits a lot on Euphoria. She’s kind of like Gen Z’s Jamie Lee Curtis, only I doubt she will ever be nominated for an Academy Award, let alone win one in her 60s.

She's been a successful actor since she was a child. She was managing a career at an age when most people, likely you included, were picking at your zits and fretting about what so and so said before school. Reducing her to her tits is the kind of misogyny I've grown to expect from the left against any woman who refuses to conform to your rules.

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.

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.

I know plenty of GenZ kids who are indifferent to Sweeny’s ad and think she’s a bad actress. This GenXer agrees with them. This was a hugely successful ad! It got people talking about a mid brand selling basic jeans by a woman who can’t act. Success!

She’s only famous because she showed her tits a lot on Euphoria. She’s kind of like Gen Z’s Jamie Lee Curtis, only I doubt she will ever be nominated for an Academy Award, let alone win one in her 60s.

She's been a successful actor since she was a child. She was managing a career at an age when most people, likely you included, were picking at your zits and fretting about what so and so said before school. Reducing her to her tits is the kind of misogyny I've grown to expect from the left against any woman who refuses to conform to your rules.

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.

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.

No, love. The original PP may have insinuated the first pp was being deliberately obtuse, but she wasn’t trying to manipulate someone’s reality.

Were you born stupid or dropped on your head as a baby or what? Maybe refrain from posting anymore at all — you clearly lack understanding of basic concepts.

It’s cute when low IQ people try to be condescending.

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.

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.

No, love. The original PP may have insinuated the first pp was being deliberately obtuse, but she wasn’t trying to manipulate someone’s reality.

Were you born stupid or dropped on your head as a baby or what? Maybe refrain from posting anymore at all — you clearly lack understanding of basic concepts.

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 fascists will be putting a noose around your neck or your loved one's and you will still be pretending that "libs did this to themselves."

Ma'am, this is a conversation about jeans advertising.

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 fascists will be putting a noose around your neck or your loved one's and you will still be pretending that "libs did this to themselves."

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.

Anonymous wrote:American eagle jeans are manufactured in China and Vietnam and other places in Asia. But go ahead and pay your tariffs and buy your jeans.

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:

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.

I know plenty of GenZ kids who are indifferent to Sweeny’s ad and think she’s a bad actress. This GenXer agrees with them. This was a hugely successful ad! It got people talking about a mid brand selling basic jeans by a woman who can’t act. Success!

She’s only famous because she showed her tits a lot on Euphoria. She’s kind of like Gen Z’s Jamie Lee Curtis, only I doubt she will ever be nominated for an Academy Award, let alone win one in her 60s.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Imagine making a fun dance video with your friends and you get used as a political tool by a bunch of old dudes. Ew.

Exactly. I bet these girls are creeped out right now.

Anonymous wrote:Do we know that?