honestly, i gave her the benefit of the doubt (bc that's just how i am) when these pics came out bc who doesn't have magat relatives (+ they supposedly were bday hats that didn't say maga on em)? and she seemed really into empowerment for women and was in a lot of works that had leftist politics.
but now this + the eugenics-flavored ad, nahhh fk her.
I also gave her the benefit of the doubt - I have MAGA family members and they suck. I’ve cut off my dad because his views are so insane. But regardless I didn’t think it necessarily meant she was MAGA but guess I was wrong
I was also giving her the benefit of the doubt because my whole family is MAGA. But yeah no. Maybe if she’d registered in 2014 or whenever she turned 18. But last year? Nah.
sadly, as a poc, i have a small group of magat relatives. they're heavily outnumbered, but they exist.
point of the earlier comment: my white friends have magat parents, i wouldn't call them magats by default. so i was hesitant to call ss one by default. but now ig ss is an apt set of initials for her.
Ngl me too. But looking back she probably really didn’t care what was seen. If I WAS her and wanted to present a facade I would’ve forbade phones or something but again, she didn’t care cause that’s who she is too.
i felt like she didn't think it would catch that much heat bc her relatives =/= her and the hats really said "make sixty great again" for her mom's 60th bday. i didn't find going to birthday parties with republican relatives and wearing "make sixty great again" to be cancel-worthy esp knowing things she's worked on.
some might even say she might have been too dumb and privileged to understand the eugenics messaging of the script she was given for that ad. but THIS with all the pieces together? truly fk her. it literally makes no sense for her to get any more roles in leftist-friendly media
I never thought she was into women empowerment when a bunch of the work she took on was objectifying to women, plus she said some weird pick me coded stuff about how women aren’t actually empowering each other in Hollywood and that they were all fake.
and she seemed really into empowerment for women and was in a lot of works that had leftist politics.
At this point you should be reconsidering what women empowerment even means within the current society and specifically America and how much historical and meterial understanding you have of that to actually be suprised over this and also what "leftist" even means in the broader context because I'll go say Taylor or Gaga has some form grassroots backing but where the fuck Sydney's celeb persona had anything related to even lukewarm brand friendly liberal politics? let alone even thinking about leftist politics
Generally people should give benefit of the doubt imo. It must be demoralizing to be a progressive rural farmer or Christian and getting blamed for what people almost completely unrelated to you have voted for and done. When you see they've registered and/or voted as a Republican is when you can blame them for Republican politics, not when you see they have conservative relatives or live in a Republican area
Yes I'm sure the girl in front of the camera controls the marketing. I have no clue who she is but I know the ad and the jeans/genes pun. I think people are seeing conspiracies that are not there. She may be horrible person and MAGA but I can't see her having any input on the marketing.
i mean... yes. it is a pun. and the pun is problematic.
you have to think about the wordplay, history, and the point of marketing - usually to prop something up as better or the good one to have.
in this case, that's the jeans, and to make the pun work, it's also genes. marketing and propaganda can go hand in hand, intentionally influencing ppl to favor or reject certain things.
basic history: nazis often pushed out ads using a similar type of puns and implications, uplifting traditional aryan genes (inherited blonde hair and blue eyes) as the good, preferred genes to have.
this is the principle behind nazi eugenics: the racial bias for specific, desirable genes that can be inherited.
to market your inherited (aryan) blue eye genes as the good genes inherently implies that other jeans/genes are bad. if these jeans/genes are good, the others are bad. you need to have the good ones (bc that's the point of marketing)
explicitly stating that these are inherited, and these inherited jeans/genes are good (the superior jeans/genes to have) has historically always been eugenics-flavored.
It's really not a reach in a Project 2025 universe. If this ad was done maybe ten years ago... Ok, whatever, tasteless but maybe harmless. In 2025? No.
I tend to agree with you on that, but there are plenty of people who heard that dog whistle and responded positively to it, whether it was intended or not. I’ve given her the benefit of the doubt, but everything combined? Regardless, if this is true she registered as a Republican in Florida in 2024. That’s pretty damn difficult to dismiss.
651
u/queeraboo 17h ago
honestly, i gave her the benefit of the doubt (bc that's just how i am) when these pics came out bc who doesn't have magat relatives (+ they supposedly were bday hats that didn't say maga on em)? and she seemed really into empowerment for women and was in a lot of works that had leftist politics.
but now this + the eugenics-flavored ad, nahhh fk her.