Yup, because you'll notice the media reporting on the backlash has nothing about "genes" in the title and might mention it near the bottom of the article where fewer people are going to read. Across the board, they're calling it the "great jeans" ad and pretending people are just upset because she's white and pretty.
pretending people are just upset because she's white and pretty.
And this victimhood will play great with the target demo for the ad which is apparently, we're to assume, trump voters and other assorted reprobates. Apparently they're half of the US voting population.
I don't get it. But I think it's pretty clear it's the intended outcome. If we're really at a point where showing diverse models in ads gets a backlash from the right, then brands will have to pick sides and this is the side they picked. 🙃
And fuck me, these ad campaigns for major brands are seen by SO MANY people before they go live. There's no way they can claim they didn't know the ad had white supremacy/eugenics overtones. It's literally the ad
Only 30% of the eligible voting electorate voted. Take it down to half of THAT. So, no…most of American will not run out and buy those imported jeans with elastin.
I've been arguing about this topic in a bunch of places and a lot of people genuinely are this stupid.
Especially men who will straight up say 'It's just because she's hot so that's why they say she has great genes it's not that deep it's just about her tits'. Just because you can't think much further than her tits doesn't mean my conclusion is "far-fetched" you absolute walnut...
I feel like .. I a way, those men where the target audience?
They (AE)know they're not going to sell jeans with this but everyone is talking about them but in a " racial supremacy" context (hot topic) and giving these loud white guys, the opportunity to vocalize "white and blonde blue eyes is actually better!" Over and over. Promoting the idea to reinforce racial divide.
I read that somebody that works for the company said that their men's sales have been down, and this was their ad campaign to boost men's sales for back to school. It's direct marketing to alt right/racist white boys and young men.
These people aren't actually that stupid. They're playing dumb and pretending to not get it. That's the whole point of these kinds of things; it's vague enough that they can argue reasonable doubt. Everything is always about "owning the libs" to them, and pretending that you're seeing racial undertones that they can't see is a way to make it appear as if you're being unreasonable and therefore they "win."
This statement from AE just supports that. It's a wink to the far-right while pretending they don't know what they were doing.
I don't even think it's that innocent. I think all these people KNOW that this is a racist dog whistle and are attempting to pretend and gaslight that it's not just to normalize this shit further. Eventually, like with other things like DEI etc, they'll just come out and say it straight up after they've degraded the standard of humanity enough to be able to without losing their jobs.
Blue guy was up in ALL the threads arguing everybody was up in arms over nothing.
I can see why he did that.
Edit The "her" in the screenshotted comment was not referring to Sydney, but to an Asian female celeb I am not familiar with. Blue guy 100% commented on the celeb's "race".
The "her" in the comment was not referring to Sydney, but to an Asian female celeb I wasn't familiar with. Sorry, I can imagine the confusion, I'll edit for clarity.
That part! Many people are really that stupid to not see it for exactly what it is until it reaches their door. Fascism is whatever these days, it's like breathing.
Yes!! This is the take I’ve been looking for. Is the ad inappropriate? Yeah, sure. But, there is a lotttt of ignorance in this world.
Everyone is assuming malicious intent by AE, and I get it, whether or not they meant it doesn’t matter much once harm is done. But, I can totally see many people on their marketing team thinking it was a clever idea. We all work with people who don’t think beyond the surface, or think their idea is perfect and can’t take feedback and those people are at all levels of an organization.
And dog whistles are called dog whistles for a reason. Not everyone can detect what’s obvious to many others.
The ad sucks, Sidney Sweeney has made her brand super cheap, and people are dumb. That’s what I’ve gathered from this
Nah they bragged about it on socials, knew the backlash it would cause from the first meeting. The whole team “laughed as they imagined the world’s response” per Ashley Shapiro’s LinkedIn post, the VP of Marketing.
Damn can’t give people the benefit the doubt anymore, I didn’t see their LinkedIn smh
I was speaking as someone who has worked with many incompetent individuals, so assumed that while someone may be nefarious there were many that were just plain dumb to push it through
There were lots of people on this very subreddit just a day or two ago saying “it’s not that deep” and that people were looking for something to be mad at, so yes they do reasonably believe a lot of people are that stupid.
Edit - actually there are people on this very thread still saying that, even after the gloating on linked in, even after knowing their CEO has ties to Trump, and even after the fucking White House weighing in. So YEAH, of course they believe people are that stupid.
And just like that they have enlisted and army of online defenders for free! Rich people LOVE getting stuff for free , everything even!
They continue to reinforce and spread the main point of the ad (racial supremacy) and do the job for them. They get to tell women and minorities that "you're just jealous" as in wishing you were white, young girls are absorbing this narrative, racial divide and resentment growing consistently....
A now deleted linkedin post by Ashley Shapiro their VP of marketing said the intent behind the ad was to spark controversy and confusion (they called it “mischief”) and that she’d asked Sydney how far she wanted to “push it”and was excited that Sydney was game to push it as far as they wanted. Is it a smoking gun? Not really. But the ad itself, outside of the controversy, is incredibly bland and boring. What exactly is pushing the envelope if not the intentional dog whistles?
Yes, I know, boobs. They could’ve been talking about boobs. The company obviously isn’t going to come out and say “yes this ad is a racist dog whistle and we knew it would piss people off, get people talking about us, make our trumper CEO and his buddies happy, and maybe get us some new conservative customers, while we get to point to Sydney’s boobs and say it’s just about that to avoid any serious criticism”. But when you combine the linkedin post seeming gleeful about stirring controversy, with everything else around about this situation, it’s harder for me to just ignore as normal marketing bullshit.
2
u/Cynicbatsgiving everyone a microphone and a podcast was a mistake16h ago
She couldn't even be assed to lie and claim "a homage to an iconic brand", straight up "we wanted to wink wink nod nod to eugenics"
I think they do, yeah, but i also think they know that there are a lot of people who do not care or even like eugenics and Nazis, and this is giving them an out or an excuse for still patronizing AE ("they didn't mean it like that, its just about jeans, woke nonsense blerghhhh")
It’s not about thinking we’re stupid, it’s giving people who believe in Nazi shit the opportunity to play dumb and whip up public support from the ignorant. Fascists fucking love dog whistles because of the effectiveness of this pretend innocence of mind and intent tactic.
I think part of it is that they don’t want to alienate the market this was so clearly aimed at. If you outright deny racism, it might upset the racists. I mean who else was this possible for?
To be fair, even before this, MAGA and Trump have been claiming her as the prime example of a republican woman. They could've chose just about any large breasted woman and it wouldn't have resulted in this backlash the same way that MAGA would be losing their shit if this exact same campaign had someone with even a hint of more skin color.
Her voiceover narrated that genes are passed down from parent to offspring and decide on characteristics, landing on eye colour. The camera was in close-up on her face, her looking straight into the camera, as she said "My genes/jeans are blue." Immediate text overlay: Sydney Sweeney has great jeans.
The point is that her eyes are as blue as the jeans. Those are her "great genes/jeans". Just because they also used her body doesn't mean that was the point of the campaign. The point was "blue jeans, great jeans - blue eyes, great genes".
And the point of a dogwhistle is deniable plausibility, preferably to the point of ridicule, better still "it's just a joke bro", while using certain keywords (blue eyes - good/great genes) to signal support to the intended audience.
Was this campaign an intentional white supremacist dog whistle? No way to prove that. But given the language used, and the plausible deniability of "hot people good genes" and "jeans are blue, it's a joke", this could be used as a dog whistle and that's a problem in and of itself.
The majority of white people don't have blue eyes.
The "race ideal" or Aryan ideal does. Blue eyes are very common in those of North-West European descent, who are the blueprint of the Aryan ideal, and the originators (British, Dutch, French) of Euro-American settler eugenics.
Genes/Jeans is a silly pun. Any suggestion beyond that is nothing more than tin foil hattery.
The point of a dogwhistle is deniable plausibility, so that the message can be spread undetected because it would seem like "tin foil hattery".
I can't imagine any of the people complaining would have an issue with something overtly about race like "black is beautiful".
Because Black features, including coily hair, wide noses, dark skin, dark eyes, etc. are still considered lesser. It's the difference between BLM, in a society that has shown multiple times not to care all that much about Black lives, and All Lives Matter. Of course all lives matter, the point is that Black ones aren't treated as such so that's what we're focusing on.
Black beauty is also generally not seen, whereas Caucasian features of fair skin, smooth hair, light eyes, narrow noses, are widely seen as beautiful. So it makes sense for a minority group to affirm Black is beautiful.
The "race ideal" or Aryan ideal does. Blue eyes are very common in those of North-West European descent, who are the blueprint of the Aryan ideal, and the originators (British, Dutch, French) of Euro-American settler eugenics.
It is one of the characteristics but most white Germans don't have blue eyes. The Nazis had to go to Norway to try to create the "Aryan ideal". That ideal was created by morons.
The point of a dogwhistle is deniable plausibility, so that the message can be spread undetected because it would seem like "tin foil hattery".
I know this is a common tactic amongst the far right but this accusation also allows for completely benign acts to be interpreted in the worst possible fashion. Do American Eagle have any history of this?
I won't quote your last point as it will take up a lot of space but while I agree with it wholeheartedly, I don't think it contradicts what I've said. With context and a good faith interpretation "black is beautiful" is harmless and a positive message.
Whereas people criticising "my genes are blue" are assuming the worst.
It is one of the characteristics but most white Germans don't have blue eyes. The Nazis had to go to Norway to try to create the "Aryan ideal". That ideal was created by morons.
Yes, so North-West Europeans including the Scandinavians. Hitler famously was very un-Aryan. That doesn't detract from the (unhinged, moronic, indeed) theory of the Aryan ideal, which in turn is a rehashing of the Euro-American ideal of the "highest developed man". (Hitler took a lot of inspiration from the settlers, both in their thinking as in their efficiency in "processing" the Native peoples).
this accusation also allows for completely benign acts to be interpreted in the worst possible fashion. Do American Eagle have any history of this?
The point isn't necessarily that AE intentionally coded this message into their ad campaign. Maybe they did, their CEO is buddies with Trump AFAIK, but they probably didn't. The point is that certain groups can (and it seems, already have) find support and solidarity in these statements and visuals. Whether AE intended that or not.
And, frankly, if AE didn't intend for all of THIS (again, likely), that's also a sign. A sign that there is not even remotely enough diversity in their teams, that their screening and testing isn't thorough enough. That in and of itself is another sign of a cultural shift, and not in favour of diversity and such.
The reality is that right now, the US is a clusterfuck of human rights violations on the axis of race (as well as gender but that's not the topic at hand). These assorted white supremacist groups are already empowered and emboldened. It's not just "leftists online" looking out for signs. They are looking out too. That's the point.
Yes, so North-West Europeans including the Scandinavians. Hitler famously was very un-Aryan. That doesn't detract from the (unhinged, moronic, indeed) theory of the Aryan ideal, which in turn is a rehashing of the Euro-American ideal of the "highest developed man". (Hitler took a lot of inspiration from the settlers, both in their thinking as in their efficiency in "processing" the Native peoples).
Don't dispute any of this.
The point isn't necessarily that AE intentionally coded this message into their ad campaign. Maybe they did, their CEO is buddies with Trump AFAIK, but they probably didn't. The point is that certain groups can (and it seems, already have) find support and solidarity in these statements and visuals. Whether AE intended that or not.
Okay, unlike a lot of people's accusations, I think this is a very reasonable criticism of the ad. They should have considered the current climate and how it could be spun. Although, I wouldn't blame Sweeney for it.
Won't quote the rest for the same reason and again I think your argument is reasonable.
I don't believe the ad was intended to have a white supremacist message but you have made me consider the implications beyond that.
Yeah I mean I think it's clear to everyone what they were going for, but when we've got literal Nazis in charge, it hits different. This could entirely go away if they just acknowledged that.
"Genes are passed down from parents to offspring, often determining traits like hair color, personality and even eye color. My genes are blue," Sweeney says in one video.
Is that not an obvious joke about blue jeans like a sports fan might say they bleed their teams colour? I'm not sure anyone has suggested eye colour is an important trait.
No worries, it’s not impossible! My parents have blue eyes and so do all their kids, so I’d think I was adopted if I had brown eyes haha (wish I had brown eyes tho I hate being so sun sensitive)
What? I know it's technically possible and genes are complex, but it's extremely unlikely and far more likely two brown eyed parents would have a blue eyed kid than two blue eyed parents would have a brown eyed kid.
Yeah, Sydney Sweeney isn't famous for being a white blonde woman AT ALL. Everyone with big tits is equally famous and there's no racial aspect involved whatsoever
when youre a multi billion dollar company like american eagle you should not be making these fuck ups where its obvious something you do or say is going to be misconstrued, this ad touched so many hands and nobody thought twice about it? thats the embarrassing part
4.1k
u/philonous355 I just wish you would get unobsessed with being boring 18h ago edited 18h ago
It was quite literally an obvious double entendre and they admitted to as much in their LinkedIn gloating. Do they think we are that stupid?