Yik Yak icon
Join communities on Yik Yak Download
Genuinely asking, is commenting on someone’s genes automatically eugenics? Like do you think the ad was saying that Sydney Sweeney’s genes were superior to others’? (And does saying a thing is good necessarily imply other things are bad/worse?)
promoting eugenics is worse than calling someone a sloth be so fr
upvote 7 downvote

default user profile icon
Anonymous 7w

well to start, we barely saw the jeans in the ad. we really only saw her and what society views as the standard for beauty (blonde hair, blue eyes, etc). she talks about how these are the types of things that are inherited from your parents. all of that plus “sydney sweeney has good jeans” was odd.

upvote 7 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 7w

Sort of just thinking out loud/trying to make sense of this and interested in ppl’s thoughts

upvote 5 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 7w

Multiple layers as to why this ad was absolutely disgusting. For beginners it’s actually hard to accidentally promote eugenics everything here was on purpose. The ad script says “Genes are passed down from parents to offspring, often determining traits like hair color, personality and even eye color” while zooming in on her blue eyes and having her say “my genes are blue.” The good genes they’re referring to. 2, this was supposedly supposed to be for domestic violence awareness

upvote 4 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 7w

As somebody who studies the history of eugenics for a living: yes, saying her genes are good implies the existence of bad genes, and yes, talking about genetic inheritance and how hers are good is eugenic language. I don’t think the people who made the ad necessarily realized they were promoting eugenics, but I think that in and of itself is a testament to how normalized eugenic language and modes of thought are in our culture.

upvote 3 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #2 7w

it was more of a subliminal message which could be why people missed it, but it’s very odd if you sit and think about it.

upvote 5 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 7w

idk why you’re getting so defensive… you must be a blonde with blue eyes

upvote 4 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #3 7w

how suggestively zipping up your pants is supporting domestic violence? Nobody knows. 3 it’s paying homage to an old shoot where the producers were sexualizing a minor. A minor that had been posed at 10 years old and very obviously used as a pedophilic pawn through her young career. just gross through and through

upvote 5 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #3 7w

posed naked***

upvote 3 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #3 7w

Oh wow interesting ok thanks The only part of the campaign I knew about was the main picture of her with the slogan (didn’t know about the ad script)

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #3 7w

this! people saying “oh she’s paying homage to brooke shields ad” as if that’s a good thing 😐

upvote 3 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #3 7w

Curious, would you say that any mention of “good genes” is promoting eugenics? Like does it automatically imply a bias against people who don’t have the same traits as that person?

upvote 4 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> OP 7w

if going out of your way to highlight blue eyes and blonde hair as good genes in this current social climate isn’t promoting eugenics what would you call that

upvote 4 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 7w

watch your mouth bitch you really don’t want to start the insult game with me

upvote 7 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 7w

this told me everything i needed to know about you 💙

upvote 5 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #3 7w

Right so because the genetic traits being highlighted are the ones favored by those with power it feels like eugenics. Context plays a role That makes sense

upvote 9 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 7w

“My jeans are blue” as it’s intentionally focused on her eyes. Also, this. Her initials are SS. She posed with her German shepherd for photos. There’s no way in hell marketing and director didn’t not pick up on that shit— it was intentional.

post
upvote -1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #5 7w

I get the first thing, but honestly everything else you pointed out sounds like a stretch. Her initials aren’t in her control and have nothing to do with her beliefs, and neither does owning a German shepherd

upvote 2 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> OP 7w

The imagery and message being associated with nazi imagery forever burned into the minds of everyone since and to come could NOT have been missed and they did nothing to avoid it.

upvote 0 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #5 7w

I sort of see why you interpreted it that way, but I don’t agree that having certain initials or a certain dog breed automatically evokes Nazism. What your saying tips into over-analysis/conspiracy to me

upvote 0 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> OP 7w

They knew exactly what would come to mind and did nothing to avoid it because that’s exactly what they’re pushing.

upvote 0 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #5 7w

That’s theory, not fact. Agree to disagree

upvote 0 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> OP 7w

Your lack of media literacy is your own issue. Cant disagree with what’s blatantly obvious, sweetheart. Sun rises in the east, AE+SS partnered for some racist bullshit.

upvote 0 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #6 7w

Interesting, thanks!

upvote 1 downvote