Anonymous #2 14w

Also it’s such a dumb ad 😭what do her tits have to do w me wanting to buy their jeans or not. If anything it made me not want to shop at American eagle cus it’s so weird

3

Anonymous #4 14w

Like if anything that ad is keeping me from buying a Jean jacket because it’s just proving it won’t fit my fucking boobs right and it’ll make me look stupid because I have to size up a couple sizes

7

Anonymous #5 14w

she says herself that this is her own doing and that she chooses to do it

1

she’s saying out of her mouth that this stuff is pitched by her. that weird soap thing was pitched by her according to her own mouth

1

the wordplay they used is referencing an old AE add w brooke schofield which in itself was controversial bc she was 14 giving an 8th grade science lesson. sydney’s was just weird especially yhe “my genes are blue” just bc you don’t think doesn’t mean there isn’t undertones and dog whistles. especially in trumps america and AE having a history w being racist and discriminatory

4

i meant to type brooke shields and it’s a ad from like the 80s i’m not spreading misinfo you can just look up this shit online and think

1

I did my senior project on Calvin Klein Brooke shields was a young actress/model who was the “most beautiful girl on earth” as young as 16 she was sexualized in a CK ad. She was sexualized through her whole career. One commercial she’s putting on jeans and talking about “genes” and evolution and selective mating. Literally what Sydney was referring to

3

Anonymous #3 14w

The Calvin Klein commercial was hit with a lot of feedback because she was literally a minor doing sexual commercials. One where she says “what comes between me and my Calvin’s? Nothing.” Implying nudity

3

Anonymous #3 14w

Not feedback, but clap back or whatever I can’t think of the word atm

3

Everyone in Hollywood knows and remembers the CK ad problem. There’s no way that they would have greenlit that unless it was purposeful

1

Good genes is a Jean Brand yeah. But it doesn’t have anything to do w this conversation. One could say ur argument is a stretch as well. Because brand name has nothing to do w it. Sexual advertisement for jeans using the definition of genes is the comparison we are drawing. Also when looking up the advertisement for the CK ad there are comments talking about the AE ad

1

Anonymous #3 14w

Yahoo article

1

Good jeans run it the family isn’t connected to Brooke Shields’s bc it’s not a sexual advertisement. And I’m not arguing the white supremacy argument. I’m talking about the comparison between Brooke and Sydney.

1

Also “doesn’t mean it is” it also doesn’t mean it isn’t. But you can’t sit here and say YOU CANT MAKE CONNECTIONS TO MEDIA!!! When you absolutely can. And I know right wing conspiracies. My parents are right wing flat earthers who drink borax and take horse dewormer. Me saying Sydney’s commercial is reminiscent of a controversial CK ad isn’t a conspiracy theory. It’s analyzing media

2

I’m not going insane. I’ll live. I can sleep. “We can a knowledge she’s an attractive woman” I never called her ugly. Weirdo. Ur the one being all crazy

6

Anonymous #3 14w

LMAOOO RIGHT, no one called her ugly here and here comes the “it’s okay to be white and attractive”

3

Anonymous OP 14w

“It’s okay to be sexy women can be sexy” there’s a difference between sexy And Whatever tf Sydney is doing. And then there’s the “I’m just trying to communicate” argument that I hear every time on any online discussion

3