Anonymous #2 7w

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 7w

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 7w

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

1

Anonymous OP 7w

right bc a celebrity is never under contract and made to say or have a certain appearance on social media, right? not saying she isn’t or is choosing it but lol

0

Anonymous #6 7w

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

Anonymous OP 7w

again not saying what’s real or not real. but the thing abt hollywood is us “regular” ppl can’t just take everything at face value from someone in the industry. you literally never know what or who is lying underneath. sure she can say something with her own mouth. but she’s also an actress im sure she’s used to being told to speak some lines and make it convincing. ofc or she could’ve just done the soap thing herself. but damn i’m soo terminally offline now i didn’t even know what that was

1

Anonymous OP 7w

yall should try it sometime instead of worrying sm abt random celebs. esp women when men have done many weird and scandalous things and don’t get nearly the same scrutiny that im sure she does now. the girl is young, pretty, and in a very competitive & misogynistic industry. but in the end who cares abt her she doesn’t know you and you don’t even know her besides whatever persona she created for yall to see

1

oh my god girl get a grip i’m sorry. what is she supposed to do? not exist? be born different so she’s not conventionally attractive to make you feel good? not feel good abt herself and looks bc others don’t? i get it beauty standards can be shit and can harm girls. but also she’s just some random lady and she’s doing her job. like i said maybe try staying offline sm if something like that upsets you sm

-2

oh brother. you are upset and it is also your opinion lmfao. but she’s not “supposed” to do anything but what she wants (ofc like i mentioned abt there’s stuff abt hollywood where we just dk going behind the scenes). she has good genes! she’s still a pretty woman! doesn’t mean a woman who isn’t “white, blonde, blue eyes, blah blah” isn’t also pretty and talk abt their good genes if she wants. and you DO know that actresses and actors don’t write the scripts for the things they act in…right?

-1

i’m slow at processing wordplay don’t mind hahaha. but it’s literally just silly wordplay on the actress modeling the jeans being attractive and advertising jeans. you should be okay. i do understand the hurt of beauty standards. but we should also start maybe learning that one beauty doesn’t take away from the other instead of outright thinking someone should ignore theirs for the sake of others idk that’s just me lol

0

Anonymous #6 7w

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

Anonymous OP 7w

girl what ad are you talking abt bc i’ve tried searching for an article or something that talks abt someone named brooke schofield and the ad and the connection. no mention of anything to do with that sort of add. i did see an ad w brooke schofield, but that was for calvin klein. and absolutely yes that ad is problematic bc of her age. but there was nothing abt good jeans. nothing abt any connection. so like is the internet creating misinfo to stir drama or ? and well no…bc the jeans are blue..

-2

Anonymous #6 7w

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

Anonymous #6 7w

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 7w

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 7w

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

3

Anonymous #3 7w

yes….i said the calvin commercial was fucked and that other one is too. but uhm you do know that genes being a funny wordplay for jeans isn’t exactly the mostly wow radical idea, right? lollll. like if the only reference you think there is is the fact that there’s a joke abt genes meaning jeans, with literally nothing else, something that is so basic, then i feel bad for how much time you look deeply into things that aren’t there. there is no evidence anywhere that the two are linked besides

0

Anonymous #3 7w

a wordplay that has literally been used so many times before bc they’re the same word spelt differently.

0

Anonymous #6 7w

also want to say that the commercial where the young girl does the genes/jeans bit is NOT funny. i just meant like the usage of the phrase in general.

0

again, the “good genes” bit wasn’t abt her blue eyes and blonde hair. it was literally a joke abt her boobies miss girl. her eyes = her boobs. blue reference bc she DOES have blue eyes, so it fits with good BLUE jeans. not meaning her blue eyes give her good genes. yall literally creating think pieces on multiple jokes in an add to reference boobs and jeans lmfao. sure feel how you want but doesn’t mean yall are stressing too much on something that is not actually this huge think piece

0

Anonymous OP 7w

i literally did look it up online that’s what i’ve been doing and said myself lmfao. not my fault you told me the wrong name. i never said YOU were. i said if you saw something that should be easy to find but wasn’t (again bc you gave the wrong name) then it’s probably some misinfo you found somewhere. but do you think any tv show, ad, movie that makes the same basic joke used many times before bc it’s basic and unoriginal then they are linked lol?

1

Anonymous #6 7w

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

Anonymous #3 7w

the problem was sexualizing a minor at all making multiple commercials doing so. you say there’s “no way” but shows and movies have made genes/jeans jokes in the past it’s so unoriginal and basic. im sure they wouldn’t greenlight an ad that is the exact setup bc that is a link. but an unoriginal joke made in an awful ad isnt gonna ban companies from using the most obvious wordplay for the use of what they sell. there’s literally a company called “good genes” it’s so unoriginal and obvious to use

1

Anonymous #3 7w

i looked it up and there’s literally one brand called Good Genes and another one too called The Good Genes like be so fr it is so used. it is not a hush hush thing to use bc of the CK thing and isn’t banned from use in HW or anywhere. ppl are not looking at that Sweeney ad and going “aha! it’s a link to this!” besides ppl who stretch so hard im worried for their back. like come on it’s so tiredly used😭

1

Anonymous #6 7w

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 7w

Yahoo article

1

Anonymous #3 7w

yeah bc again some of yall reach. with more research, there was a Gap ad in the early 2000s that talked abt “good genes run in the family.” is that a dogwhistle? is that specifically referencing brooke shields? i just think it’s worn to be like good genes and family bc the whole family wears these jeans blah blah. shields’ commercial is worded much differently. just bc yall forced everyone to see an old ad that was bad bc of the use of sexualizing a minor so now that’s why ppl are being like

1

Anonymous #3 7w

“sydney sweeney and brooke shields is connected!” doesn’t mean it actually is. no matter how many ways you twist and turn yourselves there are objectively way more actual bad things happening besides an ad that’s like genes are this scientific thing, i have good genes ! (jeans). it’s nazism! when in reality it’s boobies and word wordplay like i have been saying bahahah. like pls yall are rlly gonna need to do something to take a breather before you fully lose your hinges and start

1

Anonymous #3 7w

accusing random shit of being something it’s entirely not. like i’m genuinely afraid for the way yall are heading bc you’re becoming just as bad as some right wing conspiracy theorists i see omg. hollywood has many many issues but i promise not every small thing has this crazy connection

0

Anonymous #6 7w

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

Anonymous #6 7w

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

Anonymous #3 7w

i’m not saying you can’t. you can do what you want. just saying that maybe don’t make yourself go insane bc you see a pretty woman who happens to be white and blonde talking abt good genes, a lot of it referencing how ppl acknowledge having tbh rlly nice boobs, and happens to have unoriginal and tired word play used in OTHER jean companies as well (gap add that talked abt family and genes). what happened with brooke is fucked. but sydney is an adult and attractive woman. we can still acknowledge

-2

Anonymous #3 7w

attractiveness even if it’s from a white woman like her. it’s not telling ppl other women are not pretty or don’t have good genes. also many conservatives also go crazy “connecting media” and what they mean secretly (it’s the devil! jews! whatever!). i just mean yall are gonna drive yourself insane over something that is seriously not a big deal

-2

Anonymous #3 7w

okay? so again sydney is an adult woman. she is sexy and she is okay with showing that. it being sexual bc she is sexy and, like ive stressed, sm of the same warn, tired, wordplay and usage of scientific facts of genes being good and using it for jeans that is used over and over and over doesn’t mark this distinct link you think it is.

-3

Anonymous #6 7w

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 7w

lol i got confused with you and the literal two other people in the replies chill. getting confused and making a mistake based off of previous interactions ive already had isn’t exactly crazy. im not the one sitting here thinking some random jean ad is some huge insidious issue when there’s actual issues to worry abt in the world😭 i only type sm bc that’s how i talk with everything. due to not being able to communicate my thoughts with a few sentences. i need to express details as it helps ME

0

Anonymous #3 7w

even process my whole entire point that i am making. it is simply a difference in processing and communication abilities i have, and while ik excessive to others, it is just what i naturally do in a convo! so no craziness here. just how my brain works🙂

0

Anonymous #3 7w

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

3

Anonymous OP 7w

“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

Anonymous #3 7w

also one more, but i didn’t realize how many commercials Sydney is in for this campaign omg! finally found the one where it is like the Brooke one, instead of only being able to read the lines, so i agree that one itself can be troubling as i see how sydney is also putting on jeans! i agree good arguments can be made on the issues tributing such an ad! many “iconic” moments were definitely not good w younger girls, so we get tributes to popular, but bad moments in media :/ unfortunately the

1

Anonymous #3 7w

success that jeans campaign ultimately had then may be the marketing idea behind that specific ad, but it should have been more deeply evaluated for the controversy that it had for the age of the actress. the only “good” thing abt that part is that sydney is an adult so her more sexual nature in addition to the wordplay on jeans is allowed. the marketing for that one is definitely understandably controversial!

1

Anonymous OP 7w

im not saying you called her ugly. im saying it’s okay that she’s attractive and it’s okay that ppl acknowledge it in media. it doesn’t mean other actresses or models or other women in general aren’t pretty!

1

Anonymous #3 7w

i mean communication as in the words that go back and forth between individuals in general. bc debate is a form of communication too! but, like i said, if i have a point such this is my structure of communicating my argument of the campaign: the history/use of similar ones, the history/use of the phrase overall, and how that phrase is being used in this context, how it does/doesn’t conflate to what is being argued back, and how i believe some arguments are an overreach due to the way social

1

Anonymous #3 7w

media works in spiraling into a mass conviction of hidden ideas and meanings that are an overreaction and the way ppl lose their minds and get enraged over it while it may not be healthy for them. it’s to explain my overall one point detail by detail bc i communicate, in general, in a pattern or such so i can even process the thoughts i have on this topic and what i am going to say abt it. that is all. it usually requires more than word counts allow! 🤩

1