The American Eagle Sydney Sweeney ad (3 Viewers)

[culdeus]

Not sure if this has been posted as the last page became rough to read, but here was the Ad Week take - link

“It signals that creating controversy and attention-grabbing content is now everywhere, and this flavor may reflect a cultural longing for simpler times. It is unlikely that [the team] proceeded with this campaign without having insight into their audience and business that led to the decision.”

Leila Fataar, former Adidas and Diageo marketer-turned-founder of consultancy Platform13 and author of Culture-Led Brands, believes the backlash reflects a simple truth: brand messages don’t land in a vacuum; they land in culture, and that culture needs to be reflected in agency teams and marketing departments.

“Brands are active participants in a global dialogue, with cultural fluency not just a marketing advantage but a foundational element of successful contemporary business strategy,” she said.

Fataar added: “In this transformational and pivotal moment in global history, and specifically in the U.S., ensuring a variety of perspectives both in ideation and, importantly, in decision making is essential.”

That's a lot of words to say "somebody didn't think this thru"

 

[Zow]

could be reasonably misconstrued

OBJECTION!

People are clearly strenuously objecting the objection on this issue.

 

[Jayrod]

Sure but if you made him the central figure of a marketing campaign and the tagline was something like “he was bred for this” people would not be happy. It’s all about the delivery and it’s not a stretch to interpret this AE ad a certain way. I’m not personally offended but that’s not a requirement to think something was tone-deaf and then want to have a conversation about it. Heck their own marketing chief said they were trying to be provocative and push buttons.

Thats a different approach than Sweeney's "good genes" which is at the crux of the issue, IMO.

Why is the positive portrayal of someone white and their ancestry equivalent to the putting down of someone black?

It certainly shouldn't be.

Black people are allowed to overtly say "black is beautiful" and it is applauded in our society as it should be. That's a positive statement lifting people up.

 

[Zow]

Sure but if you made him the central figure of a marketing campaign and the tagline was something like “he was bred for this” people would not be happy. It’s all about the delivery and it’s not a stretch to interpret this AE ad a certain way. I’m not personally offended but that’s not a requirement to think something was tone-deaf and then want to have a conversation about it. Heck their own marketing chief said they were trying to be provocative and push buttons.

Thats a different approach than Sweeney's "good genes" which is at the crux of the issue, IMO.

Why is the positive portrayal of someone white and their ancestry equivalent to the putting down of someone black?

It certainly shouldn't be.

Black people are allowed to overtly say "black is beautiful" and it is applauded in our society as it should be. That's a positive statement lifting people up.

No, it shouldn't be as skin color should be about the most trivial thing (since none of us choose it and it has no actual impact on anything as a person). But some white-skinned clowns over the last centuries or so ruined that for a time being with all that enslaving, disenfranchising, and holocausting/genociding based solely on somebody's different, non-white skin color. As such, yeah, I do kind of think there should be a permissible bit of a double standard here for at least a few decades.

Think of it like making a sportsmanship commercial featuring Draymond Green or an advertisement for a teen girl shelter service featuring Ghislane Maxwell. Might be otherwise reasonable and well-intentioned in a vacuum but, alas, there is a contextual history to consider.

 

[rockaction]

Sure but if you made him the central figure of a marketing campaign and the tagline was something like “he was bred for this” people would not be happy. It’s all about the delivery and it’s not a stretch to interpret this AE ad a certain way. I’m not personally offended but that’s not a requirement to think something was tone-deaf and then want to have a conversation about it. Heck their own marketing chief said they were trying to be provocative and push buttons.

Thats a different approach than Sweeney's "good genes" which is at the crux of the issue, IMO.

Why is the positive portrayal of someone white and their ancestry equivalent to the putting down of someone black?

It certainly shouldn't be.

Black people are allowed to overtly say "black is beautiful" and it is applauded in our society as it should be. That's a positive statement lifting people up.

No, it shouldn't be as skin color should be about the most trivial thing (since none of us choose it and it has no actual impact on anything as a person). But some white-skinned clowns over the last centuries or so ruined that for a time being with all that enslaving, disenfranchising, and holocausting/genociding based solely on somebody's different, non-white skin color. As such, yeah, I do kind of think there should be a permissible bit of a double standard here for at least a few decades.

Think of it like making a sportsmanship commercial featuring Draymond Green or an advertisement for a teen girl shelter service featuring Ghislane Maxwell.

I'd sort of like to think about it in the way in which "All men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with Certain unalienable rights" instead of listening to the cultural Marxists preaching systemic racism and advocating either massively overhauling the system or creating parallel and destructive structures that will abolish it.

But hey, you keep running the liberal arts ragtime they were trying to shove down our throat back in '91. Don't come near me when they're on your ***, comrade. I'm not lifting a finger.

 

[rockaction]

Sure but if you made him the central figure of a marketing campaign and the tagline was something like “he was bred for this” people would not be happy. It’s all about the delivery and it’s not a stretch to interpret this AE ad a certain way. I’m not personally offended but that’s not a requirement to think something was tone-deaf and then want to have a conversation about it. Heck their own marketing chief said they were trying to be provocative and push buttons.

Thats a different approach than Sweeney's "good genes" which is at the crux of the issue, IMO.

Why is the positive portrayal of someone white and their ancestry equivalent to the putting down of someone black?

It certainly shouldn't be.

Black people are allowed to overtly say "black is beautiful" and it is applauded in our society as it should be. That's a positive statement lifting people up.

No, it shouldn't be as skin color should be about the most trivial thing (since none of us choose it and it has no actual impact on anything as a person). But some white-skinned clowns over the last centuries or so ruined that for a time being with all that enslaving, disenfranchising, and holocausting/genociding based solely on somebody's different, non-white skin color. As such, yeah, I do kind of think there should be a permissible bit of a double standard here for at least a few decades.

Think of it like making a sportsmanship commercial featuring Draymond Green or an advertisement for a teen girl shelter service featuring Ghislane Maxwell.

Yeahhhhh you do know about Middle East slavery and the role of Africa in the slave trade, right? Surely this didn't slip by you in history. Or how your comrades are responsible for, by safe estimates, 10x the deaths the Nazis caused? You are aware of this, no?

 

[Zow]

Sure but if you made him the central figure of a marketing campaign and the tagline was something like “he was bred for this” people would not be happy. It’s all about the delivery and it’s not a stretch to interpret this AE ad a certain way. I’m not personally offended but that’s not a requirement to think something was tone-deaf and then want to have a conversation about it. Heck their own marketing chief said they were trying to be provocative and push buttons.

Thats a different approach than Sweeney's "good genes" which is at the crux of the issue, IMO.

Why is the positive portrayal of someone white and their ancestry equivalent to the putting down of someone black?

It certainly shouldn't be.

Black people are allowed to overtly say "black is beautiful" and it is applauded in our society as it should be. That's a positive statement lifting people up.

No, it shouldn't be as skin color should be about the most trivial thing (since none of us choose it and it has no actual impact on anything as a person). But some white-skinned clowns over the last centuries or so ruined that for a time being with all that enslaving, disenfranchising, and holocausting/genociding based solely on somebody's different, non-white skin color. As such, yeah, I do kind of think there should be a permissible bit of a double standard here for at least a few decades.

Think of it like making a sportsmanship commercial featuring Draymond Green or an advertisement for a teen girl shelter service featuring Ghislane Maxwell.

I'd sort of like to think about it in the way in which "All men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with Certain unalienable rights" instead of listening to the cultural Marxists preaching systemic racism and advocating either massively overhauling the system or creating parallel and destructive structures that will abolish it.

But hey, you keep running the liberal arts ragtime they were trying to shove down our throat back in '91. Don't come near me when they're on your ***, comrade. I'm not lifting a finger.

I say this genuinely - you gotta take a breath, man. At no point did I champion some sort of government overhaul or even any governmental intervention into the issue or, apparently, claim that I'm Russian. I am merely pointing out that there's an arguable reason for a cultural or societal non-significant double standard for a bit of time here given some recent transgressions.

I suppose, though, good to know that you won't help me, a fellow American, should we get attacked merely because I dared to think about an issue differently than you. Wow.

 

[rockaction]

Sure but if you made him the central figure of a marketing campaign and the tagline was something like “he was bred for this” people would not be happy. It’s all about the delivery and it’s not a stretch to interpret this AE ad a certain way. I’m not personally offended but that’s not a requirement to think something was tone-deaf and then want to have a conversation about it. Heck their own marketing chief said they were trying to be provocative and push buttons.

Thats a different approach than Sweeney's "good genes" which is at the crux of the issue, IMO.

Why is the positive portrayal of someone white and their ancestry equivalent to the putting down of someone black?

It certainly shouldn't be.

Black people are allowed to overtly say "black is beautiful" and it is applauded in our society as it should be. That's a positive statement lifting people up.

No, it shouldn't be as skin color should be about the most trivial thing (since none of us choose it and it has no actual impact on anything as a person). But some white-skinned clowns over the last centuries or so ruined that for a time being with all that enslaving, disenfranchising, and holocausting/genociding based solely on somebody's different, non-white skin color. As such, yeah, I do kind of think there should be a permissible bit of a double standard here for at least a few decades.

Think of it like making a sportsmanship commercial featuring Draymond Green or an advertisement for a teen girl shelter service featuring Ghislane Maxwell.

I'd sort of like to think about it in the way in which "All men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with Certain unalienable rights" instead of listening to the cultural Marxists preaching systemic racism and advocating either massively overhauling the system or creating parallel and destructive structures that will abolish it.

But hey, you keep running the liberal arts ragtime they were trying to shove down our throat back in '91. Don't come near me when they're on your ***, comrade. I'm not lifting a finger.

I say this genuinely - you gotta take a breath, man. At no point did I champion some sort of government overhaul or even any governmental intervention into the issue or, apparently, claim that I'm Russian. I am merely pointing out that there's an arguable reason for a cultural or societal non-significant double standard for a bit of time here given some recent transgressions.

I suppose, though, good to know that you won't help me, a fellow American, should we get attacked merely because I dared to think about an issue differently than you. Wow.

Yeah, I’m talking you about getting eaten by your own leftist commie friends.

 

[djmich]

lmao, been on a flight 15hrs, good to catch up.

 

[MAC_32]

This backlash (and the response to it) is why we’re where we are today, a country divided. Where too many people don’t even bother to listen to different perspectives.

We are not a country divided. When you get outside and interact with people, none of this **** ever happens to anyone of us rarely if ever.

We must be seeing very different things. I wish you were right.

He is right

If you say so.
Again, we’re seeing very different things. This country hasn’t been as divided in my lifetime.

There is an ocean canyon sized difference between political division and manufactured outrage lunacy like what's being described here. The vocal minority creates an insufferable level of volume with nonsense like this, over whelming any rational thought, effectively muting it. Despite there being more people inside that canyon than on either side, but if you can't see nor hear them (this is the ocean after all) then they cease to exist.

 

[Uruk-Hai]

Unfortunately, the young people who are glued to social media are being brainwashed by **** like this though

Based on this thread (& a million other discussions), it's not just young people.

 

[-OZ-]

ocean canyon sized difference between political division and manufactured outrage lunacy like what's being described here. T

Sure. Are you not seeing political division elsewhere?

 

[MAC_32]

ocean canyon sized difference between political division and manufactured outrage lunacy like what's being described here. T

Sure. Are you not seeing political division elsewhere?

Of course, I'm actively engaged in it both personally and professionally. It's unavoidable in my line of work. Some of it is productive, some is not, but the starting point is always better than...jeans.

 

[AAABatteries]

Saying person A has "good genes" doesn't mean that hypothetical person B has "bad genes". And the message of the ad would be exactly the same if it was Anna de Armas or Dua Lipa instead of Sweeney.

Simply seeing an attractive white girl in a clothing ad can't really be the threshold for being rationally offended. It just can't.

I think if they used a different superlative it would make Woz’s point (which I agree with) more obvious. For example, if it said “superior jeans”.

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

You guys should spend more of your valuable time discussing a jeans advertisement.

Or you could ignore it and have an awesome day.

 

[dgreen]

I think this all comes down to assumptions about how common it is to instinctively associate the phrase “good genes” with white supremacy. My assumption is very few Americans would have made that connection prior to this story and it is reasonable to have not anticipated this backlash. A few here disagree and think at least a few people on a competent marketing team should have known this would blow up.

 

[AAABatteries]

Someone made the point about if they used another race model - AE could have gotten the same reaction if the rolled out a series of ads. Thats what I would have done.

 

[AAABatteries]

I think this all comes down to assumptions about how common it is to instinctively associate the phrase “good genes” with white supremacy. My assumption is very few Americans would have made that connection prior to this story and it is reasonable to have not anticipated this backlash. A few here disagree and think at least a few people on a competent marketing team should have known this would blow up.

I won’t speak for Woz but I think his point is a competent marketing team would see how some nuts would see it that way - I’m guessing their job is to figure out how many people that is and whether it’s worth it to them financially. I have zero doubt that their ultimate goal was/is money- no other motive comes close to that, IMO. And I doubt this is bad for AE - most of us now that interpretation is ridiculous.

 

[djmich]

Dunkin getting in on the fun. It's Golden Summer Baby!!

 

[dgreen]

I think this all comes down to assumptions about how common it is to instinctively associate the phrase “good genes” with white supremacy. My assumption is very few Americans would have made that connection prior to this story and it is reasonable to have not anticipated this backlash. A few here disagree and think at least a few people on a competent marketing team should have known this would blow up.

I won’t speak for Woz but I think his point is a competent marketing team would see how some nuts would see it that way - I’m guessing their job is to figure out how many people that is and whether it’s worth it to them financially. I have zero doubt that their ultimate goal was/is money- no other motive comes close to that, IMO. And I doubt this is bad for AE - most of us now that interpretation is ridiculous.

Yes, and the reason they should have known would be because of some common knowledge of the phrase “good genes”. Someone posted earlier about Saquon showing off his athletic ability and saying “I was bred for this.” That would immediately jump out at me. “Good genes” doesn’t.

 

[Max Power]

I'd wager most teens wouldn't connect a good genes pun to the Nazis.

Do you really think their point is “kids will think about nazis”? Or is it perhaps that the same message as the Nazis used is being received?
I don’t agree either way, but their point can’t be that “kids will think about mid 20th century History!”.

That was my thought following the posts talking about what type of company AE is and who they are marketing to. If I had to guess, AE's demographic is mainly white teenagers. If marketting to that crowd, I don't believe a genes reference corresponds to eugenics to that demographic.

 

[Mitchie]

I think this all comes down to assumptions about how common it is to instinctively associate the phrase “good genes” with white supremacy. My assumption is very few Americans would have made that connection prior to this story and it is reasonable to have not anticipated this backlash. A few here disagree and think at least a few people on a competent marketing team should have known this would blow up.

Maybe they did, and that was the point?

 

[Mitchie]

Dunkin getting in on the fun. It's Golden Summer Baby!!

Certain people are trying to manufacture controversy; this tweet demonstrates that, this is what this story is about.

 

[AAABatteries]

I think this all comes down to assumptions about how common it is to instinctively associate the phrase “good genes” with white supremacy. My assumption is very few Americans would have made that connection prior to this story and it is reasonable to have not anticipated this backlash. A few here disagree and think at least a few people on a competent marketing team should have known this would blow up.

I won’t speak for Woz but I think his point is a competent marketing team would see how some nuts would see it that way - I’m guessing their job is to figure out how many people that is and whether it’s worth it to them financially. I have zero doubt that their ultimate goal was/is money- no other motive comes close to that, IMO. And I doubt this is bad for AE - most of us now that interpretation is ridiculous.

Yes, and the reason they should have known would be because of some common knowledge of the phrase “good genes”. Someone posted earlier about Saquon showing off his athletic ability and saying “I was bred for this.” That would immediately jump out at me. “Good genes” doesn’t.

Agree - it wouldn’t have jumped out at me either. But I heard about the “controversy” here first so knew it had somewhat blown up. I haven’t even seen the ad and have no plans to watch it. Sorry AE.

 

[Max Power]

Dunkin getting in on the fun. It's Golden Summer Baby!!

I'll boycott DD for this ad

 

[Jayrod]

could be reasonably misconstrued

OBJECTION!

People are clearly strenuously objecting the objection on this issue.

You're out of order!
He's out of order!
You're all out of order!

 

[Don Quixote]

I think this all comes down to assumptions about how common it is to instinctively associate the phrase “good genes” with white supremacy. My assumption is very few Americans would have made that connection prior to this story and it is reasonable to have not anticipated this backlash. A few here disagree and think at least a few people on a competent marketing team should have known this would blow up.

I won’t speak for Woz but I think his point is a competent marketing team would see how some nuts would see it that way - I’m guessing their job is to figure out how many people that is and whether it’s worth it to them financially. I have zero doubt that their ultimate goal was/is money- no other motive comes close to that, IMO. And I doubt this is bad for AE - most of us now that interpretation is ridiculous.

Yes, and the reason they should have known would be because of some common knowledge of the phrase “good genes”. Someone posted earlier about Saquon showing off his athletic ability and saying “I was bred for this.” That would immediately jump out at me. “Good genes” doesn’t.

Agree - it wouldn’t have jumped out at me either. But I heard about the “controversy” here first so knew it had somewhat blown up. I haven’t even seen the ad and have no plans to watch it. Sorry AE.

Yeah, it would not jumped out to me either. I just would have thought they were talking about her naturally huge, uh… tracts of land.

 

[rockaction]

Man, did I ever write a response about a deep breath I’m glad I didn’t post. I’ll leave it at that. Let me just say that my response to the tactic of calling somebody too emotional in their argument can be found right here.

Post in thread 'Caitlin Clark vs Angel Reese - "Burning Heart" in the Desert'
https://forums.footballguys.com/thr...ning-heart-in-the-desert.816287/post-25348919

 

[Joe Schmo]

And posters want to bring back the psf...

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

News outlets reporting things like "people on social media are saying..." are ones that I'm probably not all that interested in hearing from. First, I'm guessing like half of these "people" online are bots generating comments. Second, people complaining on social media shouldn't be seen as newsworthy. If someone wants to do an actual scientific poll about how people feel about this ad campaign, then maybe I'll have some interest in discussing whether or not it is racist. As it stands now, I find it hard to believe this is a significantly widespread complaint. I think I'd have a hard time finding anyone IRL that cares about this at all.

This ^^ is the *whole thing.

Anyone bother to read the article?

>>The nod toward her "genes" is also made in another video, which further incited backlash from some users on platforms like TikTok, X and Threads<<

That’s it. That’s the outrage. So Fox, & major right wing media & influencers are off and running with it in a thoroughly politically driven push. If you engage in it you’re a part of it.

 

[rockaction]

News outlets reporting things like "people on social media are saying..." are ones that I'm probably not all that interested in hearing from. First, I'm guessing like half of these "people" online are bots generating comments. Second, people complaining on social media shouldn't be seen as newsworthy. If someone wants to do an actual scientific poll about how people feel about this ad campaign, then maybe I'll have some interest in discussing whether or not it is racist. As it stands now, I find it hard to believe this is a significantly widespread complaint. I think I'd have a hard time finding anyone IRL that cares about this at all.

This ^^ is the *whole thing.

Anyone bother to read the article?

>>The nod toward her "genes" is also made in another video, which further incited backlash from some users on platforms like TikTok, X and Threads<<

That’s it. That’s the outrage. So Fox, & major right wing media & influencers are off and running with it in a thoroughly politically driven push. If you engage in it you’re a part of it.

No. WaPo and NPR covered it yesterday with “experts” weighing in on the subject. This is just incorrect.

Sorry. Every news outlet was on this yesterday with a “think piece” and it veered left. You can be anti-Trump and still see it all over the place, often covered with sympathy for the loons.

 

[Joe Schmo]

We need more women in jeans in this thread.

 

[Osaurus]

Solid work, gents

 

[Nugget]

Between my girlfriend and I, we have 5 kids between the ages of 17-23. They aren't impressed with the ad and they think it was in poor taste. This should be the target market for AE.

To be fair, 3 of the 5 would much rather thrift than buy new clothes and the other 2 really don't care one way or the other.

 

[Gally]

As such, yeah, I do kind of think there should be a permissible bit of a double standard here for at least a few decades.

The problem is that by allowing this double standard to continue that it never lets the issue die. There will always be terrible people that are racist but that number is greatly diminished today than it was 5 yrs ago, 10 yrs ago, 50 yrs ago.

I think because of backlash like this it perpetuates the issues when it doesn't have to. There are many situations/ads/etc that come out and I immediately know that there is going to be a backlash even when there shouldn't be. By continuing this "double standard" to try and right a wrong it just extends the issue. I think society would be better served at this point by just letting it go and having things just be equal across the board without the heightened sensitivities that this may mean something bad when that was never the intention. As stated upthread you can find anything if you go about to look for it. I think we need to stop looking for it and just let it be.

 

[Jayrod]

Man, did I ever write a response about a deep breath I’m glad I didn’t post. I’ll leave it at that. Let me just say that my response to the tactic of calling somebody too emotional in their argument can be found right here.

Post in thread 'Caitlin Clark vs Angel Reese - "Burning Heart" in the Desert'
https://forums.footballguys.com/thr...ning-heart-in-the-desert.816287/post-25348919

I missed that post in there. Solid stuff, rock.

I've probably been guilty of what you stated there before. Heck, I've been an absolute jackass many times in the FFA. Learning and growing. Learning and growing...

 

[dgreen]

Between my girlfriend and I, we have 5 kids between the ages of 17-23. They aren't impressed with the ad and they think it was in poor taste. This should be the target market for AE.

To be fair, 3 of the 5 would much rather thrift than buy new clothes and the other 2 really don't care one way or the other.

My 22 year old daughter and all her friends have been doing the thrift thing for a few years. While I applaud the financial thriftiness and not blowing all her money on clothes, the fashion is just...yeah. She does a good job dressing nicer for certain things, so it's not like she shows up to a job interview in oversized t-shirts and jean shorts.

I'm praying this fad fades away quickly, but it's been about 4 years for her.

 

[Jayrod]

Between my girlfriend and I, we have 5 kids between the ages of 17-23. They aren't impressed with the ad and they think it was in poor taste. This should be the target market for AE.

To be fair, 3 of the 5 would much rather thrift than buy new clothes and the other 2 really don't care one way or the other.

My 22 year old daughter and all her friends have been doing the thrift thing for a few years. While I applaud the financial thriftiness and not blowing all her money on clothes, the fashion is just...yeah. She does a good job dressing nicer for certain things, so it's not like she shows up to a job interview in oversized t-shirts and jean shorts.

I'm praying this fad fades away quickly, but it's been about 4 years for her.

There is still a rather large group of kids that are into chic clothes. And most of them are in upper middle to upper class families. My kids' high school has a lot of them and my son like's to buy nice/trendy clothes. My 15 yo daughter is trending that way, but her and her friends still like thrift shopping because that's all they can afford on their own. When she gets taken shopping by one of her grandmothers, she doesn't go to thrift shops.

 

[Zow]

As such, yeah, I do kind of think there should be a permissible bit of a double standard here for at least a few decades.

The problem is that by allowing this double standard to continue that it never lets the issue die. There will always be terrible people that are racist but that number is greatly diminished today than it was 5 yrs ago, 10 yrs ago, 50 yrs ago.

I think because of backlash like this it perpetuates the issues when it doesn't have to. There are many situations/ads/etc that come out and I immediately know that there is going to be a backlash even when there shouldn't be. By continuing this "double standard" to try and right a wrong it just extends the issue. I think society would be better served at this point by just letting it go and having things just be equal across the board without the heightened sensitivities that this may mean something bad when that was never the intention. As stated upthread you can find anything if you go about to look for it. I think we need to stop looking for it and just let it be.

Can we settle on maybe white people just shutting up about race (whether their own or otherwise) for a couple of decades? In other words, not touting our "great genes" in ads for a bit?

I mean, we're basically Patriots, Yankees, or Lakers fans at this point where nobody wants to hear from us about how great our "team" is.

 

[Gally]

it's not like she shows up to a job interview in oversized t-shirts and jean shorts.

but what if they were "good gene" shorts?

 

[Zow]

Man, did I ever write a response about a deep breath I’m glad I didn’t post. I’ll leave it at that. Let me just say that my response to the tactic of calling somebody too emotional in their argument can be found right here.

Post in thread 'Caitlin Clark vs Angel Reese - "Burning Heart" in the Desert'
https://forums.footballguys.com/thr...ning-heart-in-the-desert.816287/post-25348919

I appreciate that.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

We need more women in jeans in this thread.

This way we could cover two banned topics in 1 thread.

 

[Gally]

Can we settle on maybe white people just shutting up about race (whether their own or otherwise) for a couple of decades? In other words, not touting our "great jeans" in ads for a bit?

I think everyone should do this. The more it gets brought up by anyone the more it gets perpetuated. That was my point.

 

[-OZ-]

Between my girlfriend and I, we have 5 kids between the ages of 17-23. They aren't impressed with the ad and they think it was in poor taste. This should be the target market for AE.

To be fair, 3 of the 5 would much rather thrift than buy new clothes and the other 2 really don't care one way or the other.

My 22 year old daughter and all her friends have been doing the thrift thing for a few years. While I applaud the financial thriftiness and not blowing all her money on clothes, the fashion is just...yeah. She does a good job dressing nicer for certain things, so it's not like she shows up to a job interview in oversized t-shirts and jean shorts.

I'm praying this fad fades away quickly, but it's been about 4 years for her.

3/4 of my sons would rather thrift and wear t shirts and either jeans, shorts or sweat pants. Often with a hoodie even in July in Alabama. The other would wear a suit everyday - he’s my business major whose idea of fun is writing a research paper. None give a rip about fashion or trends.
5th grade daughter on the other hand is already trending towards fashion. Lucky for me, the wife doesn’t care about fashion and so far has successfully gotten her to mostly thrift and assemble inexpensive outfits. I fear this won’t continue in middle school and high school.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

News outlets reporting things like "people on social media are saying..." are ones that I'm probably not all that interested in hearing from. First, I'm guessing like half of these "people" online are bots generating comments. Second, people complaining on social media shouldn't be seen as newsworthy. If someone wants to do an actual scientific poll about how people feel about this ad campaign, then maybe I'll have some interest in discussing whether or not it is racist. As it stands now, I find it hard to believe this is a significantly widespread complaint. I think I'd have a hard time finding anyone IRL that cares about this at all.

This ^^ is the *whole thing.

Anyone bother to read the article?

>>The nod toward her "genes" is also made in another video, which further incited backlash from some users on platforms like TikTok, X and Threads<<

That’s it. That’s the outrage. So Fox, & major right wing media & influencers are off and running with it in a thoroughly politically driven push. If you engage in it you’re a part of it.

No. WaPo and NPR covered it yesterday with “experts” weighing in on the subject. This is just incorrect.

Sorry. Every news outlet was on this yesterday with a “think piece” and it veered left. You can be anti-Trump and still see it all over the place, often covered with sympathy for the loons.

Hey Rock, good to read you. This thing being in the MSM spin cycle doesn’t really affect my point. Yes there’s an appetite for it. Cheers.

 

[Zow]

Can we settle on maybe white people just shutting up about race (whether their own or otherwise) for a couple of decades? In other words, not touting our "great jeans" in ads for a bit?

I think everyone should do this. The more it gets brought up by anyone the more it gets perpetuated. That was my point.

Oh. So then you agree that the AE ad was misguided? (Not trying to put words in your mouth, just not understanding your point in the context of the ad).

 

[Max Power]

Between my girlfriend and I, we have 5 kids between the ages of 17-23. They aren't impressed with the ad and they think it was in poor taste. This should be the target market for AE.

To be fair, 3 of the 5 would much rather thrift than buy new clothes and the other 2 really don't care one way or the other.

My 22 year old daughter and all her friends have been doing the thrift thing for a few years. While I applaud the financial thriftiness and not blowing all her money on clothes, the fashion is just...yeah. She does a good job dressing nicer for certain things, so it's not like she shows up to a job interview in oversized t-shirts and jean shorts.

I'm praying this fad fades away quickly, but it's been about 4 years for her.

There is still a rather large group of kids that are into chic clothes. And most of them are in upper middle to upper class families. My kids' high school has a lot of them and my son like's to buy nice/trendy clothes. My 15 yo daughter is trending that way, but her and her friends still like thrift shopping because that's all they can afford on their own. When she gets taken shopping by one of her grandmothers, she doesn't go to thrift shops.

I have 13 and 15 year old daughters who have gotten into Lululemon recently. Talk about some insane prices. We'll get an article or two from there if they really want something, but there are some kids decked out in Lulu. And luckily we've found some at the thrift stores for more affordable prices.

If people really wanted to be outraged with racism in the clothing world, Lululemon was the one.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

As such, yeah, I do kind of think there should be a permissible bit of a double standard here for at least a few decades.

The problem is that by allowing this double standard to continue that it never lets the issue die. There will always be terrible people that are racist but that number is greatly diminished today than it was 5 yrs ago, 10 yrs ago, 50 yrs ago.

I think because of backlash like this it perpetuates the issues when it doesn't have to. There are many situations/ads/etc that come out and I immediately know that there is going to be a backlash even when there shouldn't be. By continuing this "double standard" to try and right a wrong it just extends the issue. I think society would be better served at this point by just letting it go and having things just be equal across the board without the heightened sensitivities that this may mean something bad when that was never the intention. As stated upthread you can find anything if you go about to look for it. I think we need to stop looking for it and just let it be.

Can we settle on maybe white people just shutting up about race (whether their own or otherwise) for a couple of decades? In other words, not touting our "great genes" in ads for a bit?

I mean, we're basically Patriots, Yankees, or Lakers fans at this point where nobody wants to hear from us about how great our "team" is.

Whether or not you realize it, you're doing your best to pick a fight in here.

 

[Ghost Rider]

As such, yeah, I do kind of think there should be a permissible bit of a double standard here for at least a few decades.

The problem is that by allowing this double standard to continue that it never lets the issue die. There will always be terrible people that are racist but that number is greatly diminished today than it was 5 yrs ago, 10 yrs ago, 50 yrs ago.

I think because of backlash like this it perpetuates the issues when it doesn't have to. There are many situations/ads/etc that come out and I immediately know that there is going to be a backlash even when there shouldn't be. By continuing this "double standard" to try and right a wrong it just extends the issue. I think society would be better served at this point by just letting it go and having things just be equal across the board without the heightened sensitivities that this may mean something bad when that was never the intention. As stated upthread you can find anything if you go about to look for it. I think we need to stop looking for it and just let it be.

Can we settle on maybe white people just shutting up about race (whether their own or otherwise) for a couple of decades? In other words, not touting our "great genes" in ads for a bit?

I mean, we're basically Patriots, Yankees, or Lakers fans at this point where nobody wants to hear from us about how great our "team" is.

Whether or not you realize it, you're doing your best to pick a fight in here.

That's the M.O. I saw a few PR "experts" running their mouths that Sweeney needs to acknowledge the backlash. No, that is what the loons want, so they can take it some sort of justification that their deranged thinking was just and right. Insanity like this needs to labeled what it is: insanity.

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

As such, yeah, I do kind of think there should be a permissible bit of a double standard here for at least a few decades.

The problem is that by allowing this double standard to continue that it never lets the issue die. There will always be terrible people that are racist but that number is greatly diminished today than it was 5 yrs ago, 10 yrs ago, 50 yrs ago.

I think because of backlash like this it perpetuates the issues when it doesn't have to. There are many situations/ads/etc that come out and I immediately know that there is going to be a backlash even when there shouldn't be. By continuing this "double standard" to try and right a wrong it just extends the issue. I think society would be better served at this point by just letting it go and having things just be equal across the board without the heightened sensitivities that this may mean something bad when that was never the intention. As stated upthread you can find anything if you go about to look for it. I think we need to stop looking for it and just let it be.

Can we settle on maybe white people just shutting up about race (whether their own or otherwise) for a couple of decades? In other words, not touting our "great genes" in ads for a bit?

I mean, we're basically Patriots, Yankees, or Lakers fans at this point where nobody wants to hear from us about how great our "team" is.

I will not be ashamed of being white, no matter how much you try to force it on me no.

It doesn’t mean I’m pro White or anything else but miss me with this. I need to be apologetic for what other mother****ers did before my people ever arrive to this country?

This is some seriously deranged behavior in my opinion there’s a difference between pretending like your superior and being impish about your history


I’m more upset that I am reading this read, and I should listen to my own advice of ignoring it. Y’all have a good day. I’m making a promise to myself not to enter the cesspool of people, ashamed of who they are for deeds they didn’t do.


Gross!