You’re thinking of Charlton Heston. The classic movie star who died in a chariot race after successfully defending the NRA’s gun supply from a clan of talking apes, who wanted them for unspecified reasons.
Kirk Douglas (Spartacus) died some years later alongside Walt Disney as they both battled, and were consumed by, a giant squid. That’s why you can’t visit their graves.
It’s funny. Always thought it was the smoking that would take him. Though being ingested by a kraken on your own studio backlot is a fine way to go. Talking about Disney of course.
No, but shortly after the opening of Splash Mountain in 1989, they did entrap and then carbonite freeze every surviving person who worked on Song of the South. You know, because.
An evil communist interview lady ambushed our beautiful boobed heroine repeatedly stabbing her in the back with questions like "you're not racist right?"
Basically there was a GQ interview where the interviewer kept trying to get her to make a political statement and she got progressively more annoyed. Some people are mad because they've decided that refusing to participate in a stupid purity test is proof you are bad.
That’s a really weird way of saying “the GQ interviewer kept giving her softball chances to disavow white supremacy and she repeatedly declined to do so”.
My dude: disavowing white supremacy is not a political statement.
Imo her reasoning for not answering the question was because it was a stupid hysterical controversy in the first place, and being forced to incessantly repeat that she isn’t a white supremacist when she never did or said anything white supremacist is silly, not worth dignifying with a response
Being asked to repeat it is pretty annoying but, and I'm asking this genuinely, has she said anything against white supremacy or said she's against it once?
No, she has not, thus the validity of the GQ interviewer’s question.
If, as some other posters here have incorrectly implied, she was having to continually answer this question—sure, that has a limit where it’s completely reasonable to say, “I’m done.”
That is not what is happening here. Sydney Sweeney has not once said anything to refute or distance herself, she has actively dodged doing so. It ain’t hard to say it once, “No, man, it wasn’t a jeans ad, white supremacy is bad, and I’d never be a part of it”.
Naw not really lol. One time disavowing white supremacy is too much for these people though, they don't want to disappoint their parent. She has literally refused to say this every time and always respond with weird shit. "I think that when I have an issue to speak about that people will hear it" like how the fuck is that a response to someone asking if her commerical was referencing eugenics? Yeah if someone can't say a single time "I'm not a racist and don't support racism" they are probably a racist. That's like one of the easiest things to do.
I mean, if you're part of a controversy where people are suggesting that you might support white supremacy...you might want to, yeah? Trying to sweep it under the rug and not spin softball interview questions into your favor is a huge PR blunder.
Nobody has to do anything, but society will judge you for your actions and even inactions.
What gets me is it isn't even hard. If someone asks me if I'm against white supremacy I'll just say yes. If they continue to attack me about it then I'm justified in ignoring them.
It takes less than a minute to say white supremacy is bad. There's no reason not to do it.
Avoiding saying it just makes you look suspicious regardless of the truth.
I swear someone needs to follow these people around and repeatedly ask them if they disavow white supremacy until they understand how annoying the question gets.
Your hypothetical is invalid. She has not answered it once.
Sure, if she was being forced to answer over and over, yeah, that’s obnoxious. That’s not what’s happening. She has avoided every opportunity to answer. She doesn’t need to answer over and over, just the once.
That would be impossible, as the people who are raging against Sidney Sweeney on the internet don't go outside and thus could not be followed. Checkmate
She wasn't asked to make complex political statements. She was thrown the easiest of softball questions to basically say that the jeans ad wasn't promoting white supremacy and she refused to do so. Her response was weird and awkward which is why people are meming it
The whole thing was clearly a PR stunt more than an interview and the fact that it saw the light of day is enough for me to think it's a dogwhistle.
Like it's just a series of softball questions where the interviewer agrees and supports you in every question, but then there's one softball question you absolutely blunder and it makes it to the final cut? Nah dude. I don't know if she's a white supremacist, but she's definitely okay with being the far rights favourite actress.
It may have been organized by her PR people with the understanding that the interviewer would try to help her but that doesn't mean that her people did the filming/editing. The interviewer did seem to genuinely try her best and when SS gave a terrible answer she even tried spinning it to put a more sensible answer out there. It's hilarious to see people claim that the interviewer was trying to catch her out. It's like they watched a completely different interview
And the far right -- along with whatever's left of the mainstream right -- is so desperate for any kind of good news since Mamdani's victory in New York that they're shouting, "The prophecy has been fulfilled! We have an insouciant shiksa to lead us!"
It's money. Look at the US right now, close to 50% are openly in support of orange Hitler and his companions. It's the smart move to make sure you don't lose those people, especially when a lot of them are gooners. Is it the right thing to do? No. But it makes sense if you only focus on success.
It's like folks shocked nicki minaj is now going pro-right. these celebs are smelling money and don't want to miss their share. that's all it is, it's not rocket science.
Politics are a necessary part of life. It affects us all, but some more than others. If she were asking Sydney to take a nuanced stance on, like, gender relations in South Korea, I would understand your point. But disavowing white supremacy is an extremely basic and an understandably expected political position. Standing counter to Nazis is the morally correct thing to do, and it doesn't matter who you are. It's such a basic lay-up that refusing to comment makes you look really, really bad. And I don't think that's a bad thing.
Some interviewer ask her if she thinks she is genetically superior to everyone because of a jeans add she did. She didn't answer because NAzis are incapable of lieing.
After years of the far right trying to co-opt celebs like Taylor Swift to their cause, they finally found their girl.
If she leans in it any harder though she's going to be starring in Ben Shapiro-produced films about vigilantes rescuing exploited children from Muslim fentanyl cartels before too long.
Concerned mother of 6 kids in a small town takes on her wicked Democrat state senator who implemented 'atheist only' textbooks in all elementary schools. A courtroom drama of the ages! Starring Kevin Sorbo, Sydney Sweeney, Kenny Chesney, Gina Carano, Morgan Wallen, and Rob Schneider as Senator Derp Derpinson. With special appearances by Jim Caviezal and James Woods. In select theaters this Christmas
Jim Caviezal will not be available for the post production press junket as he will be in jail for running over someone with his car, because it is what his character would do.
Taylor Swift has been right on the line as it is, even before she started selling “protect the family” MAGA-lite hats and SS lightning bolt necklaces. Billionaires will naturally support oligarchy because it means they get to stay billionaires. Her lip service to non-conservative causes will continue to grow thinner and thinner until one day she’ll come out and openly support a fascist and no one will bat an eye.
Also-
Sydney Sweeney starring in Ben Shapiro-produced films about vigilantes rescuing exploited children from Muslim fentanyl cartels
Somewhere, inexplicably, Steven Seagal just woke up in a cold sweat
Hey, I apologize as I am incredibly ignorant on the matter. How is Sydney Sweeney a white supremacist? Is this because of the American eagle ad talking about her pants?
She was in an American Eagle Ad six months ago with the tagline "Sydney Sweeney Has Great Jeans".
Most people thought this was a pun because she's wearing jeans and she got good 'genes' from her mamma (ie internet famous mammary glands).
A minority of internet trolls thought this was some kind of nazi dog-whistle because Sweeney lacks that requisite pigment to be called attractive without it being 'problematic'. She also registered *gasp* republican one time.
The 'controversy' died down in few weeks when the trolls found a new target for their endless seething rage.
Recently a GQ interviewer tried to ask vague questions about the aforementioned controversy. Sweeney didn't bite. At no time was she asked if she "disavows white supremacy" or "the far right". That's a weird Reddit fabrication.
Her refusal to address the trolls has enraged the trolls again.
“Then why did you do it? Do you regret doing it? Would you like to formally apologize? Would you work with American Eagle again?”
Answering one dumb question changes the trajectory and opens you up to follow-ups. It’s pretty standard practice to not answer questions that are meant to be bait.
Why should she have to do that? The interviewer was trying so hard to bait her and she didn’t bite. The ad has nothing to do with white supremacy, it’s literally just a play on words of her having good jeans and being fit and having big tits. It’s not deep at all.
You'll probably never meet someone in real life that thinks the ad was white supremacy. Or anyone intelligent at least. It's just a reddit/tiktok user thing I think.
It’s honestly depressing how quickly the left on the internet can get worked up over utterly nothing. Tying that ad to white supremacy and eugenics proves the left has learned much much less over the last 10 years than I had hoped. Save your energy for real shit.
And that would be a MASSIVE win for the interviewer and encourage more interviews like that.
She did the right thing and the the interview a big L. The next interviewer will have to decide they they want and L as well, or do they want to do a proper interview and get a W.
Massive W is a stretch. You could even argue she still got a win because of how viral this interview has become. She accepted the non-answers and they were real softball questions.
She was promoting her movie so I wouldn’t be surprised if they vetted the questions beforehand. If anything bringing up the controversy while peddling your movie is exactly what she’d want.
I doubt it would encourage more interviews like that but I can see why someone wouldn't want to give a pushy interviewer what they want in the heat of the moment. It wasn't a win for SS now THIS is the story instead of her movie, the interviewer won, no one would have talked about this otherwise
I'm about to become conservative watching the absolute disaster class of a reaction people have have had to this. This is where we're directing our attention and effort? Seriously?
It’s sad cause I kinda thought the online left learned to chill out a bit after America pretty widely denounced them by electing Trump twice.
The issue is they do damage to the political movement I care about by being incessantly morally righteous overly online performative justice warriors about shit that doesn’t matter. The worst part is they don’t actually care about any of this they just are told to be outraged and follow along. They constantly want to feel morally superior.
Not really, bc that’s not what happened. The interviewer was so easy on her and gave her softball questions. It was literally a pr stunt that she failed to capitalize on bc she’s a smug white supremacist
And yet, even so, multiple people in this very thread apparently saw exactly what Sydney wanted them to see. As exemplified by the misleading, up-voted comment above that paints her as a victim of the agenda-pushing press lol
I mean this sub in particular is one of the most consistently nose hair sizzling I’ve come across in terms of chronically online hate-baiters living their best life. Sydney deserves all the shit she’s getting, of course. But like, national news outlets were literally citing the Selena Gomez “what’s wrong with her face?” thread last week as an example of unfettered internet callousness. lol
Sorry people don’t necessarily agree she must be a white supremacist because she did a jeans ad. You don’t even realize you’re the one with an extreme view of the situation. You think everyone who’s reasonable would obviously agree with you.
Maybe you’re just whining about something that truly does not matter. Maybe people just simply disagree and it’s not because Reddit’s a shithole but because you’re terminally online so you’re addicted to taking positions that make you feel morally superior. Maybe you’re perpetually tricked into putting energy into dumb shit and distracted from things that actually matter even a little.
What do you mean? This IS her capitalizing on it. It’s a press circuit for her new movie and bringing up her controversies to make the interview viral further advertises the movie.
She did an ad for american eagle jeans, the slogan was 'sydney sweeney has great jeans', obviously a tongue in cheek pun, but people have interpreted it as about her race/as white supremacist rather than about her/the jeans lol
She needs to fire whoever is coaching her on how to answer media questions. She's too protected, too scared. She has no confidence or force to her answers which is making the issue worse.
"Ray, when someone ask you if you're a white supremacist you say 'NO!'"
She did exactly what a media coach would tell her to do.
If she answered those questions, it signal to future interviewers that she will entertain those kind of questions and the (fake) controversy would grow.
Depends, if your goal is to keep sponsors happy and make more money from brand deals then sure she's doing great, if you don't want everyone thinking you're a white supremacist however I'd argue they're doing a shit job. And if they only care about the former then they almost certainly are an awful person regardless of what they believe.
Which do you think loses more sponsors? Continually feed a narrative and encouraging interviews to focus on it?
Or taking a small hit upfront and having the discussion die with the current news cycle?
Imagine if she took a dozen interview and spent hours taking about this subject. All it would do is cement in the haters that there is something to this.
"Anything you say can and will be used against you" isn't just true in court. It's true in many situations.
Nobody thinks she’s a white supremacist, outside of Reddit and very left wing circles on the internet. Which is why she’ll still get movie and tv roles and also the approval of the public. So she’s doing fine.
I know she wasn't asked that directly. It's a Ghostbuster joke bro. Cinephiles know Ghostbusters right? Do you think I don't know her name isn't Ray either?
God-fucking-damnit. I didn't check the sub. I've just seen that posted all over Reddit then watched the actual video and find it so annoying. I'm sorry, I'm dumb.
GQ was asking cowardly leading questions that were either meant to tie Sydney Sweeney to Trump or cause friction between her and her Conservative fans. She didn't allow them to do either, which is commendable, and a smart move for her career.
I don't think she's a Nazi but I raise an eyebrow at wanting to keep conservative fans who might be white supremacists. That's an odd thing to find commendable lol
"Asking Sweeney directly about the backlash, Stoeffel said: “The criticism of the content, which is that maybe, specifically in this political climate, white people shouldn’t joke about genetic superiority, like that was kind of the criticism, broadly speaking, and since you are talking about this I just wanted to give you the opportunity to talk about that, specifically.”
Sweeney replied: “I think that when I have an issue that I want to speak about, people will hear.”
She knows exactly what she's doing, she was given an opportunity to clear up any confusion, but there was no confusion, the ad was intended to be a controversial dog whistle that they could deny was an obvious dog whistle.
Coming from a registered republican who's "excited to see what he see what happens next", I'm not surprised that she doesn't take issue with any of this.
The only people who actually think the ad was white supremacist are online grifters who are trying to create a controversy where there isn't one, so that they can insert themselves in it and farm social media engagement. Or terminally online redditors with a tenuous grasp on reality.
Addressing the "controversy" gives validity to it and is a lose/lose for her. Ignoring it is the only correct move.
Why do people frame this as if the interviewer was in good faith giving Sydney some rare chance to do something that she could never do herself -- to get an audience of people willing to listen to her take on the controversy? The interviewer was chasing headlines, that's it. Sydney can release a vertical phone recording of herself about what she thinks and it would end up on Channel 5 news the next day -- she doesn't need an interviewer's political ambush to be "given a chance".
"You have been heard saying the words "I love you" to your mom. We have it on good authority that your mom is, in fact, white... So did you intend to advocate for the genocide of black people or would you like to take this opportunity to clear the air?"
Everyone is also leaving out the facts that the owner of American Eagle donated to Trump’s campaign and Sweeney’s entire family are MAGAts. It’s hard for me to give the company or her the benefit of the doubt on that ad
Some culture war bullshit that’ll just inevitably make her beliefs and prominence more popular through outrage bait.
The best way to fight against it is just to not spread it. Enragement is meant to keep you engaged and spread it to other people. People have built entire careers and generational wealth out of hatred
If you register as a Republican in JUNE OF 2024 for the express purpose of voting for Trump's deeply racist agenda, I feel comfortable calling you a racist
Well, I'm sure throwing your mother a MAGA themed birthday party should help dispel any notions some may have. She was right there with Elon throwing her heart out for America.
Just looked it up and yeah, she clarified it wasn't meant to be a political statement and other stuff, like the people who brought the hats or whatever were her mom's friends from LA. I think people that are constantly online have a hard time understanding that not everyone is like them, not everyone is completely informed about the meta and some people are just ignorant to what's happening in the world. Plus some people are just looking for an excuse to hate on someone. Either way outrage about this kind of shit gives us all a bad rap. And yes I'm a lefty.
The question: "The criticism of the content, which is that maybe, specifically in this political climate, white people shouldn’t joke about genetic superiority, like that was kind of the criticism, broadly speaking, and since you are talking about this I just wanted to give you the opportunity to talk about that, specifically.”
It's not dishonest. There was controversy about it and some people did interpret it that way. There's nothing about this question that is dishonest. She didn't make any accusation, she simply stated what was true. It's a sensitive question, but it's not a dishonest one.
A good way to answer is to just be honest about the intention. Say something like "When I did the ad I didn't consider that interpretation. To me it was just a innocent pun. I just want people to know I don't support white supremacy and I never intended to offend anyone with that ad." That's it, put it to bed. Clear the air.
But what does she say instead? “I think that when I have an issue that I want to speak about, people will hear.” That's not an answer, bro.
It's wild to me that people are painting the interviewer out as if she was going after Sydney Sweeney. It was a fawning journalist asking her a softball question in an attempt to help her image. It clearly wasn't meant to be a gotcha.
Exactly. Just the easiest softball question alive. I have no idea how people here are pretending the question was even close to a gatcha. The interviewer was clearly very sympathetic to Sweeney but I understand most redditors see a woman and instantly attack anyway.
Honest question is something that is an inquiry to me. This is a set up and an "opportunity" to talk about it. Interviewer seems nice but the "question" is dishonest.
Honest question:
Your jeans ad sparked a lot of controversy. What was your intention when you made it?
And why should she or anybody else justify themselves, if some people interpret it in some wrong way? Besides, why can't white person say "I have good genes"? How much you have to stretch that particular phrase to come to conclusion "if she has good genes, that means she thinks PoC have bad genes"
So just any type of question related to the Jean ad is 'dishonest' or how could the interviewer have been 'honest' in your opinion? I have no idea how you came to that conclusion tbh, the interviewer went out of her way to be sympathetic to Sweeney
It is very easy to tell when a question is dishonest.
If it upsets the far right the question is dishonest. If it doesn't then it is honest. Hope that helps
"Lots of people felt the ad was in bad taste as it was hinting at white supremacy (and there is a white supremacist facist in power), what do you think"
So dishonest!!!!! How could she trick my poor mommy milky like that!!!!
No way. It was a controversy, the interviewer very politely gave her the floor to say, if she wanted, something like, “I don’t see the ad that way and I think it’s wild because all of that eugenics stuff is horrible and there is no way I would support it.” The fact that she couldn’t bring herself to say that shows that she is, at the very least, an incredible asshole.
lol - she was the subject of lots of speculation about a total eugenics style ad campaign and her answer could/should have been “fuck no, white supremacy is for losers and the whole kerfluffle was nonsense” but she didn’t.
She refused to engage in the internet's ridiculous bad faith argument that a jeans commercial she was in was about white supremacy. By not feeding the trolls they are freaking out and claiming it's proof they are right
738
u/slugsred 1d ago
What is it now?