So real men don't drink Bud Light?

I see the latest cause among transphobic right-wing wackos is to boycott Bud Light because a transgender influencer was involved in one of their promotional campaigns. Presumably, these are the same people who complain about cancel culture.
https://www.vox.com/money/2023/4/12/...is-tritt-trans

And what does any self-respecting right-wing wacko do when sees something he doesn't like? That's right, he get out his automatic weapon and shoots it up.
https://www.newsweek.com/kid-rock-mo...-queen-1793067

Of course, if these people were real beer lovers they would not be drinking Bud Light in the first place.

No one with taste buds drank bud light looooong before this foolishness lol

I think this is the canary in the coal mine moment that those helping push the radical transsexual agenda should pay attention to, or hurt the cause they are trying to help.

Regular folks are sick of Dylan Mulvaney being pushed down our collective throats. It is beyond me why (other than misguided wokeness), that someone thought it would be a good idea to have Dylan celebrated on a beer can.

Dylan and his noxious "Days of Girlhood" are particularly cringe. It doesn't set well with most of us when an adult tries to pretend to be an adolescent or pre-adolescent. And before I get labeled as transphobic, I have a similar reaction to Peewee Herman.

The above marketing faux pas combined with the recent push to normalize transsexuals in Women's sports and Drag queen story hours, are helping create a backlash against trans folks that just want to live their lives.

The transsexual community would be ahead in the long-term to dial things back a bit.

Just my 2 cents.

How is Dylan Mulvaney being pushed down anyone's throat? I've only seen the controversy over this campaign. I haven't seen one of the ads. It's a fucking commercial, anyway. How does that have a major impact on anyone's life? No one is compelled to buy Bud Light.

As a wine and whisky drinker, I don't know if Bud Light is any better or worse than its original version, but then I am not sure how to define what a 'Real Man' is either. At one time, probably the 1950s, it would have been 'He Man', which only complicates the implosion of nouns and pronouns, and that is before we get into the TRANSitive verbs and inTRANSitive verbs.

Funny old world, innit?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fitzcarraldo

How is Dylan Mulvaney being pushed down anyone's throat? I've only seen the controversy over this campaign. I haven't seen one of the ads. It's a fucking commercial, anyway. How does that have a major impact on anyone's life? No one is compelled to buy Bud Light.

---

As you can probably guess that as a many year member of the HA forum, I'm generally sympathetic towards transgender issues. I've only known about Dylan for a month or two, and even being attracted to MTfs, I think he is cringe.

Dylan (and I personally wish her the best) in being awarded advertising contracts where she alienates customers is actually being exploited in pursuit of the woke agenda.

I forecast rocky shoals ahead for Dylan personally. Monetarily she may come out ahead, but mental health wise I assume she comes out on the losing end. In the long term, I think a more low key transition might have been best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mildcigar_2001

Dylan (and I personally wish her the best) in being awarded advertising contracts where she alienates customers is actually being exploited in pursuit of the woke agenda.

---

Spoken like one who truly wishes another the best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mildcigar_2001

As you can probably guess that as a many year member of the HA forum, I'm generally sympathetic towards transgender issues. I've only known about Dylan for a month or two, and even being attracted to MTfs, I think he is cringe.

---

As you probably know the people who agree with you are not sympathetic to transgender issues and use violent and dehumanizing language when talking about transgender people. The fact that you think a transgender woman advertising a beer brand is reason to boycott the brand makes you cringe. I'll give you this. It takes some balls to post on a transgender forum and weigh in on behalf of people who openly hate the people you claim to be "sympathetic" to.

Do you think the people leading this boycott object to Dylan bc of where Dylan is in her transition or because they are offended that a transgender woman is given any publicity at all? If you think it's the former you're exactly as dumb as I think you are.

As I think I said in my earlier in this thread, Dylan has been cringe to me because of his Days of Girlhood persona. It's creepy to me that an adult is trying to portray an adolescent girl.

It also doesn't help that he doesn't appear to be very far along in his transition (the hormones [if he is taking any] don't appear to have kicked in yet.

As for people objecting to Dylan, I don't think a majority of them hate trans folks. I think most definitely don't like the radical trans agenda (and that I agree on them with).

As for having the balls to post on a forum such as HA. I guess I grew up in a time when even Liberals weren't afraid of an open discussion of the issues of the day.

Transsexuals as a group would be far better off if their radical fringe dialed things back. If they don't, I think there likely will be a very serious backlash. This will be far beyond a beer boycott.


It would be interesting to get some off the record views that the average TS has of things like Drag Queen story hours. I think it would have to be off the record, or they would get pounded by the radical elements of the TS community. God forbid if anyone departs from the orthodoxy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mildcigar_2001

As for people objecting to Dylan, I don't think a majority of them hate trans folks. I think most definitely don't like the radical trans agenda (and that I agree on them with).

As for having the balls to post on a forum such as HA. I guess I grew up in a time when even Liberals weren't afraid of an open discussion of the issues of the day.

Transsexuals as a group would be far better off if their radical fringe dialed things back. If they don't, I think there likely will be a very serious backlash. This will be far beyond a beer boycott.

---

You said "I don't think a majority of them hate trans folks." Yet here they are boycotting a beer brand not because of anything controversial but because a transsexual is part of a promotional campaign. That's it. I've also seen what many of them have to say about transgender people. Horrific insinuations, scapegoating, and vilification. I don't even want to repeat the lies.

You say you don't think it should take balls to discuss these issues because liberals used to be open-minded. Yet the only issue here is whether a transgender woman should be part of a promotional campaign. That's an existential issue that concerns whether transgender people are permitted to be a part of public life. Don't be dishonest about it. I'm not claiming there's nobody who wants a legitimate discussion about any number of topics dealing with transgender women and sports, but you shouldn't try to shoehorn those issues in here.

I will also note you misgender Dylan twice and I don't really understand the backlash comments. If transgender people appear in ads there will be serious backlash? Who would be to blame for that? I think it's audacity to blame a minority group for not heeding the threats of bigoted people who insist they stay out of the public sphere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mildcigar_2001

As you can probably guess that as a many year member of the HA forum, I'm generally sympathetic towards transgender issues.

---

Really? I can't recall a single post from you that's been supportive of trans rights. You always have the same negative line about going too far and causing a backlash. Your general view seems to be that trans should just keep their heads down and be grateful they are not being thrown into prison.

Have you even seen any advertising featuring Dylan Mulvaney, or are you just engaging in reflexive hyperventilating after seeing some story in the media? From what I've read her role with Bud Light seems to be relatively minor. If transexuals are X per cent of the population then what exactly is your objection to them participating in something like X per cent of advertising?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by broncofan

I will also note you misgender Dylan twice and I don't really understand the backlash comments. If transgender people appear in ads there will be serious backlash? Who would be to blame for that? I think it's audacity to blame a minority group for not heeding the threats of bigoted people who insist they stay out of the public sphere.

---

I'm sure 60 years ago there were people saying the same about black people appearing in ads. The equivalent versions of mildcigar would have been tut-tutting about the civil rights movement going too far and risking a backlash. Has any group ever got their rights without making a fuss and putting themselves in the public eye? If they kept quiet and waited for people like mildcigar to grant them rights they would be waiting forever.

Anyone who has a visceral objection to even knowing that a trans person is being used in marketing is obviously a transphobe. The idea that this is pursuing some woke agenda is clearly predicated on the assumption that trans people should not be part of public life.

I think the right-wing obsession with the supposed scourge of wokism is starting to look like the 2020s version of the red scare of the 1950s.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fitzcarraldo

How is Dylan Mulvaney being pushed down anyone's throat? I've only seen the controversy over this campaign. I haven't seen one of the ads. It's a fucking commercial, anyway. How does that have a major impact on anyone's life? No one is compelled to buy Bud Light.

---

The irony (no doubt lost on mildcigar) is that none of the people complaining about Bud allegedly forcing a woke agenda on them would even be aware of this if the right-wing outrage machine had not picked it up. It's a bit like someone complaining about pornography after having gone looking for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by broncofan

I will also note you misgender Dylan twice

---

He seems to be a slow learner

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mildcigar_2001

However, we are getting away from common sense when we started sending trannies to women's' prisons.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GroobySteven

Keep using the word 'trannies' if you want removing from this forum - and we should all be concerned with 'trans rights'.

---

Anyone can now be who they want and rightly so.Its all the prancing about I don't get, to me it looks juvenile.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filghy2

He seems to be a slow learner

---

I see the Red Guards are out in full force trying to enforce uniform thought and language.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mildcigar_2001

I see the Red Guards are out in full force trying to enforce uniform thought and language.

---

Yes, because acknowledging the right of trans people to exist is clearly communism.

dylan is making success

So, mildcigar, what is the "radical trans agenda"? What's wrong with being "woke" -- better than being asleep, no?

I support the auto industry in general, but I don't like seeing commercials from Toyota. Sure, they have a right to exist, but their commercials go too far. They show people enjoying driving in, buying, and even selling Toyotas. Sure, I've ridden in and even driven Toyotas before, but that company should be careful. Pearl Harbor wasn't really that long ago. Toyotas shouldn't be forced on society.

Fitz,What on earth are you talking about. You are off your nut pal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mildcigar_2001

As for having the balls to post on a forum such as HA. I guess I grew up in a time when even Liberals weren't afraid of an open discussion of the issues of the day.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mildcigar_2001

I see the Red Guards are out in full force trying to enforce uniform thought and language.

---

So after complaining about Liberals refusing to engage in discussion, you now refuse to engage with any argument others have made and retreat behind this tired line?

The basic point is that you made an assertion that Dylan Mulvaney is being forced down peoples' throats, which you are obviously unable to back up. Without that your entire argument falls apart.

Your claimed sympathy for transsexuals seems dubious, given your posting history is full of negative comments about them. Do you even like or respect them as people, as opposed to sexual objects?

The world according to mildcigar:

A trans person was involved in some niche marketing that few people would have seen
= Trans are being forced down peoples' throats

Some transphobes brought it to my attention by making a big deal about nothing = Trans are being forced down peoples' throats

Some businesses recognise that trans people exist = Businesses are pursuing a woke agenda

Trans people demand rights = Trans are going too far and causing a backlash

Trans people refuse to stay invisible = Trans are going too far and causing a backlash

Right-wing transphobes target trans for political reasons = See, I told you there would be a backlash

Some liberals disagreed with my dubious arguments = Liberals are intolerant of other points of view

I ran away from a debate because I had no good counterarguments = Liberals refuse to debate

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Imatwork

Fitz,What on earth are you talking about. You are off your nut pal.

---

Analogy. It wasn't subtle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fitzcarraldo

Yes, because acknowledging the right of trans people to exist is clearly communism.

---

Not being able to refer to trans people as "he" is also clearly communism. But wanting to prevent a trans person from doing promos on their own social media pages is definitely nothing like communism.

As far I can tell, that's the only place these promos appeared originally. So what these cretins are really saying is that they don't want a trans person to be forced down their throats if they happen to visit that trans person's social media pages.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filghy2

So after complaining about Liberals refusing to engage in discussion, you now refuse to engage with any argument others have made and retreat behind this tired line?

The basic point is that you made an assertion that Dylan Mulvaney is being forced down peoples' throats, which you are obviously unable to back up. Without that your entire argument falls apart.

Your claimed sympathy for transsexuals seems dubious, given your posting history is full of negative comments about them. Do you even like or respect them as people, as opposed to sexual objects?

---

I think I have general sympathy for transsexuals as a group.

I assume that having gender dysphoria is a hard row to hoe.

I think the opinions expressed by me in this forum and in public for that matter generally support the best interests of transsexual community. I'm sure a good number of my opinions go against the current trans orthodoxy, but that doesn't make me wrong or a hater of transsexuals.

The Trans community and its supporters need to think in terms of long term goals rather than short term victories (as do we all).

For example it makes little sense to me for public libraries to host drag queen story hours (we probably shouldn't be promoting overtly sexual entertainment to young children). This very easily leads to charges of grooming. I could care less if adult males want to dress up as women (I assume most of us can admit there is a sexual element at play with this behavior). Nothing particularly wrong with the behavior of crossdressing itself, but it is wrong to put minors into the mix.

In this forum I have expressed the opinion that MTF transsexuals should not compete in sports against biological woman, and predicted that there would be a backlash against the transsexual community as a whole because of the push to include MTF in women's sports.

I think it is patently obvious that Lia Thomas should never have been allowed to compete against genetic women in the NCAA (if anyone has any doubt relook at Lia on the victory stand towering over her competitors). As far as MTFs in sports there are few good options other than having a MTF division (which based on the relatively small number of trans athletes would most likely be cost prohibitive). Is this completely fair to Lia? Probably not, but it would be the fairest thing to do for the greatest number of people.

The reason I bring this example up is that ongoing backlash against trans athletes will have a negative impact on the trans community as a whole (even those who don't have an athletic bone in their body). Some people can argue against my reasoning, but I think I am giving sound long term advice that would help the trans community rather than hurt it.

This leads me to Dylan Mulvaney. I really do believe when corporations (when controlled by woke leadership) advertise with someone like Dylan it is for shock value only, and I and others perceive this as having Dylan forced down our collective throats. When you have an advertising campaign that in this case has very little to do with selling beer then something is rotten in Denmark.

As a corporation why would you do something that actively hurts your brand (it would lead some to believe that the advertising is for pure ideological purposes to push the radical trans agenda)? Why do advertising that causes you to lose customers? I have not run a Fortune 500 company, but I have run a small business in the distant past, and I never in my advertising was even tempted to get involved in one side or the other on a hot button political issue (it would merely be a way to piss off potential customers that believe whatever the other side of the issue is the correct one).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mildcigar_2001

This leads me to Dylan Mulvaney. I really do believe when corporations (when controlled by woke leadership) advertise with someone like Dylan it is for shock value only, and I and others perceive this as having Dylan forced down our collective throats. When you have an advertising campaign that in this case has very little to do with selling beer then something is rotten in Denmark.

---

What advertising campaign? Where did your see it? I far as I can tell, she only appeared on her own social media page after responding to a general invitation from Bud Light. This is what it says in the article I posted earlier.

"In early April, Bud Light sent an influencer named Dylan Mulvaney a handful of beers. Mulvaney, in turn, posted a video of herself dressed like Holly Golightly from Breakfast at Tiffany’s, using said beers to celebrate both March Madness and her first year of womanhood. One of the cans featured her image. It was part of a paid sponsorship deal and promotion for some sort of sweepstakes challenge where people can win $15,000 from Bud Light by sending in videos of themselves carrying a lot of beers."

This hardly amounts to featuring in a national advertising campaign. Have you never heard of niche advertising? LGBT people drink beer too.

You and your transphobe friends seem to be upset by the idea that a trans person would be used anywhere in any limited way. It really doesn't say much for you that you reflexively go along with this ridiculous beat up, and the fact that you also chose to make gratuitous negative comments about Dylan is also revealing.

Here are four simple questions that I think are a good test of whether you are really sympathetic to trans people:

1. Do you think trans people are entitled to general protection against discrimination in employment, access to services, etc (leaving aside particular cases like female sports or female prisons)?

2. Should trans peoples' gender identification be respected in how they are referred to?

3. Do you think trans people should have the same rights to participate in public life as anyone else?

4. If any of your friends, family or workmates made blatantly transphobic comments would you raise any objection?

I know that people can have different views on things like female sports without necessarily being transphobic, but if you can't answer yes to these questions then I can't see how you can possibly be sympathetic to trans.

I know you want to present anyone who disagrees with you as a slave to some liberal trans rights orthodoxy, but that is not so. Here's what I said in another thread.
http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/sho...ication-easier

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filghy2

As long as we have things that are separated by gender (eg female prisons, toilets, sports) then the state or some other authority will need to define gender in some way. What alternative do you suggest?

The fact that some people try to milk an issue for political purposes does not mean there is not a legitimate concern that needs to be taken into account. Most policy issues involve balancing different considerations. In this case the rights of people to choose their own gender identity need to be balanced against the rights of genetic women to have their own space. If we insist that gender self-identification rights must always take precedence and ignore other concerns then we play into the hands of the transphobes.

---

You are just totally wrong-headed on this issue. You read about this, saw 'woke agenda', went into knee-jerk response mode, and didn't even bother to check basic facts. Whatever sympathy towards trans you might have, it is clearly subservient to your political allegiances.

Generally, I think trans people are deserving of the same rights and privileges as anyone else.If someone wants me to refer to them as a particular gender I try to respect that. However the "they, them" crap is pushing it, and I'm probably not going to take that seriously.In my day to day life, I don't think I ever see someone I know going out of their way to be mean or disrespectful to a trans person (or anyone else for that matter). If I think someone's language is out of line, I would say something. I live in the Midwest, and other than some rare crazy people (such as the Westboro Baptist Church) most of us try to live our own lives and leave people alone to live their best life.Where I do hear people make comments recently is about transgender folks in women's sports, or the recent Riley Gaines situation at SF State, and how shouting down and assaulting someone is a poor way to have a discussion in a democracy. However these are transitory comments over the news of the day.The other recent front here in the Midwest is legislation (which I think is needed) restricting sex change therapy for minors. I'm sure this will be seen as a transphobic comment, but I don't think minors are mature enough to able to make those type of decisions until later in life. There also seems to be a good amount of Munchhausen Syndrome by proxy going on with the parents of some of the gender nonconforming minors. I think a good example of going too far too fast in the case of a minor is the case of Jazz Jennings. If I had a child in a similar situation, the last place I would have them work out their life would be in front of the world on The Learning Channel. I think Jazz would have been a lot happier at this point if there had not been a rush to medically and surgically transition her at a very young age.

I notice that you complained previously about some trans people trying to cancel JK Rowling (yet another canary in that coal mine).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mildcigar_2001

Some of the trans community attempting to cancel J.K. Rowling is the canary in the coal mine.

Rowling is a bleeding heart liberal, and the radical trans community is trying to cancel her.

---

What is the difference between these cases? Why is it unacceptable for some people to try to cancel JK Rowling because they don't like her views on trans, but perfectly okay for others to try to cancel Anheuser-Busch because they object to even limited use of a trans person in marketing?

For the record, no I don't think JK Rowling should be cancelled, and I do think some trans activists go too far.

Also, why do you continually play up the role of fringe trans activists while downplaying the role of transphobes on your own side?

I notice you continue to be evasive on the question of how exactly Dylan Mulvaney was forced down people's throats. Resorting to words like 'perceived' is a circular justification if the perception is just something manufactured by a right-wing beat-up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filghy2

I notice that you complained previously about some trans people trying to cancel JK Rowling (yet another canary in that coal mine).



What is the difference between these cases? Why is it unacceptable for some people to try to cancel JK Rowling because they don't like her views on trans, but perfectly okay for others to try to cancel Anheuser-Busch because they object to even limited use of a trans person in marketing?

For the record, no I don't think JK Rowling should be cancelled, and I do think some trans activists go too far.

Also, why do you continually play up the role of fringe trans activists while downplaying the role of transphobes on your own side?

I notice you continue to be evasive on the question of how exactly Dylan Mulvaney was forced down people's throats. Resorting to words like 'perceived' is a circular justification if the perception is just something manufactured by a right-wing beat-up.

---

I think Dylan is being forced on us because the use of Dylan had nothing whatsoever with trying to sell more beer, but rather yet another attempt to push the woke agenda. I don't have an MBA, but I could have told you a month ago that using Dylan as a spokeswoman to sell Bud Light would not push the needle in a positive direction (i.e. more beer sales). When you conduct an advertising campaign ideally it should be to sell more product (otherwise you are doing a disservice to the shareholders). As I indicated earlier in the thread, Dylan (is an adult, so his "Days of Girlhood" are particularly cringe. It makes a lot of us feel the advertising is being done just to get in our collective faces. Even though the company should have avoided this particular briar patch to altogether, it is my suspicion that with another trans person there would not have seen this hue and cry. Not much of a fuss would have been made if Caitlyn Jenner or even RuPaul was featured in the advertising, and beer sales might have actually increased.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mildcigar_2001

GThe other recent front here in the Midwest is legislation (which I think is needed) restricting sex change therapy for minors. I'm sure this will be seen as a transphobic comment, but I don't think minors are mature enough to able to make those type of decisions until later in life. There also seems to be a good amount of Munchhausen Syndrome by proxy going on with the parents of some of the gender nonconforming minors. I think a good example of going too far too fast in the case of a minor is the case of Jazz Jennings. If I had a child in a similar situation, the last place I would have them work out their life would be in front of the world on The Learning Channel. I think Jazz would have been a lot happier at this point if there had not been a rush to medically and surgically transition her at a very young age.

---

Why do you think the state should be involved in medical decisions? Parents and doctors should be allowed to decide what's best for a child.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mildcigar_2001

I think Dylan is being forced on us because the use of Dylan had nothing whatsoever with trying to sell more beer, but rather yet another attempt to push the woke agenda.

---

Anything you don't want to see is "forced" and "woke." Got it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mildcigar_2001

It makes a lot of us feel the advertising is being done just to get in our collective faces.

---

What advertising are you referring to? Have you ever seen any, other than on her social media page as a result of hearing about this controversy? How could something you would never otherwise have seen be done just to get in your face?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fitzcarraldo

Why do you think the state should be involved in medical decisions? Parents and doctors should be allowed to decide what's best for a child.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fitzcarraldo

Anything you don't want to see is "forced" and "woke." Got it.

---

Conservative philosophy nowadays:
All for parental choice - unless parents do things they don't like
All for free enterprise - unless companies do things they don't like.
All for limited government - unless people do things they don't like.
All for law and order - unless their people break the law.
All against cancel culture - unless people do things they don't like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mildcigar_2001

I don't have an MBA, but I could have told you a month ago that using Dylan as a spokeswoman to sell Bud Light would not push the needle in a positive direction (i.e. more beer sales).

---

I had never heard of Dylan Mulvaney before this controversy and I really have no opinion on her. It's unlikely that my decisions on buying beer or anything else would be influenced by who appears in their marketing. I see lots of advertising that doesn't work for me. I don't throw a tantrum about it. I just ignore it. Isn't that what any sensible, mature person should do?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fitzcarraldo

Anything you don't want to see is "forced" and "woke." Got it.

---

Finally, someone sees the light of reason.

Well done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mildcigar_2001

I think Dylan is being forced on us because the use of Dylan had nothing whatsoever with trying to sell more beer, but rather yet another attempt to push the woke agenda.

---

One more question. How exactly does this woke agenda work in your mind ? Leaving aside the fact that few people would have seen the promo without the controversy, what would be the result if they had? Would the revelation that some trans people drink beer have underlined the social fabric? Would lots of people decide they wanted to become trans if they saw a trans person drinking beer? Would they be converted to the radical trans rights agenda you keep talking about?

[QUOTE=mildcigar_2001;2069012]

For example it makes little sense to me for public libraries to host drag queen story hours (we probably shouldn't be promoting overtly sexual entertainment to young children). This very easily leads to charges of grooming. I could care less if adult males want to dress up as women (I assume most of us can admit there is a sexual element at play with this behavior). Nothing particularly wrong with the behavior of crossdressing itself, but it is wrong to put minors into the mix.

-Children like to dress up, and respond to other people dressing up, but if you are sure that there is a sexual element in the situation where most children at that age have no interest or awareness in sexual matters, ask yourself -if these storytime events are introducing children to sexual matters, does watching a Punch and Judy Show introduce, or even normalize violence between parents? Of the two, which is the most explicit -Kandy Floss reading children a story about a dog that gets lost and is found by a five year old; or Punch beating the shit out of his wife with a stick?

In this forum I have expressed the opinion that MTF transsexuals should not compete in sports against biological woman, and predicted that there would be a backlash against the transsexual community as a whole because of the push to include MTF in women's sports.

-This has been debated before in this Forum. And as I have said on those posts the point that is often missed, is that as a male transitions to female, they lose their masculine features as their female ones grow. For some reason, the oestrogen that is part of the transition is not factored in to the transition, so the assumption made is that the athlete is as masculine when competing as they were before their transition began, hence the so-called 'advantage' -so what are authorities to do, insist on medical examinations to ascertain the hormonal balance between athletes? Some women are stronger than others, just as successful swimmers tend to be tall with long arms. A lot of the argument here is bogus, because it collapses all these subtle differences into an either/or option that has no bearing on reality.

I really do believe when corporations (when controlled by woke leadership) advertise with someone like Dylan it is for shock value only...
As a corporation why would you do something that actively hurts your brand (it would lead some to believe that the advertising is for pure ideological purposes to push the radical trans agenda)? Why do advertising that causes you to lose customers? I have not run a Fortune 500 company, but I have run a small business in the distant past, and I never in my advertising was even tempted to get involved in one side or the other on a hot button political issue (it would merely be a way to piss off potential customers that believe whatever the other side of the issue is the correct one)
- I find this quite strange. I don't know what you mean by Corporations have 'woke leadership' -I guess Disney is one you are thinking of?- but I do know that Corporations selling products either hire their own market analysts or pay external consultants to keep them informed of their customer base. As the population of the US has diversified over the decades, so Corporations have adapted their advertising to maintain and expand their customer base. There was a time when you would rarely if ever see a Black face in any advertising, now it is common -and I think you will agree there is a lot of commercial logic in creating a brand that everyone can identify with, and buy the product. You don't need to imagine what would happen if a trans person was used to advertise a product, because it has been done already -the Trans person who gets into a cab gets admiring looks from the driver, until he hears the sound of an electric shaver....the ad was for Levi jeans and as far as I know the company did not lose sales because of it. So below I have linked the ad, preceded by an hysterical piece in the Mail which claims sales of Bud Light have 'fallen off a cliff' because of TIkTok. Whatever, dude.

NANA AKUA: After trans TikTok personality Dylan Mulvaney promoted Bud Light, sales have fallen | Daily Mail Online

Enjoy this instead-

Levi's 1995 Taxi (Freak Power - Tune in, Turn on, Cop out) - YouTube

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stavros

You don't need to imagine what would happen if a trans person was used to advertise a product, because it has been done already -the Trans person who gets into a cab gets admiring looks from the driver, until he hears the sound of an electric shaver....the ad was for Levi jeans and as far as I know the company did not lose sales because of it.

---

And you know why? The 'woke agenda' boogeyman had not been invented in 1995, so nobody thought to stir up a campaign against it. This backlash did not arise spontaneously, just as January 6 did not arise spontaneously. If Anheuser-Busch made a marketing misjudgement, it's because they failed to take account of the peculiar right-wing psychology of our times.