Nike choose Dylan Mulvaney to promote womens sportswear range.

He. Is. An. Actor.

It's literally what he does.

Why do people think he is 'trans'?

Thanks for that. I was wondering what was wrong with my thread, I didn't think anything was wrong. It was just questioning why Nike would chose a man to promote a woman's sports bra.

Most odd. Women are being silenced/cancelled and men are being used for all things women all the time.

Just found this thread. I search before posting a thread on this topic and couldn't find it. Anyway MN deleted my thread since it breaks guidelines, no idea how they didn't say.

Someone put a thread in AIBU on this a short time ago and it was deleted! The message says:

"The OP breaks our Talk guidelines so we have removed this thread"

Odd message. And from what I saw, nothing delete-worthy unless my page hadn't refreshed.

And never forget, Nike funded the Oregon Project which was eventually shut down due to doping done by Alberto Salazar:

https://www.runnersworld.com/news/g29323802/alberto-salazar-nike-oregon-project-doping/

You'd also think that DM, clearly wanting to be a woman, would also have the intelligence to work out that this organisation don't like or respect what he seeks to attain.

Unless, wait, it's just all about the money. The parody. The mockery. The fundamental insult. The insistence on fame at any price. No, can't be that surely?

Have a look at some of the stuff about DM on YouTube - beyond offensive.

Ah, be kind, be inclusive

SHUT THE FUCK UP WOMEN!!!

So taking this latest ad with Nike’s treatment women athletes historically….

what they are basically saying is women can’t be “proper” athletes. We don’t sponsor them because all women do is tit around like DM. They aren’t real athletes like men, which is why we only really sponsor men.

Oh, wait, its okay.

Nike have responded to the backlash.

They have instructed women to 'be kind, be inclusive'.

I'm not even fucking joking.

https://www.foxnews.com/sports/nike-responds-to-backlash-over-dylan-mulvaney-partnership-instructs-customers-to-be-kind-be-inclusive.amp

Completely agree.
As PP stated, this vain fool , ill~chosen by Nike ,prancing and flapping about like a prat absolutely does not represent women.

The creepy grin is just so ''Red Flag'', and unwholesome.

One day this craziness will be looked back upon for the lunacy it is.

It's so insulting to Women.

I prefer my Hoka trainers and my brooks trainers anyway. Nike can just do one.

I am not bothered so much about having a trans person advertising. There should be a market there and a target there as well

But I am insulted by this parody of being a woman. It is really insulting.

I thought this must be a poorly executed April Fool when I first saw it. You know when you think you're a bit odd because you can't see the funny?

Like other posters it's led me down a rabbit hole where, on surfacing, I am embarrassed I did not know about Nikes attitude to women.

So, easy decision to spend elsewhere. Where do you suppose the financial tipping point is for Nike between the world's women buying for themselves, their kids and often men they know, plus women that run pension and investment funds vs customers like DM?

Is it just me who keeps seeing Dylan as a young Jim Carrey playing Vera De Milo?

I've long thought that trans ideoogy is the absolute apotheosis of identity politics - formed via a combination of late stage american consumer culture and the religion of the 'individual'.

I've always imagined it is going to take a couple of decades for it to reach its crash and burn point; but there will be a gradual and incremental unravelling before we finally reach that point. I suspect there is more dystopian darkness yet to emerge.

"Trans influencer Dylan Mulvaney has broken her silence saying 'it's hard to see the light now' after 'the week I've been having' hitting back at critics in a defiant song after receiving backlash for her Nike bra deal."

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11952025/Trans-influencer-Dylan-Mulvaney-says-hard-light-now.html

Cringe

Cynical woke washing. They couldn't care less about trans, women's, Children's, human rights.

There was also an article in the Times? back end of last year that had a wonderful paragraph that we frequently posted all over the place. Sometimes in really big letters just in case someone had missed the smaller lettered versions.

None of them were deleted. So it's definitely off the naughty list in general discussions.

As a male watching this, I can only be totally disturbed.

I can't imagine what's going through all your minds as women.

All I can say is that it's my firm belief we're at peak woke intensity.

I know that may be no relief, because it's been so insane for so long.

But the very parodic nature of this, and this moment in time that Dylan is existing in with maximum publicity and appearance, suggests to me that this is the very apex of the curve, apogee of the orbit.

This peak may last some time, but it cannot hold.

Nike are about to get the shock of their lives as women boycott and get their men and friends to boycott.

Once they're hit in the pocket, the grovelling apologies will come.

I also believe we're at peak phenomenon because they youngest consumers are starting to come thru, and they're not kow towing, and existing women will continue to say no in greater and greater numbers.

And as the realities of this movement dawn more and more, companies will soon realise where their profits bread is buttered.

So, I can't prove it, but I'm confident campaigns like this are some of the last ones, the tide is turning.

I think I was born in the wrong universe

Yeah pretty much. I dont think it's only DH who can change the rules like this.
I think if any man says it first then we lowly women can continue to use whatever term.
Remember the born in the wrong body shtick we had to use forever, but then mermaids tweeted out that of course no one was born in the wrong body, and then we were allowed to say that. Jeez we've come such a long way.

Ignoring the fact that this is highly offensive to women, who at Nike looked at DM's ad and thought "yes! THIS will sell our clothing!"

DM looks like a windmill, I thought the whole point of advertising was to entice the consumer to buy the product by making the product look good?!

Ah so when DH, a 'rhymes with van and begins with m' says it we are allowed to say it.

But women saying it without the benevolence of DH saying it first is a no no

Last year when I think debbie hayton stated they were agp, the rules changed and we are allowed to mention it now. However horse brushing is still not allowed afaik.

Refer to not reveal to