Dylan Mulvaney -created in a boardroom

What has happened to Capital Letters?

Like the experience of female equals biological reality?

And the experience that womanface is deeply offensive?

Do jog on... (That's the best I can do to "be kind").

you are all just annoyed to see a young trans woman gain popularity for sharing her experiences that you say spiteful things about her. nobody would ever spend so much money on facial feminisation surgery just for a few marketing deals so it's ridiculous to label her as a fraud with no proof. what happened to being accepting of other people's experiences?

Argh. That's a forecast I've seen Tinsel make before on threads, that as the attention and sympathy moves on we will see plenty of people change identity to move with it, and sadly she rarely turns out to be wrong.

And as a pp says: it won't be the girls like Keira Bell, it will be men. And a lot of women gushing sympathy.

I just typed a long post about this interview but the Web page shut down and I'm not typing it again, so I'll just drop this here and say that James talks about how and why so many corporations are using Dylan.

He thinks it's part of a bigger to-down drive to embed "inclusivity" as a universal core value. Something of a cultural revolution. The US version of the stonewall employer rankings being one of the mechanisms to drive that change.

And of course it'll be so on-message and hip that Dylan The Detransitioner will be the only one the MSM will be interested in, the likes of genuine cases such as Keira Bell will lose all coverage.

And Dylan will weaponise the de-transitioning grift just the transitioning grift was weaponised.

What will future historians and peoples looking back on this Clown World think? My only cultural comparison is all the new age religions and cults that took in swathes of apparently intelligent dilligent people in the 70s and 80s, the UFO abductee saps, the debunked Satanic abuse scandals, the recovered memories scams.

But the difference here, is that Clown World back then was over there. It wasn't imposed on us over here. You had to consciously decide to disengage from rational thought and enter Clown World.

Today, we're all made to live in Clown World, with no visible exit. The insanity ordained by our lords and masters, and fed to us, whether we want it or not.

"Dylan, My 365 Days Of Regaining My Gay Male Identity"...I can see the multimedia campaign as I type these words. Kirstie Allsopp likely the first Tweets in support, lol.

They thought Mulvaney was cheap until $6 billion was wiped off Bud Light.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12001387/Bud-Lights-fire-marketing-VP-takes-LEAVE-ABSENCE-Dylan-Mulvaney-controversy.html

Looks like the bud light activity achieved its objectives, although I bet they didn't anticipate the scale of the downside.

Depressing to see young women fall for this nonsense.

Dylan comes from money and judging by his Price is Right appearance when he was "still" a man. Dylan has been paying people to help him achieve stardom for a long time. Dylan's 'performance' on that show was clearly prearranged because it wouldn't have been tolerated from some random game show participant. Especially during strict covid distancing on set. They even left the camera on him for ages while he pranced around the pool table he won.

Dylan, the hysterical gay man wasn't gaining notoriety. So a new strategy was devised. And don't be massively surprised if at some point in the not too distant future, Dylan, the damaged and angry detransitioner emerges.

I think that it’s an interesting idea that Dylan’s ‘act’ was dreamt up by a team of ad execs who grew a young tic tok audience to market old brands to.
Yes, and who would they be working for - who briefed such a team in the first place?

I think that it’s an interesting idea that Dylan’s ‘act’ was dreamt up by a team of ad execs who grew a young tic tok audience to market old brands to.
Yes, and who would they be working for - who briefed such a team in the first place?

Are Nike an especially ethical company in general?

In my memory I thought not, although not researched it recently.

Maybe that shit doesn't matter to enough people any more.

I think that it’s an interesting idea that Dylan’s ‘act’ was dreamt up by a team of ad execs who grew a young tic tok audience to market old brands to.
It would explain why he got so many contracts so fast and his overnight success, having strings pulled to meet Biden etc..

It was an interesting article, made harder to read by the use of “woke” in nearly every sentence. For example, when we are told Dylan’s agent has a roster of “woke” clients when what is clearly meant is clients specifically pushing gender ideology, not black clients who protest for racial justice.

It’s lazy writing and thinking to just use “woke” every sentence instead of actually describing what it is these people promote and believe. As far as I can tell, not one of the people talked about is African American (ironically other than Felix and Serena, both of whom would by the way also be labeled “woke” for being a black woman speaking out for Women’s rights. I’ve seen Felix mocked as a “woke mother” and men complained liberally about the amount of coverage she got last Olympics from “woke NBC” while many also complain about “woke coverage” of the Williams sisters and Serena gets huge attacks for being a “woke” black woman showing the problem of using this word so liberally it becomes meaningless.)

It’s just bad writing to re-use one word over and over. Any writing teacher would advise finding some synonyms to stop it from being repetitive.

And, again, it’s ironic in an article that uses Black Women’s struggle for economic justice for women - it’s black women who stepped up and risked themselves to fight for all women, black women with a long history of advocacy who have taken racist and sexist backlash as a result - but then takes a word to sneer that is used against black women and against these women specifically and derived from the very fight for racial justice these women embody.

I find this story interesting given what else I'm reading about how this is apparently panning for bud light and Nike.

Both companies seem to be having a different response - partly because they have different target markets.

Nike is a sports brand so it's base tends to be much younger than bud light which has a much broader demographic.

Nike has doubled down on the campaign and isn't backing down .

However things look more problematic / complex for bud light. They didn't respond for several days and when they did it was to say 'We never intended to be part of a discussion that divides people. We are in the business of bringing people together over a beer'.

It was pointed out that their mixed demographic creates an issue for them: they couldn't apologise and they couldn't double down.

Rumours are that the ad campaign was dreamt up by a low level marketer rather than being seen by the board before being approved. I'm not sure I believe this, but the existence of the rumour suggests a damage limitation exercise is going on to some degree.

How this pans out for bud light isnt clear. It has improved brand awareness by creating a controversy. That may yet drive sales in the long term rather than damage the brand too much though.

I think other companies and ad agencies will be watching bud light closely because it may well burst this advertising bubble - or fuel it.

It's an interesting article. I don't blame Mulvaney for his shtick, apparently it has made him very wealthy. I hope, for his sake, he's just taking the money before it get old. That he's aware it's probably got a shelf life and is making the most of it. If it wasn't him, it'd be someone else. My anger is reserved for the companies like Nike and the advertising companies who know exactly what they are doing, as skewered in the article. Perhaps the Bud light shitshow will be a turning point.

Interesting (if extremely depressing!) article - thanks.