September 15, 2026

JIM TREACHER: Sydney Sweeney Is Jiggling All the Way to the Bank.

Last year, liberals were all angry at Sydney Sweeney for wearing blue jeans. Now they’re angry that she’s not wearing blue jeans. Or anything else.

She’s naked again. She just did an ad for some sports betting app, I think. I don’t know. Not anything I’ll ever use. But in the ad, she’s butt-nekkid, with strategically placed sporting equipment covering her naughty bits. I’ve never seen any of the movies or TV shows this woman’s been in, but you cannot miss her ads.

* * * * * * * *

When I was young, it was always people older than me saying that kind of stuff: “How can Madonna do this? What does this say about our society? Shame on you people!” Well, now the shaming is coming from people younger than me.

There will always be killjoys. There’s always gonna be jealousy and resentment. People are always gonna try to ruin a good time.

By the way, Sydney Sweeney’s Instagram has 25.7 million followers. So if she lost 200,000, that’s… 0.78%. Which is good enough for a Variety headline. I think she’ll be okay.

There’s a theory that this woman keeps triggering these people because she’s not a liberal. Or at least not an outspoken one. Her relatives were seen in MAGA hats at one point, I think. That’s how it all started.

That could be part of it, I guess. I think it’s just women hating a woman for being more attractive than they are. If they could get a lucrative endorsement deal for lounging around in the buff, they would. But they can’t, so they rage at somebody who can.

Haven’t any of these people heard of the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue? That’s been around since I can remember.

In response to the popularity of the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue, Disney-owned ESPN Magazine launched “The Body Issue” in 2009. Disney-owned ABC News has forgotten about it — or their links to it over the years:

 

Ace of Spades adds: Feminists and Media Scolds Continue Melting Down Over Sydney Sweeney.

I have my own mild objections to the ad campaign. First of all, I’ll admit what these nasty scolds won’t and say that part of my objection is due to simple prudery and a preference for modesty. My preference is for covert sexiness rather than in-your-face over sexiness, at least in public. I like when a woman is riding that line between modest and sexy so she can claim “Ooops, it was an accident, I had no idea that when I leaned over I showed a flash of cleavage.”

My other mild objection is about attention-getting. The media and media-personalities are constantly demanding the attention of each of us. I prefer these demands to be made more subtly. Yes, Sydney Sweeney has an amazing body but I would like my own Male Gaze to decide when to gaze.

But feminists have decided that attractive women are not allowed to show they are attractive in public because of Equity. Unattractive women do not draw positive attention in public, and therefore attractive women should be hated, shamed, and clucked to death by angry hens in the name of Sexual Equity. If we can’t all be gorgeous Sex Symbols, than nobody can.

Note how they never admit that they’re engaging in the ancient art of female sabotage/smear-campaigning against rivals they’re sexually jealous of. They always have to pretend their obvious middle-school sexual jealousy is actually some high-minded campaign for Women’s Empowerment.

Sweeney’s ad campaign is a repeat of ESPN Magazine from 2009 to 2019 (when Disney decided to stop printing it on dead tree). But the backlash to it by the left is an extension of their pressure campaign on Taylor Swift starting around 2013, demanding that she go on the record as supporting their causes, or be constantly described as some sort of crypto-Nazi. Swift eventually capitulated to the relentlessness of it all. Will Sweeney?

Posted at 8:14 pm by Ed Driscoll