Wait...Sydney Sweeney's boobs killed "wokeness?" When did this happen??

If being "woke" means being kind and compassionate, wir sind SEHR gefickt.

Is it true? Could Sydney Sweeney’s boobs REALLY have killed “wokeness?”

It’s no secret that many, if not most, Conservatives live to “own the Libs.” That most Conservatives don’t even know what that means almost goes without saying, but they live for it, anyway.

And almost as important as “owning the Libs” is the “war against ‘woke.’” Again, most Conservatives couldn’t define woke if you held a gun to their testicles, but they know that it’s the worstest thing EVER. Not that the actual meaning of the concept matters, of course. “Woke” gives them something to focus their daily “Two-Minute Hate” on.

It’s their Daily Devotional, don’tchaknow?

So, just so we can be sure everyone’s on the same page, here’s a real, honest-to-[insert preferred deity here] definition of “woke”:

Yes, the “active awareness of systemic injustices and prejudices….” That must be just about The Worstest Thing Known To Mankind ©, eh? Unless, of course, you’re a practicing Fox News Conservative, in which case you believe that “woke” is the primary driver of all that Liberals have done to fuckify this one-great nation of ours.

But, at the exact moment America was being terrorized by the specter of “woke” ideology looming over our body politic and everything that’s good and holy, along comes the one thing that could save AmeriKKKa:

Sydney Sweeney’s boobs. And a grateful nation (or at least the Penis-American half of it) breathed a sigh of relief.

And I suppose you think I make this shit up.

According to some conservative thinkers, the scourge of “wokeness” has finally been defeated: Last weekend it was smothered to death on live television by a starlet’s breasts.

I wish I were kidding, but not one but two news outlets have published creepy columns in recent days about how actress Sydney Sweeney was not just doing her job and looking cute when she showed off her cleavage in a recent Saturday Night Live appearance but was, in fact, owning the libs. “Are Sydney Sweeney’s breasts double-D harbingers of the death of woke?” asked Canada’s National Post. The U.K.’s Spectator did less beating around the bush, writing: “Yay! Boobs are back!” The conversation played out on X, formerly known as Twitter, as well, with a well-known anti-woke champion posting a clip of Sweeney accompanied only by the words “Wokeness is dead,” as if it were the most obvious thing in the world that wokeness and décolletage cannot coexist.

Wait; boobs are back? When did they go away? Did the phenomenon of Penis-Americans fawning over a perfect set of celebrity mammaries disappear? And did I somehow fail to notice this rift in the space-time continuum? ‘Cuz I think I would’ve noticed.

Yeah, I may be married- but I ain’t dead, knowhutimean??

No. And not just no, but HELL NO. Sydney Sweeney’s boobs have precisely zero to do with killing wokeness. Or anything else. Unless they were on a billboard and some poor maroon drove off the road into a swamp, whereupon they were promptly consumed by an alligator.

But that’s just natural selection at work.

Frankly, I have to get in line behind this guy:

No, they really don’t have any idea at all what “woke” means. If you ask your average Conservative on the street, you’ll probably get a deer-caught-in-the-headlights blank stare. They know “woke” is terrible/mean/nasty/awful, but they don’t know what “woke” means.

Just ask

Libs of TikTok

. Chaiya Raichik’s as dumb as a post turtle and as self-righteous as Charlie Kirk after he’s been dipped in holy water…but she doesn’t have a freakin’ clue.

Trust me, y’all; “woke” has nothing to do with the frontal gifts bestowed upon a remarkably attractive and talented 27-year-old actress who’s well aware of the value of her assets and isn’t afraid to employ them for her financial aggrandizement.

I’ve never seen “Euphoria,” and all I’ve ever seen is one scene in which she’s completely naked and has sex with a tongue and a penis attached to a man (warning: definitely NSFW) whom I’ve never seen before. I have a feeling this scene came close close to breaking da Interwebz.

And while Conservatives may not be edumicated enough to define “woke,” even they know that boobs are good. Always have been, and always will be.

Hey, they’re not called (among other things) “fun bags” for nothing.

(What does a girl have to do to get her hands on those? And, no, that’s not Ms. Sweeney, in case you were wondering.)

Even those who appreciate boobs find it difficult to argue with the contention that the obsession with Sydney Sweeney’s “gifts” has become a bit…um, top-heavy, yeah?

Then again, it does demonstrate that the Far-Right is still obsessed with a cartoonishly misogynistic view of femininity and female attractiveness.

Yes, Ms. Sweeney is objectively lovely, the sort of thing Hollywood eats up and spits out. Still, there’s a weird fascination that the Far-Right has with women like Sydney Sweeney. They’re objets de plaisir, not flesh-and-blood human beings with feelings and emotions. As such, at least according to the dominant Right-wing narrative, they exist primarily to service the sexual fantasies and desires of men.

That most of these men couldn’t get laid if they were the last erect penises left on Earth is lost on them. They know nothing of how to treat and respect a Vagina-American, how to talk to one, and,most importantly, how to treat one within or without the confines of a relationship.

After the actor Sydney Sweeney’s appearance…on Saturday Night Live, some conservatives online launched a senseless and downright misogynistic conversation about femininity.

Following the SNL episode, social media users have declared that “Wokeness is dead”, while one of Canada’s biggest daily national newspapers asked: “Are Sydney Sweeney’s breasts double-D harbingers of the death of woke?”

Jesus.

Sure, Sweeney herself leaned into stereotypes about her appearance both during the night and in the lead-up to the show, including in a lackluster Hooters-themed sketch. But the absolutely bran-dead conversation that followed is a sure sign of how ridiculous the socially conservative discourse around women’s bodily autonomy, the media and “wokeness” has become.

Have y’all forgotten that there’s a thinking, feeling woman attached to those breasts? And that she probably wouldn’t agree to be within the same time zone with any of y’all? Never mind getting naked and horizontal with you.

C’mon, man…staring at boobs isn’t the radical act that Conservatives make it out to be. Penis-Americans have been doing that sort of thing since we figured out what fun activities that dangly thing between our legs could be used for.

In her National Post piece, the writer Amy Hamm explains this moment as follows: “We’ve spent years being chastised for desiring or admiring beauty – because beauty is rare and exclusionary, and to exclude is to hate – or so we’ve been scolded to accept by today’s diversity, equity, and inclusion fanatics. We aren’t supposed to admire Sweeney’s beauty; but we’ve done it anyways. The times, they are a-changin’. Aren’t they?”

I mean … viva la revolución, I guess?

Hamm is being intentionally obtuse here. Beauty has always been political, and desirability absolutely dictates how people – especially women – are able to navigate society.

Ogling Sweeney also isn’t the revolutionary act that conservatives desperately want it to be, seeing as society’s obsession with skinny, blonde, large-breasted women never went anywhere.

Yes, attractive women with large breasts have always been a few steps ahead of their contemporaries lacking such assets. It’s not fair, and it may not be right, but evolution sucks sometimes. Not all of the things Penis-Americans value are handed out with perfect fairness and equity in mind. Some women get the looks and the boobs. Some women get the brains. A select few get all of that and then try to navigate life while simultaneously trying to fend off men who see them only for their perceived potential as a sexual partner.

Having never been a sex object myself, I can’t relate…but I’d certainly be willing to try.

The writer Bridget Phetasy struck a similar tone as Hamm in a piece in the Spectator. “See, back in my day, kids, boobs were everywhere,” she wrote. “It was the 1990s and early 2000s. We had Pamela Anderson and Baywatch. Jennifer Love Hewitt graced the cover of Maxim with her boobs. Our supermodels – like Tyra Banks and Cindy Crawford – had curves.”

Framing Sweeney’s appearance as a return to “real body positivity” (yes that’s literally what the Spectator headline reads) is sinister obfuscation. This isn’t about body positivity or body neutrality or anything that purports to be good or inclusive of women’s body sizes, because Sweeney was never on the outside. She is a white, very conventionally attractive woman, the same kind of woman that mainstream media in the west has worshiped for an eternity, while working hard to disparage larger bodies.

Knowing how much some conservatives despise fatness in women, it’s also interesting to see them so easily exploit the idea of body positivity. And while this kind of goalpost-shifting is par for the course at this point, it remains infuriating to watch rightwingers both villainize and also manipulate the language of inclusion, depending on what suits them.

Interestingly, and I imagine maddeningly for women, it’s still men (in this case, still Conservative, misogynistic Penis-Americans) who get to define the ideal female body. That ideal changes as time passes, and women don’t get to have a say in what’s “ideal” and sexually alluring at any point in time.

Women are simply expected to react according to the changing whims and desires of men, who are under no concomitant expectation to explain their changing tastes. The needle moves up and down from one extreme to another with the passage of time, and women are left to deal with the fallout.

The online conversation about Sweeney is also clearly a reaction to the fact that we’re seeing far more racialized, gender-nonconforming, not-model-thin people in mainstream media. As Phetasy writes: “For anyone under the age of 25, they’ve likely never seen it in their lifetime – as the giggling blonde with an amazing rack has been stamped out of existence, a creature shamed to the brink of extinction.”

Really? This, once again, is patently false. The “hot blonde” is still very much the queen bee of the western cultural zeitgeist, except today, she may not laugh politely at your crass jokes or let you objectify her. And therein lies the real problem. What conservatives actually want is the version of white womanhood that they saw on Sunday’s SNL episode – sexy, problematic yet unashamed, and seemingly happy to play the role society has assigned her when necessary.

While the “ideal” female body type may change over time, the “giggling hot blonde with an amazing rack” will never truly go out of style. Men LOVE women they think they can manipulate into performing whatever sexual act they prefer. It’s the age-old male fantasy of having sex with a woman, using her until you tire of the game, and then cutting her loose- dumb, willing, skilled, and obedient.

That describes every horny Conservative misogynistic male’s fantasy woman…and yes, there’s a reason such a woman is a “fantasy.” She doesn’t exist.

It’s also important to consider who wrote this, and not just the politics and people they represent. The writers of both the Spectator and National Post articles are women, and it’s not a coincidence that conservative media deployed them to create this garbage. Because, of course, it’s seemingly not as slimy for a woman to write a thinkpiece about a 26-year-old’s “buxom bust”, and when the writer is a woman, it’s much easier to pretend that this kind of wretched thinking comes from a place of legitimate contemplation and lived experience.

Women – Sweeney included – deserve better than having to endure this kind of low-grade discourse just so that misogynists can defend a vision of femininity that isn’t actually useful to everyday women in any real way.

It is sad that here we are, firmly ensconced in the 21st century…and we’re still having this dumbass conversation about women’s bodies. Yes, in 2024, a large segment of Penis-Americans, many of whom probably couldn’t get laid if they were the owner of the last penis on Earth, are still evaluating women based on perceived sexual desirability.

(That, after all, was the origin story of Facebook. Yes, kids, misogyny and objectification can be financially rewarding pursuits.)

Millions of Conservative men know nothing of Sydney Sweeney, save for one vital (at least in their mind) question: Would I fuck her (The question should more accurately be “Would she fuck me?” And the answer would be a resounding “NO!!”)?

After all the time and effort spent trying to educate the knuckle-dragging, penis-wielding troglodytes, far too many still think with the wrong head.

Quelle surprise.

It’s STILL the only head they think with…and will probably ever think with.

You’ve come a long way, baby. Then again, perhaps not.

All of my posts are public at this time. Any reader financial support will be greatly appreciated. There’s no paywall blocking access to my work (except for a few newsletters), but that remains an option. I’ll trust my readers to determine if my work is worthy of their financial support and at what level. To those who do offer their support, thank you. It means more than you know.