I can’t believe I’m typing that, but it’s true. Not only is she a decent actress, but she’s being productive with her youthful looks while she still can. Sure, she’s “everywhere”, but is that any different than the dozens of men in Hollywood who promote themselves ad nausea? I don’t think so. And neither should you.
I mention this due to Sweeney’s recent biopic, Christy, failing to connect with audiences. I don’t know the movie’s quality, I haven’t seen it, but it’s already on several people’s “shit-lists” of 2025. It’s wild that a boxing movie would attract that much ire, but that’s what happens when someone’s the target of faux-controversy. It’s also attracted the attention of Ruby Rose from The CW show Batwoman. Specifically, Rose ripped apart Sweeney, saying:
"For her PR to talk about it flopping and saying SS did it for the ‘people’. None of ‘the people’ want to see someone... parading around pretending to be us. You’re a cretin and you ruined the film. Period…"
Far be it for me to throw shade at Rose for criticizing taking roles from lesbian performers. That happens often in Hollywood, and it’s something I’ve addressed before. Also, Rose is entitled to an opinion. She has agency. Besides, I’ve heard worse from other actors in Hollywood before.
What irks me is Rose claiming Sweeney’s a “cretin” who “ruined the film”. Deflecting legitimate criticism by saying something was “for the fans” is embarrassing, but Rose could stand to dial it back. Especially since the real Christy Martin has defended Sweeney following the backlash. That alone should fizzle out this drama. But perhaps that’s asking too much when Sweeney was chastised for appearing in an American Eagle ad because she was “promoting an unhealthy body image”. (And no, she didn’t do that either.)
I want to throw the floor back to Rose here. Batwoman, or Kate Kane, is Jewish in the comics. Ruby Rose, however, isn’t. Yes, both Kane and Rose are lesbians, but the Jewish part’s missing with her casting. Considering Rose claimed that Sweeney was stealing roles from lesbians, isn’t it hypocritical for Rose to steal roles from Jews?
This is something I’ve covered before, sometimes to criticism from others. Judaism’s a complex ethnoreligion you can opt into. There are also plenty of Jews who play gentile characters. But if we’re using the minority card here, then shouldn’t that apply to Rose too? Especially given their resumes?
I want to throw the floor back to Rose here. Batwoman, or Kate Kane, is Jewish in the comics. Ruby Rose, however, isn’t. Yes, both Kane and Rose are lesbians, but the Jewish part’s missing with her casting. Considering Rose claimed that Sweeney was stealing roles from lesbians, isn’t it hypocritical for Rose to steal roles from Jews?
This is something I’ve covered before, sometimes to criticism from others. Judaism’s a complex ethnoreligion you can opt into. There are also plenty of Jews who play gentile characters. But if we’re using the minority card here, then shouldn’t that apply to Rose too? Especially given their resumes?
Sweeney doesn’t need my blind loyalty. I don’t know or care enough to be a simp. I also know she’s had a brush-in with controversial music producer Scooter Braun, which is a can of worms on its own. However, Sweeney as a “conservative psy-op” is laughable. Sweeney can’t be a psy-op because she keeps her politics close to her chest. Saying she leans a particular way, therefore, is hearsay. It’s also annoying when many actively-conservative actors already exist in Hollywood.
I know what this is really about. It all goes back to Sweeney’s American Eagle stint. The idea that Sweeney’s shaming people for not looking a certain way is ridiculous, as that’s not what she did. She modelled clothing, that’s it. And this adoration conservatives have for her is equally ridiculous.
Hollywood is a world of excess. So much nonsense goes on regularly that it’s easy to latch onto scandals. But this? Picking on an actress simply because she exists, really?! I knew people were misogynistic when Gal Gadot and Shira Haas were criticized for being in superhero films, but at least that misogyny goes into the-albeit Antisemitic-category of “Zionists in Hollywood”. That, and they’re from Israel, everyone’s favourite punching bag. Sydney Sweeney, on the other hand, I don’t get the hate for.
I know what this is really about. It all goes back to Sweeney’s American Eagle stint. The idea that Sweeney’s shaming people for not looking a certain way is ridiculous, as that’s not what she did. She modelled clothing, that’s it. And this adoration conservatives have for her is equally ridiculous.
Hollywood is a world of excess. So much nonsense goes on regularly that it’s easy to latch onto scandals. But this? Picking on an actress simply because she exists, really?! I knew people were misogynistic when Gal Gadot and Shira Haas were criticized for being in superhero films, but at least that misogyny goes into the-albeit Antisemitic-category of “Zionists in Hollywood”. That, and they’re from Israel, everyone’s favourite punching bag. Sydney Sweeney, on the other hand, I don’t get the hate for.
Truthfully, people have too much free time. There are so many legitimate issues that deserve our attention more: poverty. War. Disease. Politicians making the world more dangerous by the hour. Claiming an actress is “bad” because “reasons” isn’t one of those issues, and it’s ridiculous that this is touted as such.
This “scandal”, if you’d call it that, needs to be put to bed. Ruby Rose might have a point about equitable casting, but she’s going too far by labelling Sweeney a cretin. I know she won’t read this anyway, but I still think it’s worth giving my two cents. Especially since, when the chips are down, this reads as her being bitter over something she doesn’t need to be bitter over.
And to those dogpiling on Sydney Sweeney for existing? Back off. Sweeney’s doing nothing wrong by taking on gigs for money. That’s what actors do constantly, even if it means taking on roles that “suck”. She might be “box-office poison” currently, but she’s still young. That could always change if she lands the right role, it’s too early to tell. For now, however, I think people need to get a life. There’s too much negativity in the world to be adding to the pyre unnecessarily.
This “scandal”, if you’d call it that, needs to be put to bed. Ruby Rose might have a point about equitable casting, but she’s going too far by labelling Sweeney a cretin. I know she won’t read this anyway, but I still think it’s worth giving my two cents. Especially since, when the chips are down, this reads as her being bitter over something she doesn’t need to be bitter over.
And to those dogpiling on Sydney Sweeney for existing? Back off. Sweeney’s doing nothing wrong by taking on gigs for money. That’s what actors do constantly, even if it means taking on roles that “suck”. She might be “box-office poison” currently, but she’s still young. That could always change if she lands the right role, it’s too early to tell. For now, however, I think people need to get a life. There’s too much negativity in the world to be adding to the pyre unnecessarily.
No comments:
Post a Comment