An Adidas campaign for Pride 2023 has gained considerable backlash after featuring male-presenting models wearing women’s swimsuits. Now, many people have defended the brand, amidst a wave of anti-trans sentiment towards companies including transgender people in their advertising. The sportswear brand unveiled its new collection for Pride 2023 on 15 May, titled “Let Love Be Your Legacy”. The range of apparel and footwear was designed by queer, South African designer Rich Mnisi, and comes as a collaboration with the non-profit Athlete Ally, which focuses on ending homophobia and transphobia in sports. In a statement, Rich Mnisi said the collection was “a symbol for self-acceptance and LGBTQIA+ advocacy.” On the company’s website, one of the bathing suits from the line – a colourful one-piece swimsuit called the “Pride Swimsuit” that retails for $70 – was being shown off by an apparently male model, though their gender is unknown. The swimsuit was marked under the women’s sportswear section on the website. The campaign photoshoot immediately set the internet ablaze, as many people criticised Adidas for “erasing women” by using a male-presenting model to advertise its female clothing. Former NCAA women’s swim athlete Riley Gaines, who has often been outspoken against trans women competing in sports, tweeted: “I don’t understand why companies are voluntarily doing this to themselves. They could have at least said the suit is ‘unisex’, but they didn’t because it’s about erasing women. Ever wondered why we hardly see this go the other way?” “We women will not be erased!!! Quit trying to replace us with male models!!! We’ve fought hard to be heard. Quit attempting to erase us again!!!” another user tweeted. Others called out the company for the move towards “woke” advertising, in light of the recent Bud Light and Nike campaigns featuring trans influencer Dylan Mulvaney. “Apparently Adidas hasn’t learned the lesson from Bud Light fiasco. Time to give Adidas the ‘get woke, go broke’ treatment,” said one person. British internet personality Oli London added, “Nike and Adidas are at War to see which brand can become the Most WOKE! Both brands are now using male models to advertise women’s sports bras. Who wins the WOKE Award?” Reviews for the bathing suit on the Adidas website have also been flooded with one-star ratings and negative reviews, like one which read: “Hope the same thing that happens to Bud Light happens to them with this woke trash.” Despite some of the criticism, many people have stepped up to defend Adidas for featuring the models in its Pride Month collection. In response to the backlash, author Dr Delatorro McNeal appeared on daytime talk show Daily Blast Live to discuss the Adidas Pride campaign. “My concern with all of the bashing and all of the categorising is that we’re not leading with love and we’re not leading with acceptance and inclusion,” he said. “We all want to count, we all want to matter, we all want to be included, and it’s so vitally important. So I believe that, although there’s a fine line between free speech and freedom of expression, I believe at the end of the day if Adidas wants to create this line, let them do it. The customers that are going to align with that message and are aligned with that product are going to get it those that won’t, won’t.” @dailyblastlive Something we have been talking a lot about on the show is big brands like Bud Light and Nike are facing boycotts because of their ads that include transgender people. Adidas is under fire for using a model to highlight its pride swimsuit collection. People online are claiming this ‘woke marketing’ is ‘erasing women.’ Reviews on the site have been flooded with negative comments like this one saying, ‘Hope the same thing happened to Bud Light happens to them with this woke trash.’ Dr. Delatorro shares his take on this. #adidas #backlash #leadwithlove #love #lgbtq #drdelatorro #transgender #swimsuitmodel #model #budlight #trans ♬ original sound - DBL Others took to social media to express their support for Adidas, as well as their confusion over the widespread outrage. “Why are people in an uproar about a man modelling a womens ‘pride’ swimsuit for adidas??????” asked one person on Twitter. “WHO CARES?” Meanwhile, on TikTok, someone else said: “I want one!!! It’s beautiful and so is the model!” “Trans people exist! They shop too!! If the model doesn’t represent you it probably wasn’t meant to,” another TikToker said. “Y’all are making this outrage up,” a third user wrote. “I’m a millennial woman and I don’t feel erased or threatened. Accept people, love people, grow.” In April, Bud Light faced similar backlash for partnering with trans influencer and model Dylan Mulvaney in an Instagram video. The 26-year-old TikTok star revealed her new sponsorship deal with the beer company when she filmed herself with multiple cans of Bud Light. The brand had also sent her a can of Bud Light with her face on it. The video instantly received backlash from conservative politicians and celebrities, including Kid Rock and Travis Tritt. Others called for a boycott of the beer, and filmed videos of themselves smashing or shooting at cases of Budweiser products. Anheuser-Busch, the producer of Budweiser beers, issued a statement in response to the boycott, saying that they “never intended to be part of a discussion that divides people.” That same month, the actor also faced transphobic backlash for her partnership with Nike. In response, the sportswear brand wrote in the pinned comments of one of its social media posts: “You are an essential component to the success of your community! We welcome comments that contribute to a positive and constructive discussion. Be kind…Be inclusive…Encourage each other…Hate speech, bullying, or other behaviours that are not in the spirit of a diverse and inclusive community will be deleted.” The Independent has contacted Adidas for comment. Read More LGBTQ+ group suspends Bud Light maker's rating over handling of backlash to transgender influencer Ted Cruz wants to investigate Bud Light for working with Dylan Mulvaney: ‘Melting down over a trans woman’ Dylan Mulvaney reveals impact of trolls misgendering her following Bud Light controversy Adidas plans to sell Yeezy stock from axed Kanye West deal and donate proceeds Get to know Foday Dumbuya, winner of the Queen Elizabeth II Award for British Design 7 beauty changes to make as the weather gets warmer

The Epson Pro EX11000 is almost the same as the Pro EX10000 that it's replacing

LONDON (Reuters) -Nestle improved its full-year organic sales outlook and reported better-than-expected first-half organic sales, as the world's biggest packaged

The COVID-19 pandemic upended the work habits of people around the world, with millions working from home, at least for part of their week

With its promise of lush parties and lusty romances, Emerald Fennell's Saltburn promises to lure

To stamp out any remaining protests, Reddit is sending “final warnings” to subreddits that decided

Qantas Airways Ltd. overhauled its leadership, including naming a new chief financial officer and creating a role to

A woman is suing Starbucks for “false and deceptive practices” over claims that the coffee company’s iced, fruit-filled refresher beverage actually contains no fruit. Joan Kominis from Queens, New York, filed a complaint in August 2022 after learning that Starbucks’ Strawberry Acai Lemonade Refresher contained no actual acai. Court documents filed in the southern district of New York claim that “unbeknownst to consumers, the Mango Dragon Fruit and Mango Dragon Fruit Lemonade Refreshers contain no mango, the Pineapple Passionfruit and Pineapple Passion Fruit Lemonade Refreshers contain no passionfruit, and the Strawberry Açaí and Strawberry Açaí Lemonade Refreshers contain no açaí.” Kominis and her co-plaintiff, Jason McAllister of California, are seeking damages in excess of $5m. Starbucks has since called the allegations “inaccurate” and “without merit”. On Tuesday 19 September, US District Judge John Cronan rejected Starbucks’ request to dismiss nine of the 11 claims in the class-action complaint because “a significant portion of reasonable consumers” would assume that the beverages in question would contain the fruit in their names. The plaintiffs have said the main ingredients in these beverages were water, grape juice concentrate, and sugar. They claim the refreshers “differ from other Starbucks products” in that the product doesn’t contain items in their name. “Starbucks’ hot chocolate contains cocoa, its matcha lattes contain matcha, and its honey mint tea contains honey and mint,” reads the complaint. While they noted that the refresher drinks do in fact contain freeze-dried pieces of strawberries, pineapple and dragon fruit, they claimed that Starbucks “does not affirmatively indicate anywhere which ingredients are and are not in the products.” Starbucks had said that the fruits mentioned in the refreshers titles are meant to “describe the flavours as opposed to the ingredients.” Judge Cronan disagreed, writing in his ruling: “Nothing before the Court indicates that ‘mango,’ ‘passionfruit,’ and ‘açaí’ are terms that typically are understood to represent a flavour without also representing that ingredient.” In Kominis’ original filing, she claimed that she was going to buy a Strawberry Açaí refresher specifically for the açaí benefits. The suit stated that açaí berries and juice “are known to provide benefits to heart health, cognitive function, and contain anti-cancerous properties.” “Had she known that the product did not contain açaí, she would not have purchased it, or would have paid significantly less for it,” the document read. Kominis said that she and other consumers bought these menu items and “paid a premium price” based on Starbucks’ naming of the refreshers, and would either not have purchased them or “paid significantly less for them” had they been aware they were missing one of the named fruits. “The allegations in the complaint are inaccurate and without merit,” a Starbucks spokesperson told Today. “We look forward to defending ourselves against these claims.” One claim of fraud and another for unjust enrichment were dismissed from the suit, but Starbucks will have to face the rest of the allegations. The Independent has contacted a spokesperson for Starbucks for comment. This is the second lawsuit an American food chain has faced in recent weeks. Earlier this month, Burger King was sued over claims that the company misled customers by making its Whopper burger appear larger on the menu than how it appears in reality. Read More Citing sustainability, Starbucks wants to overhaul its iconic cup. Will customers go along? Starbucks cheers ‘good progress’ in plan for 100 new UK shops Ed Sheeran serves up Pumpkin Spice Lattes to surprised Starbucks customers Courgette season is nearly over – here’s three ways to make the most of them Top international cuisines Brits are keen to try Subway enthusiasts stew over launch of first ever 3-inch sandwich

What happens when an unexpectedly powerful technology becomes an overnight sensation, quickly making its way

Walt Disney Co. is set to open the world’s first Zootopia land at Shanghai Disneyland Resort as the

Prices in UK stores fell for the first time in two years, in another sign that the cost-of-living

The website looks like something that a generative AI system dreamed up: Lockheed Martin Apparel,