Introduction
In April 2023, Dylan Mulvaney, a transgender activist and influencer, posted a short clip from her partnership with Bud Light on X (formerly Twitter). On the face of it, the post contained no controversial statements, yet it sparked sharp criticism from conservative journalists, politicians, celebrities, and social media personalities. The critics targeted Mulvaney with anti-trans statements and Bud Light for what they considered as turning “woke” (Caruso, 2023). Over several months, these attacks escalated into calls to boycott Bud Light beer.
This controversy prompted debate and raised critical questions on the intersection of gender identity, marketing, and societal attitudes toward gender-fluid people. This essay analyzes this public storm through the perspective of gender identity and expression. Thus, in discussing gender identity and expression, I will analyze the Dylan Mulvaney controversy to showcase underlying societal biases and challenges that transgender individuals encounter while also highlighting the power dynamics in marketing and advertising.
Analysis of the Bud Light Controversy
The scandal that engulfed Bud Light, its parent company (Anheuser-Busch), and Dylan Mulvaney can be traced to inclusivity efforts by the vice president of marketing, Alissa Heinerscheid was hired in 2022, and her first major effort was to introduce Bud Light to a wide range of customers (Caruso, 2023). Thus, she tapped Mulvaney to try to target the transgender market and increase the company’s sales.
However, the beer’s traditionally conservative customer base saw these efforts as an affront to their values. They accused the company of going “woke”, which is a term generally associated with liberalism. To show their dissatisfaction, they organized a boycott of Bud Light, which has had a significant negative impact on the company’s sales. Additionally, it has led to Bud Light being replaced as the beer brand with the highest sales in the United States.
At its core, the controversy that surrounded Bud Light and Mulvaney shows the pervasive issue of transphobia in the United States. Immediately after Mulvaney posted the short clips announcing her partnership with the beer brand, millions of social media users, including prominent conservative celebrities, politicians, journalists, and others, used anti-trans rhetoric to attack her and Bud Light for their collaboration.
Additionally, they called for a boycott of the company’s products, viewing it as a betrayal by a company whose beer market held conservative views (Caruso, 2023). These events reflect a broader pattern of prejudice and discrimination that transgender people endure. Specifically, their identities are regularly invalidated and scrutinized in public discourse. Additionally, this controversy underscores the difficulties that transgender individuals face in being accepted and respected in social and mainstream media advertising.
The fiasco was also a watershed moment in the challenges brand marketers face when marketing products to LGBTQ+ communities. The idea behind the Mulvaney and Bud Light partnership was to showcase inclusivity and the company’s gender diversity (Caruso, 2023). However, the backlash from conservative voices highlights the delicate balance that a company has to strike to engage with its LGBTQ+ customers. In their efforts to reach all their customers regardless of their sexual orientation or gender, brands risk alienating certain segments of their customer base, which could negatively impact sales and the brand’s reputation. In the future, brands must re-evaluate the consequences of their actions before rolling out certain campaigns.
These events also have implications for transgender people, especially as they relate to their mental health. Research among adolescents shows that gender composition is likely to increase mental health diagnoses, a situation that persists even in adulthood (Getik & Meier, 2022). For transgender individuals, stigma and discrimination further compound the risks of diagnosis with mental health problems such as depression and anxiety.
The vitriol faced by Mulvaney signifies the challenges that transgender individuals face when navigating public scrutiny. A well-meaning partnership to explore a new market for Bud Light was scandalized by conservative voices that exposed their indifference toward people who fail to conform to societal expectations. In the months since the scandal first broke, Mulvaney has spoken about the heavy mental toll she endured (Caruso, 2023).
Additionally, Bud Light’s failure to address the controversy substantively fueled the scandal. Further, it exacerbated the marginalization of transgender voices and the perpetuation of harmful stereotypes. The inadequate response from the beer brand also led to feelings of isolation and invalidation among transgender individuals. In essence, this controversy was a perfect illustration of the notion of constrained choice: societal norms and expectations limited Bud Light and Mulvaney.
This controversy can also be analyzed through the constrained theory perspective. This theory asserts that an individual’s choice to engage in healthy behavior is fundamentally influenced by actions and decisions in their workplace, home, and community, as well as by the public policies adopted in the area where they live (Winkler et al., 2020). The multi-level contexts can either act as a barrier or encourage individuals to adopt a healthy lifestyle. In essence, this theory is helpful because it identifies the most limiting factor that hinders achieving a given goal.
In this case, Mulvaney faced massive backlash for participating in a campaign by Bud Light highlighting the difficulties that transgender individuals face in expressing their identities publicly. Her plight is a reflection of the broader societal struggle with gender identity and expression, where certain people often feel obligated to conform to expectations from the community they reside in or grew up in.
Rather than accepting the fluidity of gender, society constrains people to the two primary genders, which is limiting for people who feel that they are neither. Individuals such as Mulvaney, who rebel against these limitations, face similar backlash to the one she encountered in April 2023. Thus, Mulvaney’s treatment is a clear example of how societal norms and expectations constrain individual choice and perpetuate discrimination and prejudice against marginalized groups.
Conclusion
Therefore, the Bud Light controversy is a microcosm of the broader societal issues regarding gender identity and expression. From this perspective, it is apparent that brands continue to face scrutiny and criticism for working with people who fail to conform to the traditional binary gender expression. With its primary customer base being conservative, the fiasco faced by Bud Light in April 2023 also reflected intolerance and indifference towards marginalized groups.
The backlash faced by Mulvaney exemplified the discrimination and prejudice that transgender people experience despite living in the world’s premier democracy. Additionally, the scandal was a clear illustration of the constrained choice that transgender people and the brands they work with face. Thus, the backlash faced by Mulvaney and Bud Light stemmed from their breaching societal norms and expectations. As such, despite the freedoms that individuals enjoy in the US, it is apparent that work is needed to achieve true gender equality and acceptance.
References
Caruso, S. (2023). Everything to know about the Bud Light controversy. Peoplemag.
Getik, D., & Meier, A. N. (2022). Peer gender and mental health. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 197, 643–659.
Winkler, M. R., Telke, S., Ahonen, E. Q., Crane, M. M., Mason, S. M., & Neumark-Sztainer, D. (2020). Constrained choices: Combined influences of work, social circumstances, and social location on time-dependent health behaviors. SSM – Population Health, 11.