The camera pans across Sydney Sweeney’s body as she lays on the floor buttoning up her jeans. She says, “genes are passed down from parents to offspring, often determining traits like hair color, personality and even eye color,” ultimately landing on her face when she says, “My genes are blue.” “Sydney Sweeney Has Great Jeans” is part of American Eagle’s new campaign that dropped on July 23. In the week following the advertisement, American Eagle’s shares surged, initially by 10% on the day after the release. More recently, share prices increased by 33% on Sept. 4. Despite this commercial success, the advertisement received backlash on social media for being perceived as overtly sexual and promoting eugenics. The advertisement’s focus on Sweeney and her body over the jeans, seemingly bragging about the blond, blue-eyed white woman’s “good genes,” rubs audiences the wrong way. Following this, American Eagle has since taken down this video from their social media.
Scrolling on her phone, junior Amelia Rojas first stumbled upon an American Eagle advertisement on TikTok. Initially, she felt confused and uncomfortable with the wordplay on “genes” and “jeans” and the camera framing Sydney Sweeney’s body instead of the product. Rojas questioned whether she was looking too deeply into the messaging of the advertisement because she couldn’t imagine why a company would put out a product that people would interpret negatively.
“The gene joke, to me, was just such a weird joke to make, especially using her as an example,” Rojas said. “Just a couple of months before, she had that whole bathwater soap ad. Using her specifically to sexualize women definitely stood out to me. And then, while seeing the other ads, it was clear that they were portraying her in a way to appeal to a man’s gaze — specifically, probably older men.”
Rojas shares how she further explored and understood these advertisements in her Honors American Literature class, where the class analyzed them from different political lenses. By being further exposed to these topics and able to discuss them with her peers, Rojas affirmed her initial impressions on the campaign.
“Seeing other people’s opinions on it definitely shifted my view,” Rojas said. “I’m not saying their opinions are wrong, but after hearing some of the guys in my class talk about it, I could tell that their view was very different from how the women and girls felt about it.”
Rojas talked about the campaign with her dad, who, like her male peers, believed that there wasn’t anything political about it. Rojas mentions that her female classmates had agreed with her thoughts about the over-sexualization of women and the role Sweeney played in promoting that message, while her male peers didn’t focus on that aspect. Likewise, junior Aeshna Chatterji drew similar conclusions regarding this campaign.
“I was thinking that maybe it’s just a marketing tactic — they’re using a pretty blonde girl to get at other young girls and say, ‘This is who you can be like,’” Chatterji said. “But the part that really stuck out for me was the play on words of jeans to genes and the idea that an American should look like Sweeney. So that kind of irritated me.”
Both Chatterji and Rojas specifically focus on the portrayal of a white woman as the face of this campaign, especially in the current political climate in which minority rights are threatened. Senior Aaryan Sharma thinks that people who didn’t see any issues with the advertisement believe that those who are uncomfortable with it are only upset because American Eagle collaborated with a conventionally attractive blond woman. However, he points out that the backlash was instead because of the lack of diversity and how the campaign felt like it was catering to a conservative audience.
“Beyond marketing and advertising clothing ads, our country is getting a lot more conservative,” Sharma said. “I think that has to do with who’s in power right now — people like our president and people in the Senate. It’s an indicator that we’re leaning more right, and a lot of that conservative propaganda and mindset is filling America and taking power.”
On the other hand, business teacher Carl Schmidt stresses that having Sweeney as the face of the campaign is important because she reflects the market American Eagle is selling to: Gen Z. Despite the controversies surrounding the advertisements, the brand proves to be successful in terms of getting people’s attention and selling their product. Whether people approve of the campaign or not, by engaging in discourse surrounding it, attention is brought to the brand and its product. Schmidt believes that companies do not have a responsibility to remain apolitical, and they are allowed to align themselves with people who reflect their market.
“Businesses aren’t stupid,” Schmidt said. “They aren’t going to do something that will irritate their customers. That would be foolish. Some would argue that it could be overtly racist — others will oppose it. If you think it’s racist, don’t buy the product. California is a very blue area, but in Texas and Idaho there will be completely different views about it.”
One aspect that both Schmidt and Chatterji touch on is how there will always be differing views and interpretations of controversies like this. Similarly, Chatterji believes that any company has the right to represent their politics but must also accept the consequences, whether that be addressing backlash or reaping the rewards.
“In our area, most of the people here are minorities, and at Valley Fair, when I saw American Eagle’s ads, I looked inside the store and there was not a single person in there,” Chatterji said. “But, if you go somewhere that’s more white dominated, the store could be a lot more popular there. I think for people of color, it makes you look back and question and realize that that’s not for you.
