By Josephine Scalia
Over the summer, Sydney Sweeney and Sabrina Carpenter got people talking for all the wrong reasons by each leading controversies that sparked major discourse online. Sweeney did so with her questionable American Eagle campaign, and Carpenter with the reveal of the cover for her new album “Man’s Best Friend.” These disastrous campaigns have left social media users debating whether subliminal messaging is at play or is rather the result of major negligence and oversight.
Recently, American Eagle launched the campaign “Sydney Sweeney Has Great Jeans,” with the “Euphoria” star at the forefront. Videos of the actress were posted to the brand’s social media pages with Sweeney saying, “Genes are passed down from parents to offspring, often determining traits like hair color, personality and even eye color. My jeans are blue.” Many are taking issue with the play on word “genes,” especially when it is coming from blonde-haired, blue-eyed Sydney Sweeney, and they are left wondering if Sydney Sweeney has great genes then what does it mean to have bad genes?
In response to the backlash, American Eagle (AE) pulled the video and the company released a statement stating the campaign “is and always was about the jeans,” and added how the brand will “continue to celebrate how everyone wears their AE jeans with confidence, their way.”
In an effort to make amends, the statement ended with, “Great jeans look good on everyone.” However, the damage was already done. Many have taken offense to the ad, claiming that it is a dog whistle designed to promote white supremacy and eugenics ideologies.
I find it hard to believe that out of the hundreds of people who likely had to approve the Sweeney campaign, no one predicted the ad would face criticism. We are living in a time when our presidential regime is crafted to target marginalized groups and paint them as national threats. While there are groups of people who claim the dog whistle accusations for the ad campaign are the result of oversensitivity, we are living in a time when we must not turn a blind eye to what is happening in front of us. Even if I suspend my belief that American Eagle had no intention of alienating vulnerable populations, it is still imperative that people call the brand out and demand the campaign be removed for perpetuating harmful and dangerous ideas.
In what seems like another attempt to bait audiences, Sabrina Carpenter’s cover for her newest album “Man’s Best Friend” left many fans with a bad taste in their mouths. The album cover depicts Carpenter on her hands and knees with a faceless man dressed in a suit grabbing onto her hair like a leash. Many have pointed out that Carpenter posing like a dog being controlled by a man is setting women back with such a submissive and helpless portrayal. Additionally, the cover design left many fans puzzled simply because it does not fit the narrative Carpenter has worked to perpetuate. For instance, in the last few years the singer has soared in popularity and has been commended for her overtly cheeky, light-hearted and sex-positive lyricism. Also, the album’s lead single, “Manchild,” is a direct criticism of a past lover for being incompetent and immature. Yet, she chose to put herself in a dehumanizing position on the album cover, and fans had to witness a lazy attempt at a joke that ultimately fell flat.
In response to being called out for being tone-deaf considering our socio-political climate regarding women’s rights, Carpenter released an alternative cover that the singer has deemed “approved by God,” which is a black and white photo of Carpenter holding onto a suited man’s arm. In a recent conversation with Gayle King on “CBS Mornings,” Carpenter chose to stand by the original cover saying that it is a metaphor for control and that those offended “need to get out more.”
With conservatism on the rise, almost everything has to be inspected through the lens of being a political statement—and that’s because everything is political. It certainly feels like we are living in a time when artists and brands are trying to test the limits on how far they can go without being called out. Even if Sweeney’s and Carpenter’s intentions were not meant to harm, the impact of their decisions speaks volumes. We must continue to dissect, analyze and challenge problematic behaviors to emphasize that they have no place in our society.
Leave a Reply