Banking on Racism? The Blue Jean “War” is Just Beginning
August 28, 2025
Photo by Ryan Moreno
One of the oldest maxims in advertising is that sex “sells.” But it turns out that race – and racial controversy – “sells,” too. Witness the sprawling controversy over an American Eagle advertising campaign to promote sales of its new line of blue jeans. The campaign features Sydney Sweeney, an aspiring actress who’s considered a rising Hollywood star in some circles. She’s not the first sexy blue-eyed blonde to be treated by advertisers as a shapely “hook” for their hot new brand, but her company’s tag line quickly raised some eyebrows. “Sydney Sweeney has great jeans” – the message in voice over – was meant to be a subtle – and deliberate – double entendre. Did the company mean “jeans,” as the ad actually reads in print, or is it implying that Sweeney also has “great genes,” a not-so-subtle riff on her racial background, and to some, a presumption of racial “privilege” – or worse, “superiority.” Sweeney herself went on to riff on the genes/jeans connection herself, seemingly amping up the racial innuendo.
Of course, the company still denies any racializing intent – but it wasn’t long before social media posters raged across the Internet.Was American Eagle promoting “White supremacy”? Weeks later, Tik Tokers and You Tubers are still avidly debating the issue. Clearly, the company’s fully aware of what it’s doing – creating buzz and stoking consumer interest in its new apparel line. There’s another old saying in advertising: “Call me anything, just spell my name right.” Indeed, American has already raked in some $400 million in new sales since the Sweeney ad campaign began. And the company’s doubling-down on its ad campaign, publicly disavowing any need to apologize for any “misunderstanding” – wink, wink – that its edgy tag line has created.
It’s not just thinly-veiled racism that’s being assailed by critics. Some are suggesting that the ads are also highly “sexualized,” with Sweeney cast in some provocative poses, suggestive of a soft-core porn shoot, perhaps. The actress is pushing 30 but she’s made up to look like a pouty and defiant nymphet, maybe even a teenager, in one spot, displaying oodles of skin. American Eagle is getting something of a two-fer here: raising the hackles of conservatives and liberals alike, and creating a feeding frenzy that in theory, could damage the company’s brand – but instead, in today’s amped up sex and often vitriolic racial culture – where every word and inflection is parsed for meaning – appears to be stoking it to new heights. If few people knew who American Eagle the company was a month ago, virtually the entire country knows now.
And America Eagle’s competitors are pouncing. Levi’s, one of the largest and most established denim brands, has since expanded its own ad campaign, this one featuring a proud African-American woman at the center. And not just any Black woman, but Beyonce, or Bey, as she’s known to her adoring fans. No one has made the racial connection explicit – but it’s obvious anyway. White supremacy you’re promoting? Well, how about a heavy dose of Afro-centrism in reply? Beyonce’s dressed in a full-length blue jeans suit, not the kind of wear you typically might see her in and she’s not the small slender woman Sweeney is. She looks like a Blue Jean Goddess or a Denim Queen, towering over her universe. While Sweeney inspires a certain lasciviousness, Bey commands respect and awe. In other words, game on.
There may be more than one way to look at what’s going on here. One is that these two beleaguered jeans companies cooked up the entire race controversy together to create social media buzz about their respective product lines, and did so cynically to boost sales. But maybe it’s just a timely confluence – or opportunistic piggy-backing – at work: Levis saw an opportunity to counter the “White supremacist” scandal with a “Black pride” response. I favor conspiracy theory. Why? Because it takes considerable advance planning and effort to contract actors, develop and test ad messaging, and organize the actual shoots. The timing here was just a little too perfect, as if American Eagle and Levis were just lying in wait, ready to pounce on unsuspecting consumers, with the roll-out of their consecutive ad campaigns nicely in “sync.”
There’s another reason to believe that the two companies knew what they were doing all along. The jeans industry is actually in trouble, maybe even dire trouble, as blue jeans sales among youngsters especially have declined somewhat sharply over the past two years. The decline was apparent as far back as 2019-2020, but a post-COVID bump seemed like the market might rebound; instead, consumers have grown increasingly cautious about discretionary clothing purchases ever since, and even worse, apparel fashion preferences are evolving; while jeans are still in broadly speaking, it turns out that Gen Z consumers, especially young women, are souring on denim. Big time.
A consumer report published last year tells the story in stark numbers. Young women under 30 are developing new tastes – and with less income are prioritizing their purchases; denim is still great as casual wear but it’s less functional for the office and for the evening night out. And women are clearly becoming more “feminine” – and formal – in their apparel tastes. As a result, a real sense of crisis has begun to set in among the major jeans companies – they’re desperate to capture these rapidly defecting young consumers, ensuring the brand “loyalty” that will make them – and their children –consumers for life. And when you’re down and nearly out, stodgy appeals surely won’t do. Getting those consumers back in the fold requires some bold risk-taking.
So there you have it. The real subtext to this controversy may not be racial at all. Or even a matter of protecting young consumers – or the rest of us – from “hyper-sexual” messaging. The real subtext is grubby economics – or good-old fashioned capitalism. Jean companies are afraid of losing their market, especially their future market, which relies upon cultivating the apparel tastes of youngsters, especially women, who have always comprised the dominant share of jeans commerce. Sydney and Beyonce may or may not have great jeans – or genes; in fact, neither woman, by most accounts, even wears blue jeans all that much, certainly not in public. Maybe they will more often from now on – but don’t count on it. Will it even matter? American Eagle and Levi sales are booming again; by riffing on race, their clever marketing gambit has allowed the two companies to go to war, while appealing across the spectrum, drawing in White and Black Gen-Zers alike, stoking the growth of the overall market. Sydney’s fans are happy – and so are Bey’s. And the two icons – handsomely paid for their willing service as warring sales props – are beginning to make these two beleaguered jeans companies extremely happy.
Give these two companies some credit. At a time when “DEI” is everywhere under siege, their clever marketing executives have found a way to make America’s unending racial drama bankable. They’ve staged a performance – and attracted a growing audience. Their investors are surely cheering. The rest of us? We barely know what hit us.
There is a danger in this kind of marketing, however – the potential for a sustained backlash. Not just a backlash against the racial innuendo but a backlash from consumers who may not really want to be implicated in the jeans war. While sales of American Eagle jeans are clearly up (online,at least), foot traffic to store outlets is down almost 10%. Not everyone is comfortable, perhaps, being seen shopping for jeans associated with racial innuendo. And Sweeney’s new indie film? It just bombed at the box office, defying expectations of a windfall. The film may eventually rebound, industry insiders say, but Sweeney’s celebrity aura is taking a hit in Hollywood, leading her diehard fans to denounce the “hate.”
Beyonce’s such a celebrity superstar that her own shiny tiara will likely survive the continuing controversy. Still, politics – and political controversy – while creating a powerful buzz, can also be a real minefield. Just ask Bud Light about its use of Dylan Mulvaney as a product spokesperson. Companies that play with politics for self-serving ends often find that consumers don’t see the politics involved as a game. In the end, issues of sexism and racism cause real world pain and suffering. To the extent that the comfort and ease that consumers feel wearing blue jeans is diminished, their interest in having them in their wardrobe might also decline. Wait until the first young girl gets denounced at the shopping mall for flaunting her “Nazi” jeans. Could it happen? Time will tell. But the ultimate test will be returns on investment. Unless sales rebound, and denim takes off with youth again, the jeans companies that promoted this thinly-veiled consumer war may not themselves survive.
In fact, the American Eagle/Levi’s jeans “war” is already expanding. GAP and two other companies have just introduced their own new jeans apparel lines aimed once again at Gen Z women. Their sales are booming well beyond American Eagle’s. GAP, it may be recalled, designed a very snazzy ad campaign in the 1980s using African-American urban hop-hop music as a theme. They weren’t selling jeans – just casual leisure apparel. Today, their jeans models are dancing once again, this time to more modern Afro-centric pop themes. The company’s serving up wholesome fun – and the sex and race politics is not only muted but decidedly PC.
GAP’s even adding insult to injury. Their former top CEO has just penned an op-ed trashing American Eagle and Sydney Sweeney for playing on sexualized racism. Talk about ingratitude! American Eagle got the whole shebang started and now its successor marketers are turning on the upstart. GAP’s really just stirring the pot still further. After all, in capitalist marketing all’s fair in sex, race – and money.
