American Eagle Outfitters is defending its latest ad campaign featuring actress Sydney Sweeney after a wave of social media backlash accused the brand of promoting problematic messaging through a pun on the word “genes.”

The denim giant, known for its casual wear and youth-oriented marketing, rolled out a campaign this summer with the tagline: “Sydney Sweeney has great jeans.” The ads feature the Emmy-nominated Euphoria and Anyone But You star modeling American Eagle denim in a series of print, digital, and video spots.

While most of the campaign plays on the obvious reference to Sweeney’s wardrobe, one teaser clip included Sweeney talking about her “great genes” — as in DNA passed down from her parents — before pivoting to the brand’s jeans. That wordplay has sparked fierce debate online, with critics accusing American Eagle of invoking rhetoric historically tied to eugenics and white supremacist ideology.

Brand Stands by Campaign

American Eagle is not backing away. In a statement provided to multiple outlets this week, the company reiterated that the “great jeans” message is — and always was — about denim, not DNA.

“Sydney Sweeney has great jeans is and always was about the jeans. Her jeans, her story,” the brand said. “We’ll continue to celebrate how everyone wears their American Eagle jeans with confidence, their way. Great jeans look good on everyone.”

The company emphasized that the campaign’s intent was to celebrate personal style and confidence, not to make any political or ideological statements.

Critics See a Troubling Subtext

That clarification has done little to quell criticism from some quarters of social media. On TikTok, several users have dissected the teaser clip frame-by-frame, arguing that the pairing of a blonde, blue-eyed model and a line about “good genes” echoes language once used to promote racial purity.

One viral post, with over 2 million views, compared the ad to 1930s Nazi propaganda. Another creator linked it to the American eugenics movement, which between the early 1900s and the 1940s pushed the idea that certain traits — and certain races — were inherently superior.

“The pun ‘good genes’ activates troubling historical associations for this country,” one commentator said in a widely-shared video. “The American eugenics movement weaponized that idea to justify white supremacism.”

Prominent celebrities have also weighed in. Singer Lizzo and social media personality Doaat both criticized the ad, saying brands should be more aware of historical context when playing with language.

Political Reactions Add Fuel

The debate quickly jumped from TikTok to the political arena. Conservative figures including Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Vice President JD Vance criticized what they characterized as an overreaction from the political left.

Cruz posted on X (formerly Twitter): “Now the crazy left has come out against beautiful women. I’m sure that will poll well.”

Vance accused Democrats of hostility toward “basic American life,” saying in a statement: “You have a pretty girl doing a jeans ad and they can’t help but freak out. It reveals a lot more about them than it does us.”

Notably, there has been no major commentary from high-profile Democratic lawmakers. While the online conversation has been fierce, the controversy has so far remained more of a cultural flashpoint than a legislative talking point.

Supporters Say the Outrage Is Overblown

Many Sweeney fans and American Eagle customers have pushed back on the criticism, arguing that people are “reading too much into” a harmless pun.

“It’s a jeans ad. She’s wearing jeans. She looks great. Not everything is a secret political message,” one X user wrote, earning thousands of likes.

Another commenter on Instagram put it more bluntly: “If you’re offended by a play on words about denim, that says more about you than the ad.”

The Celebrity at the Center

Sydney Sweeney herself has not publicly commented on the backlash. The 26-year-old actress, who rose to fame playing Cassie Howard on HBO’s Euphoria and has since starred in romantic comedies and thrillers, has built a brand around her all-American aesthetic and down-to-earth persona.

Sweeney has previously spoken about her upbringing in rural Idaho and her love for restoring vintage cars. Her image — glamorous yet approachable — has made her a sought-after figure in fashion marketing.

That image has also made her a lightning rod in certain online spaces. In past news cycles, Sweeney faced criticism when photos from a family gathering showed attendees wearing pro-Trump apparel. She denied hosting any political event and asked for privacy, but the incident cemented her as a figure whose brand partnerships can draw outsized scrutiny.

The Historical Weight of “Good Genes”

Part of what makes this controversy resonate for critics is the historical baggage of the phrase “good genes.” In the early 20th century, U.S. eugenics advocates promoted selective breeding to encourage “desirable” traits — often defined in explicitly racial terms — and discourage or even forcibly prevent reproduction among those they deemed “unfit.”

While the phrase has since been reclaimed in casual speech — often as a compliment on someone’s looks or health — for some, especially those aware of its darker history, hearing it in a mass-market ad still triggers discomfort.

Marketing experts say this is where brands must tread carefully.

“Wordplay can be clever and memorable, but you have to know your audience and your history,” said Dr. Alicia Porter, a professor of advertising at NYU. “In the social media era, a line that seemed lighthearted in a creative meeting can read very differently to millions of viewers.”

A Pattern in Brand Backlash

The American Eagle dust-up is the latest in a string of advertising controversies where a campaign was accused of inadvertently invoking harmful stereotypes or ideologies.

In recent years, brands from fashion to food have been called out for imagery, slogans, or partnerships that critics said were tone-deaf or offensive. Some companies have pulled ads or issued apologies; others, like American Eagle, have chosen to defend their creative vision.

The stakes can be high: in the age of online virality, a single clip can spark boycotts, trending hashtags, and days of negative press — or, conversely, can rally a brand’s loyal customers in defense.

Business Impact So Far

Ironically, the controversy may be helping American Eagle in the short term. Since the campaign launched, the company’s stock price has ticked upward, with analysts noting increased media coverage and online engagement.

Some marketers argue that even negative attention can drive brand visibility, especially if the core customer base views the backlash as an overreaction. Still, the long-term effect on brand reputation is harder to measure.

What’s Next?

American Eagle shows no signs of pulling the campaign. Retail analysts say the company is likely betting that the social media cycle will move on quickly and that the campaign will ultimately resonate with its target demographic — young, fashion-conscious consumers who know Sweeney as a pop culture fixture.

Whether that bet pays off will depend on how long the debate lingers and whether Sweeney herself decides to address it. For now, the company’s message is consistent: it’s about the jeans.

Bottom Line

The “great jeans/genes” flap underscores the tricky terrain brands navigate in a polarized, hyper-online culture. A pun that some see as clever, others read as coded. A celebrity whose appeal to middle America makes her marketable also makes her a flashpoint.

For American Eagle, the lesson may not be to abandon playful marketing — but to understand that in 2025, even a denim ad can spark a national conversation about history, politics, and the power of words.