Why American Eagle’s Sydney Sweeney ad strikes a nerve with Asian Americans

An American Eagle ad featuring actress Sydney Sweeney drew criticism in July for its tagline “Sydney Sweeney has great jeans,” a pun on “jeans” and “genes.” While meant as humor, the campaign’s use of genetic language revived memories of when pseudoscience about inherited traits was used to justify systemic discrimination. For Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) communities, that history includes immigration bans, property restrictions, propaganda and forced sterilization.

In the early 20th century, eugenics gave anti-Asian sentiment in the U.S. a false sense of scientific legitimacy. President Theodore Roosevelt openly supported Asian exclusion, warning that allowing Japanese immigrants to enter the U.S. would “invite and insure a race contest.” Biologist Charles Davenport described nonwhite immigrants as “cheaper races” and called for immigration limits based on supposed genetic quality.

These ideas shaped the Immigration Act of 1924, which effectively banned most immigration from Asia under the guise of preserving racial “homogeneity.” California passed its own measures, including the 1913 Alien Land Law, which barred Asian immigrants from owning property by labeling them “aliens ineligible for citizenship.”

Propaganda reinforced these laws. The “Yellow Peril” narrative portrayed Asians as a threat to Western civilization, casting them as morally and genetically inferior. Popular literature, staged exhibits and fabricated surveys depicted Asians as unfit to assimilate, normalizing discrimination and building support for exclusionary policies.

The American Psychological Association (APA) formally apologized in 2021 for its role in advancing eugenic and racist ideologies. Founded in 1892 by white male scientists, the APA acknowledged that for decades, psychologists promoted theories of white superiority, conducted biased research and provided intellectual support for segregation, anti-miscegenation laws and coerced sterilization.

These ideas were not confined to academic journals or policy debates. They directly informed state actions and medical practices, laying the groundwork for programs such as California’s forced sterilizations. California operated one of the most extensive sterilization programs in the country, targeting those institutionalized for perceived mental illness or developmental disability. Between 1909 and 1979, more than 20,000 people were forcibly sterilized in state-run facilities. Many of those affected were denied information or legal recourse, and decisions were often based on vague or racialized assessments of fitness.

A 2023 public health study found that Asian-born individuals in California institutions were sterilized at significantly higher rates than their U.S.-born counterparts. Eugenic organizations such as the Human Betterment Foundation publicly promoted sterilization as a scientifically sound and socially beneficial policy, which helped garner broad support among physicians and state officials.

Although the sterilization law was eventually repealed, the state did not acknowledge the harm until decades later. In 2021, California established a $7.5 million reparations fund for living survivors. By early 2023, only a small fraction of those who applied had received compensation.

The American Eagle campaign may have seemed playful to some, but for many AAPI individuals, references to genetics carry the weight of a past in which their communities were labeled biologically dangerous or inferior.

For lifestyle influencer Payal Desai, the ad triggered memories of growing up in a predominantly white environment where Eurocentric beauty ideals were the norm. She recalled wanting lighter skin and different features to fit in, saying the campaign “hit a nerve” because it echoed the exclusion she felt as a child. Her response struck a chord with others who have faced similar struggles with identity and belonging.

This history helps explain why even a seemingly lighthearted marketing line can stir strong reactions. The influence of eugenics persists in systems, institutions and cultural narratives shaped by its legacy, and for communities that have lived through its consequences, reminders, even in an ad, can feel personal.