The media/left-wing hysteria over movie star Sydney Sweeney’s ad for American Eagle was straight out of the Twilight Zone.I mean, who would have thought a simple commercial about jeans featuring an unapologetically curvy woman that reminded you of those Calvin Klein ads featuring actress Brooke Shields from the 1980s would have sparked a backlash centered around wokeness and anti-white racism?Well, it indeed happened, as Legal Insurrection‘s own Leslie Eastman explained at the time:
Unfortunately, the woke and those who bitterly cling to “body positivity” and victimhood are incredibly unhappy. The elite media refers to the ads as “controversial” as they promote the hysterical and nonsensical takes on the AE campaign. But I have to say the anti-white race hate in the remarks published in the reports about this “nontroversy” is positively chilling.
“Maybe I’m too f***ing woke. But getting a blue-eyed, blonde, white woman and focusing your campaign around her having perfect genetics feels weird,” one wrote on X.“I like Sydney Sweeney and American Eagle as much as the next guy but ‘we must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children’ is a crazy tagline for selling jeans,” another tweeted.
Here’s an example of what last month’s media noise machine around the ad looked like:
The New Yorker was one of the leftist publications that got in on the act, publishing a write-up by staff writer Doreen St. Félix, who tried to explain why the American Eagle jeans campaign had so fired up the perpetually outraged on the left:
The allusion is incoherent, unless, of course, we root around for other meanings, and we don’t have to search for long: genes, referring to Sweeney’s famously large breasts; genes, referring to her whiteness. (American Eagle has said that the campaign “is and always was about the jeans.”) Interestingly, breasts, and the desire for them, are stereotyped as objects of white desire, as opposed to, say, the Black man’s hunger for ass. Sweeney, on the precipice of totalizing fame, has an adoring legion, the most extreme of whom want to recruit her as a kind of Aryan princess. To them, she signals, as my colleague Lauren Michele Jackson wrote, a “rejoicing in a perceived return to a bygone beauty standard in the wake of all that overzealous feminism they blame on the left.”A lot of people don’t like the ad campaign, and there are plenty of reasons not to: there’s no irony or camp to leaven the trashy, dog-whistle atmosphere.
It appears, however, that St. Félix was projecting her own racism onto others if one considers tweets she wrote in the past, where the anti-white hate and antisemitism were pretty strong:
In one tweet targeting white men dated in December 2014, St. Felix wrote: “You all are the worst. Go nurse your f–king Oedipal complexes and leave the earth to the browns and the women.”Another simply said: “I hate white men.”The resurfaced messages revealed a pattern of racially charged commentary spanning multiple years.In one post, St. Felix admitted she “writes like no white is watching.”Another declared that she “would be heartbroken if I had kids with a white guy.”[…]In one tweet, she described what she called “the holocaust gesture,” writing that “it’s tricknological, when white people invoke the holocaust” because it “allows them to step out of their whiteness and slip on fake oppression.”[…]In another post, she claimed “the tolerability of racism is linked to how its acted out on brown bodies. The holocaust was not tolerable bc of white victims so it ended.”
Though St. Félix has since deleted her X account, the Internet is forever:
All of that said, some implied that it was hard to decide which was worse – St. Félix’s racism and antisemitism or that such low-quality writing appeared on the pages of The New Yorker?
I report, you decide.
– Stacey Matthews has also written under the pseudonym “Sister Toldjah” and can be reached via X. –
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY