Sidney Sweeney, “Good Jeans,” and the Distraction Machine
Antoine Clyburn Jr.
When Sidney Sweeney appeared in the now-viral “Good Jeans” ad campaign, it was only a matter of hours before the internet caught fire. The image of Sweeney, American sweetheart turned cultural Rorschach test, posing in nothing but a suggestive glance and designer denim, prompted praise, backlash, and most curiously a wave of accusations drawing parallels to eugenics.
Yes, you read that right. Eugenics.
Some critics claim the ad idealizes a specific “American beauty” standard, white, blonde, blue-eyed, thin and thereby echoes a dangerous legacy of racialized ideals and selective desirability. Others say the campaign feels like an aspirational whisper toward a “better gene pool,” masquerading under the phrase “good jeans,” with the pun perhaps being more sinister than playful.
Could these critiques be valid? Absolutely. The beauty and fashion industries are steeped in systemic exclusion, and nothing exists in a vacuum. Ads like these, even when subtle, shape perceptions about worth, power, and perfection. But here’s the problem:
We are being distracted. Again.
As TikTok stitches and Twitter threads pick apart Sidney Sweeney’s thighs, what are we not talking about?
We’re not talking about the rampant gerrymandering unfolding in Texas, where voting maps are being contorted with surgical precision to dilute Black and Latino voices, ensuring that power remains in the hands of the few.
We’re not talking about the dark strategies quietly being laid to rig the 2026 House and Senate elections, with data mining, voter suppression, and AI-driven misinformation campaigns already underway.
We’re not talking about why the Epstein client files, implicating some of the world’s most powerful and protected figures in a decades-long abuse network, still haven’t been fully released to the public. Where’s the national outrage? Where’s the accountability?
Instead, our collective attention span, which now rivals that of a gnat, flits from scandal to scandal, influencer to influencer, as if we’re being trained to forget.
While Sidney Sweeney trends, the president, any president, continues policies that deepen economic inequality, empower corporations over people, and dance around climate collapse with polite speeches and weak regulations. And while we gawk at thigh gaps and slogans, the slow erosion of democracy grinds on, quietly, efficiently, in courtrooms and committee meetings far from the limelight.
This isn’t about defending Sweeney or excusing tone-deaf advertising. It’s about a pattern. One where outrage is manufactured and amplified just long enough to overshadow the systemic rot underneath. Where clickbait wins and critical thought loses. Where aesthetic controversies drown out existential ones.
We need to break the cycle.
Ask yourself: Who benefits when we fight over fashion ads instead of foreign policy? Who gains power when we’re debating the symbolism of denim instead of the disenfranchisement of millions? Who wins when we stay distracted?
It’s not us.
So next time a celebrity controversy flares up, take a breath. Look around. And ask what’s happening in the shadows, because while we’re busy scrolling, the real stories are being buried.