Charli XCX has stripped down to black lingerie for Playboy's Fall 2026 cover, and the internet has fallen head over heels for it. That warm reception looks odd next to what happened to Sydney Sweeney just days earlier, when she posed naked for a sports betting advert and was accused of sexualising women's sport. Fans have already started asking why one nearly-nude shoot gets called empowering while the other gets torn apart.
Charli's Fall issue interview with her friend Kylie Jenner covers her marriage, what she considers a genuinely sexy photograph, and a 'toxic' trait she happily admits to finding attractive. None of that would usually cause a stir. Instead, the controversy arises from the timing, just days after Sweeney's shoot received backlash from critics and female athletes.
Why Sweeney's Naked Sports Ad Backfired
Sweeney posed naked, or nearly so, for Novig, a sports prediction app in which she holds an equity stake, covering herself with footballs, tennis rackets, and a basketball in a campaign filmed in Australia and female athletes reacted fast.
Olympic swimming champion Ariarne Titmus called the ad infuriating and asked why monetising a woman's body and sexualising women's sport is still acceptable, while British athlete Lucy Davis said plainly that it was time to stop sexualising women in sport.
sydney sweeney reacting to her giant naked ad in times square 😂 pic.twitter.com/EZidXvBOXA
— Mikasa (@mikasa_90s) September 13, 2026
Sweeney defended the campaign as a playful idea meant to focus on sport rather than take away from it. It is also not her first brush with this kind of criticism.
Her American Eagle jeans advert last year drew accusations of eugenics-tinged wordplay and pandering to the male gaze, so this is now the second time in a year that a Sweeney campaign has sparked the exact same argument.
Charli XCX's 'Empowering' Playboy Cover
Charli told Jenner she had wanted to shoot with Playboy for years, describing it as an iconic magazine and saying outright that she loves the logo, the underwear, and full-out sexiness.
She is entering a format that has often been criticised for objectifying women, similar to the concerns raised with Sweeney. However, she presents this decision as her own choice rather than something others imposed on her, which is largely why she is receiving praise.
me for @Playboy pic.twitter.com/4HwIKWGc6h
— Charli (@charli_xcx) September 16, 2026
Aidan Zamiri photographed the shoot, including a shot of Charli on a boat on the Thames, and he has worked with her for years, shaping the visual side of her music. His involvement backs up the idea that this is her own creative vision rather than a magazine simply asking a pop star to pose.
She described a genuinely sexy photograph as one that is raw and a little vulnerable rather than polished, something that shows the truth of a person.
There is also a neat bit of symmetry here, since Charli already has an unreleased B-side called 'Playboy Bunny', which makes the cover feel like an extension of her own work.
Charli XCX for Playboy pic.twitter.com/eDKeIPD5Cj
— JumpTrailers (@JumpTrailers) September 16, 2026
The Double Standard Debate
Not everyone agrees that the authorship argument is a sufficient explanation. One common critique questions why this situation is considered cool and empowering when Sweeney's ad was not viewed the same way. Another comment even suggested that the entire feature has set feminism back a hundred years.
So this is cool and empowering but what Sydney did is wrong?
— Culture Boy (@cucumberthestar) September 16, 2026
Holy shit this just set feminism back 100 years
— Neil Legstrong (@MikeyMeatSweats) September 16, 2026
Set against Sweeney's backlash, Charli's cover makes one thing clear: empowerment isn't about what a woman wears, but who is allowed to sell it, shoot it, and stand in front of it without penalty.
