Cherrykitten pulled its 'I Am Jane Doe' merch and apologised after a profiteering backlash

Cherrykitten launched tees, tanks and crop tops printed with "I Am Jane Doe" — the phrase strangers repeated online to shield the anonymous woman suing seven Chi Phi fraternity members over alleged drugging and sexual assault at Cornell in October 2024, allegations the defendants dispute and which have not led to criminal convictions. The brand pledged 5% of net sales from the collection to the National Organization for Women.

Screenshots of the products spread across X on October 5, 2026, and the reaction was immediate: users asked why a clothing brand would commercialise the phrase at all. "Why are we trying to profit off of the rape of another woman. DISGUSTING," one wrote. The 5% pledge became a second controversy — calculated on net sales rather than revenue, critics questioned how much would actually reach NOW, and argued direct donation without products would have been the respectful route.

Cherrykitten removed the designs and issued an apology, acknowledging it had "got this one wrong" and that turning a real and deeply serious situation into a product was not an appropriate way to show support. The apology did not end the criticism: users noted it came only after the backlash, and questioned why the brand had not recognised the slogan's sensitivity before launching.

The whole collection withdrawn, a public apology, and screenshots of 'profiting from rape' criticism circulating on X.

The phrase was created to blur one survivor's identity and invite others to share theirs, so printing it on sellable clothing changed what it meant.

Five percent of net sales looked small against the seriousness of the case and the full retail price of the garments.

The cause-marketing framing collapsed: buyers read the collection as profiting from an alleged assault, not supporting survivors.

The brand appears to have treated the slogan as viral language available for products, not as a living solidarity campaign with owners.

A solidarity slogan belongs to the people who made it; merchandising one — with a token donation — reads as exploitation whatever the intent.

The designs are withdrawn and the apology stands, but the material records users still questioning why the line was launched at all. The Cornell 7 case itself continues, with a criminal investigation reopened, keeping attention — and the slogan's meaning — live.