Loins are burning

This DH site ad is the dictionary definition of good to go:

Give me a break - AA and their previous perv owner are purveyors of kiddie porn...
http://la.curbed.com/archives/2007/02/american_appare.php

http://agencyspy.wordpress.com/2007/11/27/tits-ass-and-american-apparels-backlash/

wow, AA makes money off tits and ass. what an outrage! welcome to america.

and all of those girls are over 18.

call the wahmbulance.

also, however it is they treat their cotton before it becomes a t-shirt or dress or leggings or panties or whatever makes it SOFT. sad, I know, but I love my AA stuff. especially since I fail at the real AA.

mr. met wrote: wow, AA makes money off tits and ass. what an outrage! welcome to america.

and all of those girls are over 18.

call the wahmbulance.

Nah, take two Crylenol and call me in the morning.

haha, crylenol is a good one

i'm a dyed-in-the-wool feminist liberal offense-taking machine, but even i can't get very upset about AA.

sweet tea wrote: i'm a dyed-in-the-wool feminist liberal offense-taking machine, but even i can't get very upset about AA.

Their ads are one thing, sure; how about the owners' three sexual-harrassment lawsuits? Or the allegations that he gave his employees vibrators as a Christmas bonus once?

Not that I've got a problem with vibrators (I sing the praises of the Babeland shop opening up, after all), but -- there's such a thing as an employer getting too much into his employee's sex lives, you know?

alafairnadia wrote: also, however it is they treat their cotton before it becomes a t-shirt or dress or leggings or panties or whatever makes it SOFT. sad, I know, but I love my AA stuff. especially since I fail at the real AA.

You are not alone

Hell, I'm wearing one of their leotards right now.

YES, that's right. A Leotard.




With pants and a jacket. And shoes.

queencallipygos wrote: [quote=sweet tea]i'm a dyed-in-the-wool feminist liberal offense-taking machine, but even i can't get very upset about AA.

Their ads are one thing, sure; how about the owners' three sexual-harrassment lawsuits? Or the allegations that he gave his employees vibrators as a Christmas bonus once?

Not that I've got a problem with vibrators (I sing the praises of the Babeland shop opening up, after all), but -- there's such a thing as an employer getting too much into his employee's sex lives, you know?

yeah, dov is a pervy guy, no doubt about it. i don't know the details of those suits (though i'm familiar with the, erm, broad strokes, of what the issues at stake might be), so i can't say exactly what i think of them.

but as a women's rights issue, i think sweatshops are a MUCH bigger deal. (not that my closet is morally pure, but i do really like that aspect of AA.)

Oh, my mistake, I must have accidentally posted on the post-feminist blog.

Next time you all are in Manhattan (if ever) look at the humongous billboard on the southeast corner of Houston and 1st and tell me that's not kiddie porn, by anyone's definition.

AA does so many things right, particularly there labor practices and respect for immigrants, but their ad campaigns sucks IMHO.

hey, i don't particularly like the ads either. (especially the ones with boys in them -- nasty.) but i don't like very many ads, period. after "advertising and the end of the world" (documentary; i think that's the right name), i rather lost my taste for the industry.

but i'm not going to make my own t-shirts, and i'm picking my battles. AA shirts are good quality, american made, not from sweatshops, and they don't cost a fortune. i don't have a ton of them (i wish they made more colors, frankly), but i'm not ashamed of the ones i have.

in fact, i'm more ashamed of almost every non-AA shirt i own, given that they were mostly made overseas (contributing to the loss of textile manufacturing jobs in my home state) under god knows what conditions. or here, under god knows what conditions. i read (somewhere....sorry) an interesting article once about a young woman from SE Asia who had worked in sweatshops in Asia and the US. she said the ones in the US were worse.

how is it kiddie porn if the women in the ads are over 18 and not nude?

and, wow, a CEO is a scumbag! what a shocking development.

Subject: Re: Loins are burning

[quote=Old Time Brooklyn]This DH site ad is the dictionary definition of good to go:


Yes, this is an outrage. I mean, really, how they can get away with...oh, who am I kidding? Yum, yum, yum. Sorry...

In the words of Diamond Dave:

Me: Dave, what's up, man?
DLR: Call me retro, but I'm still hetero!

sweat tea

i'm pretty sure AA has about 25-30 colors available for their tshirts

sweet tea wrote: [quote=queencallipygos][quote=sweet tea]i'm a dyed-in-the-wool feminist liberal offense-taking machine, but even i can't get very upset about AA.

Their ads are one thing, sure; how about the owners' three sexual-harrassment lawsuits? Or the allegations that he gave his employees vibrators as a Christmas bonus once?

Not that I've got a problem with vibrators (I sing the praises of the Babeland shop opening up, after all), but -- there's such a thing as an employer getting too much into his employee's sex lives, you know?

yeah, dov is a pervy guy, no doubt about it. i don't know the details of those suits (though i'm familiar with the, erm, broad strokes, of what the issues at stake might be), so i can't say exactly what i think of them.

but as a women's rights issue, i think sweatshops are a MUCH bigger deal. (not that my closet is morally pure, but i do really like that aspect of AA.)


Mmmmm, I've actually heard they're not quite as great on the sweatshop front either. Better than most, but still not quite within shouting distance of fair labor.

mr. met wrote: sweat tea

i'm pretty sure AA has about 25-30 colors available for their tshirts

yeah, but it's always the same colors, and only 4 or 5 look not bad on me. plus some of their styles are redonk.

queenC -- if you have a link about the labor stuff i'd love to read it.

do they have an ad of two men kinda getting it on? cause that would make me buy more product.

no, just young women who look 15 sticking their asses up in the air so the pervs on Houston St can get their rocks off - that turn you on?

alafairnadia wrote: do they have an ad of two men kinda getting it on? cause that would make me buy more product.

I remember one with a nearly naked young looking guy, but none with two guys of any age getting it on. I'll keep my eyes out though.

Their ads turn me off a bit, but I still prefer them to the alternatives for the reasons listed in this thread. *shrug*

she is not 15!!!! all of those girls look like theyre college-aged...and they are smokin hot.

Livetotravel wrote: no, just young women who look 15 sticking their asses up in the air so the pervs on Houston St can get their rocks off - that turn you on?

Here, this should be more your speed...

sweet tea wrote: queenC -- if you have a link about the labor stuff i'd love to read it.

UNITE wrote them up for union busting in 2003; workers were trying to form a union to address no paid time off and supervisor treatment, amont other things, at an LA plant. But AA employers held an anti-union rally; the National Labor Review Boards got involved, and AA finally reached a no-fault settlement with the NLRB. AA now has a statement agreeing not to conduct anti-union activities in its plant.

Yeah, that was in 2003, but what were they saying about themselves to the public in 2003? Or, is that the only reason why they crow about their conditions now, becuase they got busted for not doing it before?

Food for thought, anyway. A link: http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/2270/

mr. met wrote: she is not 15!!!! all of those girls look like theyre college-aged...and they are smokin hot.

^it's true. quite a few of my college students look YOUNGER than these models, actually.

teenagers on TV are usually played by people in their 20s, which gives a skewed idea of what teenagers actually look like. (awkward and lumpy, in the main. even the ones that are hot later.) as an adult, i now realize why i didn't look like the "teens" i saw on TV and in ads -- bc their bodies look like adult bodies.

also, while the women in these ads are hot (for the most part), they look like real hot people, not like waifs airbrushed within an inch of their lives. i appreciate that.

LOTS of clothing companies use youth and sex to sell products -- dare I say, most of them do. (LL Bean, not so much, i'll grant you.) to me, the AA ads are kind of funny, because they're like "look, you buy from abercrombie, which basically has porn for a catalog, and victoria's secret, which has a few models who really do look like teenagers. so how about some really, greasy, 70s porn? instead of shirtless and hairless abercrombie boys, how about a hairy man's thigh in terry cloth shorts? does THAT make you want a t-shirt?" the imagery is so over-the-top that i actually find it less problematic than subtler campaigns.

the notion that these ads promote sexual assault (to cite a common objection) seems uncomfortably close to the idea that women in tight clothes are "asking for it."

also, while the women in these ads are hot (for the most part), they look like real hot people, not like waifs airbrushed within an inch of their lives. i appreciate that.

i like that, too.

daver wrote: [quote=alafairnadia]do they have an ad of two men kinda getting it on? cause that would make me buy more product.

I remember one with a nearly naked young looking guy, but none with two guys of any age getting it on. I'll keep my eyes out though.

Their ads turn me off a bit, but I still prefer them to the alternatives for the reasons listed in this thread. *shrug*

thank you for keeping an eye out. slashy ads always make me happy. yay me!

i am a big fan of hot women.

More pics?

http://store.americanapparel.net/women-one-pieces.html

the hotness

<----------In honor of this lovely topic.



Caaah is wearing: http://store.americanapparel.net/8373.html#i

cute - but that's pretty damn tame compared to these below - and it isn't the actual age of the "model" it's the age they appear to be. I have a 17-yr-old daughter and every week we talk about exploitative images bombarding young women in this country. And these young models "look" younger then her and she looks her age.

I post these at the acknowledged risk of titillating certain viewers....
http://la.curbed.com/archives/2007/02/american_appare.php

And here's the one on Houston & 1st that I mentioned
http://racked.com/uploads/2007_10_doggie.jpg

and here's the previous billboard on Houston - do you "feminists" out there really approve of this?
http://gothamist.com/attachments/arts_jen/2007_10_wonder.jpg

There's much more - but I already feel like an enabler to the "men" posting here that love these images.