Comments on: The Dirtiest American Apparel Ads of All Time

By: J

Wed, 08 Sep 2010 23:38:36 +0000

I avoid American Apparel specifically because their ads are made to look like dodgy porn shoots. Porn has a place, and its place is not everywhere.

By: Dangerous Lilly

Dangerous Lilly — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 21:56:03 +0000

Wow. Where the fuck have I been that suddenly American Apparel = Soft Core Porn Modeling?
The perv side of me says “Let me see Jillian’s puffy nipples again” while the regular side says “can’t we just attempt to sell clothes and not sex? or are the clothes that shitty?”

Also, I’m enraptured at how Jillian was able to do those stripper poses on the office chair with wheels. While in heels, no less. I’d for sure be on my ass faster than anybody could take a good picture.

By: Matt Cornell

Matt Cornell — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 19:41:35 +0000

There’s a difference between porn and pornographic advertising, but few of American Apparel’s defenders will confront this, instead blasting AA’s critics as “anti-sex” feminists or prudes.

But AA’s ads are irksome for another reason too. Look at how the power relationship between the photographer (usually sexist CEO Dov Charney) and the model (often a retail employee) is inscribed in the ads. Hey, here’s Dov in bed with one of his middle managers. Look, here he is tugging at her panties. Here’s another with his thumb prying her mouth open. As photographer, mouthy CEO and frequent offscreen subject of his own ads, Charney constantly reminds us of his sexual access to the woman in the picture.

Most porny advertising tells us “You can fuck this girl.” AA’s ads seem to say “I just fucked this girl.” That’s what makes them creepy.

By: IvanFenn

IvanFenn — Mon, 06 Sep 2010 19:42:33 +0000

As a guy who identifies himself as ‘bi’ I get so confused about American Apparel.Violet, if you read this, I would love to know your opinion about movements like About Face, which was posted on Feminist Frequency in late June…