Pornographication of the garment industry
I hate American Apparel.
Not just because its no-label label is bogus and not simply because its
products are cheap. No primarily because I am a prude.
Now don’t get me wrong I appreciate the human form, male or female,
clothed or nude, but I have some political and esthetic limits and AA
goes beyond them. Every ad I see on Queen West and College and every ugly
word that falls from owner Dov Charney’s lips furthers my conviction
that AA is detrimental to women’s sexuality.
Maybe I am a fuddy-duddy, but I’m not alone.
From Now:
But not all observers are so supportive.
Media Watch founder Ann Simonton says it might be time for a boycott.
"This is beyond 'sex sells.' It goes to a level of humiliation."
In fact, she says the ads stem from the same branch of reality porn as
"humilitainment," the kind that stages drive-by gang rapes but
tries to make them look real.
Dov thinks it’s old-fashioned thinking that makes people hate the
ads and his company. I don’t think it’s old fashioned to respect
people and sex.
AA ads are shot, sometimes by Dov himself, to look like warehouse sex
photos. And Dov admits
he sometime has sex with the models who are often staff of his stores.
“It has happened, and it's potentially possible that I'd fall in
love with models, as they've fallen in love with me. People fall in love.
That is possible. It could happen between you and me."
Dov says these are consensual sexual relationships, But how is it consensual
when one partner has control over the other’s livelihood. It isn’t
illegal but it crosses an ethical line. If we personally knew someone
who was sleeping with their staff we would think it was dodgy no matter
how liberated we are.
AA and its ads make a mockery of the fun and liberation associated with
healthy sexuality. The company further insults women by telling them they
are behind the times if they don’t like it.
Yeah, way to liberate those girls, American Apparel.