NP Rank:
American Apparel accused of promoting rape
Through a variety of means -- Vice Magazine, Vice Records and, most recently, their web channel VBS.tv -- the company has successfully imprinted this vision upon millions of impressionable young and old minds, and one of their greatest aesthetic and, dare I say, philosophical proponents of this Vicestyle lifeview of the world has been Dov Charney, CEO and founder of American Apparel.
American Apparel's provocatively pornographic ad campaigns have proven to be a perfect fit with Vice's visual style and the ads continue to occupy the prominent back cover of each issue of Vice magazine.
Dov Charney and his company are no strangers to controversy but a recent American Apparel billboard ad in Manhattan proved to be too much for local residents, who not only issued numerous complaints about the ads -- they also tagged the billboard with graffiti that stated: "GEE, I WONDER WHY WOMEN GET RAPED".
Once you've seen the image, you'll understand why.
Needless to say, there has been a firestorm of controversy surrounding the ad -- which has thankfully been removed due, in part, to the direct connection the graffiti message makes between the sexualized image American Apparel claims to be selling and the sexualized violence that they quite literally appear to promote.
How far is too far? Should we buy or boycott American Apparel?
American Apparel Ads: Sexy Or Sexist?"The giant billboard ad for American Apparel on Houston Street in NYC--of a woman wearing only tights, bent over, legs spread--was defaced this week when someone spray painted "Gee, I wonder why women get raped?" Initially we were all, "Misogyny!" But after further consideration, and noticing that this graffiti actually has correct punctuation and everything, we were wondering if this wasn't a social commentary. American Apparel immediately replaced the ad with a different one, featuring a model who is actually wearing a top. But no matter what A.A. puts in that space, it's always attention grabbing, and pushes the envelope. Alex Goldberg and I hung out in front of it and asked passersby what they thought of the campaign, and why they think women get raped." (Includes VIDEO footage)
I love you, American Apparel. I love your scoop-neck tank tops, your $26 tube dresses, your socks—even your metallic leggings. I love that when I walk through your neon lights and bright white walls I feel as if I'm in a Terry Richardson photo shoot, and that your employees—all clad in tube socks and aviator glasses—stare back at me, vacuous and wide-eyed. I love that I can wear your clothing to work out in the morning, to the office during the day, out for dinner at night and back to bed—no shower necessary.But somehow, sweet American Apparel, you make me question you, time and time again. I get it: you're edgy, you're hot, no one can resist you. But it seems as though everywhere I turn I see you objectifying girls just like me—except that they're half-naked, in compromising positions. You photograph them on the floor in nothing but a thong, hands down their pants. And I can't decide if I should slap you for exploiting them, or congratulate you for such an innovative ad campaign.
I really got to thinking about our relationship last week, after an anonymous tagger spray-painted the enormous billboard that sits near my apartment in downtown Manhattan. It was hard to miss: a young-looking girl, shirtless but in tights, bent over with her legs spread, dark hair spilling down her back. Even harder to miss when somebody had written, "GEE, I WONDER WHY WOMEN GET RAPED" across the front of it. Offensive? Maybe. But perhaps clever, too. A woman never asks for rape, but some would say that flaunting a model in such a vulnerable position could feed into that sordid interpretation. "It's basically like, 'Here's my a--, f--- me'," if you want to be as blunt as possible, says Steve Hall, the creator of Adrants, an advertising blog.
The debate over American Apparel advertising is not a new one, of course. The company made a name for itself largely on its amateur-porn-style ads full of crotch shots, sweat stains and bikini rashes. (One ad I remember even encouraged shoppers to Google the model, only to find out she was a rising Canadian porn star.) On its Web site the company states up front its reputation for "provocative photography"—in addition to comfortable clothing—and the company's founder, Dov Charney, is in effect the Ron Jeremy of the T-shirt world. (Charney takes the company's characteristic snapshots in various states of undress himself, he once exposed himself to a reporter from Jane, and he has had more than one former employee file a sexual harassment lawsuit against him.)
But some think that style—which uses real people for models, not professionals—is brilliant. After all, sex sells. A recent posting on the company's Web site called for new models, "particularly ones with great, how do we put this … assets." (American Apparel was restricted from commenting for this article because it's in the process of going public, but an associate said that while a good portion of Charney's models are employees, the others are amateurs who send in photos. Ninety percent of them are in their 20s, and on the few occasions they have shot minors, they've done so with parental consent.)
Still others find the ads completely opposed to the company's "socially responsible" sweatshop-free image. (American Apparel workers produce the threads in a single factory in downtown Los Angeles, where workers are paid an average of $12.50 an hour and are offered subsidized meals, health care and free English classes for those who are Spanish speakers.) "I find it quite ironic that a company that so heavily markets itself as being 'socially responsible' is quick to perpetuate the sexual subordination of young women—airbrushed or not," says Sara Sheridan-McAndrew, a gender and social policy master's student at the London School of Economics. "They are sending the message that social responsibility is about money alone—as long as you pay the women inside the factory a legal wage you're absolved from exploiting them in other ways."
Billboards: We See Through American Apparel's Latest AdLiterally. Stare too hard and you might go cross eyed or something. This sexed-up shot is quite a departure from the non-controversial image of men and women wearing shorts that American Apparel was advertising not too long ago. The sleaze is officially back. It'll be hard to top this image—we can't wait to see what Dov Charney's going to put up on Allen and Houston next.
American Apparel Raped (Flickr Photostream)
"Many of us on the Lower East Side and East Village are very opposed
and irritated to put it mildly, that we have to stare at this new 50
foot billboard every morning and night...This billboard is too much
damn much. Many of us have emailed them, and have been told they will
discuss it. But enough is enough."
American Apparel's Lower East Side Billboard Saga: Neighbors TriumphantWell, the neighbors finally got fed up. This week, after someone defaced American Apparel's now infamous billboard at Allen and Houston Streets, the T-shirt chain has finally removed and replaced it with a marginally less offensive one.
Just in from The East Village
"I wrote to American apparel regarding this billboard at first had promising communications with them. The Director of Communications writes:
“Seeing the size of the billboard and its location within the community, we will look into this further so we may in future take into consideration displaying different imagery that would not be so boldly provocative on such a large scale, but still be in keeping with the aesthetic of our brand. Thank you for taking the time to inform us of the impact that this billboard has had on the immediate community."
[q
url="http://www.pollsb.com/polls/poll/3290/american-apparel-billboard-in-nyc-was-spray-painted-gee-i-wonder-why-women-get-raped-then-replaced-by-aa-with-a-different-one"]
American Apparel billboard in NYC was spray painted "Gee, I wonder why
women get raped?", then replaced by AA with a different one [/q]
Just days after The Ass That Launched a Thousand Ships got splashed, American Apparel rolls out the latest in its ongoing subtlety-is-everything billboard campaign on the corner of Allen and Houston Streets on the Lower East Side. Delightful!
Most Recommended Comment
Crowd Power
-
Jarrett Martineau
Vancouver, Canada -
Andrew Mundy
Fort Walton Beach, Florida, United States -
iwantchai
Los Angeles, California, United States -
fleshandbones
Atlanta, Georgia, United States -
Australian Rozie
Australia
Recommendations (23)

Anonymous users (6)














Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (10)
at 14:53 on November 26th, 2007
Jarrett Martineau, bound to be controversial, but very good stuff indeed!
at 15:30 on November 26th, 2007
Jarrett Martineau, thanks for posting this. I'd consider adding the Opinions tag here, as you're expressing your feelings about the ad in the intro. I'm sure you have many on your side, however.
I'm not really sure how I feel. The ad is overt and certainly as a billboard it's ridiculous. But are ads responsible for rape, however indirectly? The line is blurry, as it is with many of these "art"-to-action connections. I don't know where I stand, but I do know that I don't know anyone who just wears the tights like that.
Has Dov, with his outsized persona and the previous accusations of sexual assault, made it so he can't do anything a bit out of line without the connection drawn? Should we take the man out of the equation?
This has me thinking, which is, I suppose, the point. Good stuff.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
Jarrett Martineauat 16:11 on November 26th, 2007
Thanks Kaitlin, I certainly didn't mean to suggest a definitive, or absolute, connection between 'art' and action in this case -- I agree that it is a difficult and tenuous connection to make.
That said, I did (and do) want to express my disgust with Charney/AA's ongoing use of sexually exploitive advertising while claiming, simultaneously, to be some kind of socially-concious company that is interested in finding "new ways of exploiting human potential rather than exploiting human beings".
I'll take your suggestion and add an Opinions tag to the piece.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
Rob Petersat 16:23 on November 26th, 2007
Dov Charney is creepy and weird.
at 07:26 on November 27th, 2007
Yes...Dov Charney is completely bizarre.
at 09:18 on November 27th, 2007
I don't think people can pin this all on AA and this Dov Charney--the objectification of women in society. Be that as it may, I make no excuses for him and his company. I'll bet that he is laughing all the way to the bank, though.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
Jarrett Martineauat 09:58 on November 27th, 2007
Agreed - all the way to the bank, to the tune of almost $100 million in the first half of this year alone:
"American Apparel’s retail sales for the first two quarters of 2007 were
$90.8 million, an increase of 55% over the $58.7 million of sales in
the comparable period for 2006." -- http://tinyurl.com/2nlex9
at 10:12 on November 27th, 2007
And then there is Dove who is ostensibly trying to decontruct the beauty industry and promote self esteem. There are already several parodies out there which accuse the company of hypocrisy given their relation to products like AXE.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
Jillian P (not verified)at 10:07 on July 17th, 2008
American Apparel.... Sexy or Sexist?
Perhaps the ads are sexist, however insinuating that sexuality is reason for rape is absolutely disgusting. People who reveal their sexuality, no matter to what extent, should never be responsible for the actions of the unfortunate and sick minds of others. This is not to say that there are consequences for such displays, but "Gee, I wonder why women get raped?" I'll answer that: it is not because women display their sexuality, it is because people are twisted, hateful and cruel.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
Lyst (not verified)at 21:22 on June 30th, 2009
Women should be able to express whatever they want to whether it be sexy or plain jane. For someone to accuse a billboard image or ad or video game as the cause of why humans do certain acts is absurd. After spending time in Europe , where sexuality and nude figures of men and women are splashed in their mainstream magazines, like Vogue and implied nude figures are shown at peak "prime time hours" most of their countries have a considerably low case of rape the same with alcohol abuse, it is shown and accepted. We americans are so hardwired to think that the human body and sexy images are so bad that like alcohol, we are forbidden to have or see it and when we can actually obtain it we go crazy, hence high alcoholism rates and teen pregnancy.
Back on the topic, Rape has nothing to do with sex, it is the dominace or power over another person. there are many cases actually probably most, where the victim was not dressed in a sexy manner or plain not sexy at all, It is the case of sick and twisted males, and yes females, who decide they are going to show they are more dominate than the victim regardless of who it is or their apparel. People are always trying to find a scapegoat for their ill will. Sex is here to stay and the ads are going to continue to push the envelope. It sell. The more the extreme conservatives complain, the more sales will boom out of the water. there evidently are more who like these ads than those who don't hence AA hasn't gone bankrupt or lost sales. You need to look no further than the Porn industry who made over 18 billion dollars in the U.S. alone. I am sure that it is more than the same 18 people buying a billion dollars worth each by themselves. Relax. Take a deep breath and overt your eyes and keep it moving, and think the next time you want to blame an ad or a womans right to show her sexiness when ever she feels, cause women could go back to wearing petticoats or wearing burkas like they do in some of the middle eastern countries.