Our buddy Tony Pierce down in LA (who gave us some choice advice when we here in the Mission were dealing with our own American Apparel-related crisis) is grappling with conflicting feelings about the controversial clothing manufacturer:
whenever i see one of their billboards or ads i think what happens when i have little daughters and they see that ad and their friends see that ad and they say daddy can we go to american apparel and buy some of those clothes, those girls look so pretty.
what am i supposed to say to those little angels?
i cant say “you dont see mommy dressing like that do you?” cuz mommy better have some of that tucked away. so now im a hypocrite. in front of my sweethearts.
im so doomed.
Poor Tony! Read on.
 is grappling with conflicting feelings about the controversial clothing manufacturer: whenever i see one of their billboards or ads i think what happens when i have little daughters […]</p>
%5Bvia+%3Ca+href%3D%22http%3A%2F%2Fwww.missionmission.org%2F2011%2F03%2F03%2Famerican-apparel-ads-and-the-hypocrisy-of-parenthood%2F%22%3EMission+Mission%3C%2Fa%3E%5D&clickthru=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.missionmission.org%2F2011%2F03%2F03%2Famerican-apparel-ads-and-the-hypocrisy-of-parenthood%2F){kind=link}
American Apparel Angels Are Awesome.
I don’t see a conflict: people by sex toys and lingerie at stores targeting adults. The issue with American Apparel’s ads is that they target kids, and the imagery appears to many people as borderline child-porn. So the point, I believe, is that American Apparel is inappropriately advertising a totally appropriate set of garments. Context is important, and AA has lost their way.
Their stock price reflects this. On paper they are technically bankrupt, and they have broken their lending covenants. The only reason they haven’t declared bankruptcy is their lenders have allowed them extra time, and Wall Street believe they still have some goodwill in their brand.
Consumers are voting with their wallets, and voting against AA. Which leads me into my final rant: blocking AA from the Mission was a truly sad move by our community. It shows the weakness of so many retailers, and their inability to create healthy business models. By resorting to protectionary measures we help nobody. AA would have created jobs and improved the Valencia economic scene. Competition strengths retailers and improves products and services for consumers. I love the Mission, but this whole situation made me sad and angry, and showed that we don’t value progress, jobs or competition.
Thank you Contextualizer. It made me so happy to see AA doing poorly. Their titillating ads appeal to the masses of asses. Shit like this makes me like Justin Bieber. That fool is wholesome as fuck.
Personally I’ve always liked sluts on heroin.
a male friend of mine was an underwear model for them years back. after seeing his pasty hairy body staring at me every time I walked in the store, I can handle anything they send my way.
On a seperate note, I think AA’s business problems are due more to Dov Charney openly being a complete scumbag than their advertising choices.
@ Contextualizer
AA has plenty of “penetration” in the neighborhood in the form of t-shirts which are sold by many mission retailers. Honestly, what does this have to do with capitalist competition? AA is both a retailer and part of the supply chain. It seems like they have a pretty good advantage. The don’t even need an AA retail store on Valencia to make revenue from the area. You have a valid point with regards to jobs but it sounds like AA will probably have to close some stores anyways. Finally, moving AA onto Valencia might have driven up the rent which may make more stores close. So the jobs gain might have been negated. I appreciate where you are coming from but you blanket “competition” statements are seemingly out of place here.