Check this out.

Remember the satirical American Apparel ads? (If you don’t know what I’m talking about, see this and this.) Well, here they are along with a few others and some commentary on American Apparel. 

I have to warn you, two of the fake posters have some flat-out porn in them (which I think I can back since it’s there to prove a point), but this site is most definitely worth a look.

Props to reader Matt for the tip.

Bookmark and Share


11 thoughts on “Check this out.

  1. That site’s first post was like a week and half ago. Clearly, it’s not the source of the ads. I’m not a huge American Apparel fan either but facts trump being indignant.


    1. Really, Maggie? How do you know that the person who made the ads didn’t decide to put up a site just a week ago? And besides, who cares? The important part isn’t identifying the specific individual who made the ads. I wanted my readers who care about this issue to see that there are other people making an effort to illustrate American Apparel’s hypocrisy.


  2. You care, remember? That’s why you began your post with “I think we found THE creator…” I’m just saying that the website you linked doesn’t even claim to be the source of the ads which basically means you made the connection up.

    Besides, what’s more likely that the source of dozens of spoof ads suddenly, years later put up a blog with two posts on it or that some random person collected as many as they could find? And by the way, since none of the ads look the same I would guess they prolly came from some sort of contest.


    1. Yeah, but that’s so far from the point that I don’t see why you even mentioned it. The point here is that I’m directing my readers to a set of satirical ads that I think they might be interested in, considering the three posts I wrote on the subject have gotten a lot of attention. But I’ll reword the post so you don’t cry about it anymore.


  3. I made all of these spoofs in late 2005. They could be found wheatpasted outside of AA locations in Los Angeles and posted anonymously to a few websites– primarily advertising and fashion blogs. Happily, one of them went viral a few weeks ago. I’m glad Dov’s interview with the McGill Daily is getting some fresh attention.



  4. American Apparel… is that one of those companies that charges more because there are letters on the pockets, but then, after you wash the shirt (or pants) a few times the threads start to come loose and in about a month where the letters, or sometimes it’s a dude riding a horse or something, anyway, instead of the embroidery you’re left with a hole and from then on you use the shirt for when you have to paint a room or do landscaping or pretty much anything where there’s a good chance you’re going to ruin the shirt anyway?


    1. No, they’re the stupid clothing company that makes overpriced plain t-shirts and leggings to help hipsters create that, “The pinnacle of coolness is to look like an assclown” look.


      1. Oh.

        Well, anyway, most popular clothing designers/companies are in the business of objectifying “models.” It’s how they make money. I just wonder, though, without the objectification of others would there be such a thing as subjectivity, and if so, of what? In other words, can a person survive as an individual subject without an object to behold, compare, contrast and gain insight from, and if so, would not other human beings be the most noble and worthwhile objects to contemplate?


        1. Okay. This was a long time ago, and probably nobody cares anymore, but I can’t help myself…did you seriously just try to make a metaphysical justification for the sexual objectification of women in advertising? Seriously?

          Just an FYI: dressing your thoughts up in ornate, abstract, philosophical language does not lend them any extra validity, particularly if they fail to be coherent in the first place.

          Also, to quote Inigo Montoya, this word, objectification: “I do not think it means what you think it means.”

          And finally, had you clicked on the links Nine Deuce provided in the post, you’d have seen that the objectification of female models is by far the least of Dov Charney’s crimes against women.

          Hmph. Probably no one will ever read this, but I feel a little better having gotten it out.


          1. Dear Aestas,

            I read this.

            In fact I greatly appreciated this.

            And then I checked out your blog.

            All is not in vain, at least not all of the time.

            FYI — yeah, I nth that Dov Charney is a tool. I even have, and have had for some time, an elaborate fantasy about inciting a riot at American Apparel headquarters …
            but then again, everyone there seems to have drank the patriarchy’s Kool Aid and they wouldn’t stir up any revolt if it was offered to them. Blame the patriarchy.

            Meanwhile, AA’s devoted employees blame the latest woman to sue Charney over sexual harassment, saying — bonus points if you’ve guessed it — she’s just a slut.
            Either that or she’s being such a buzzkill prude. And some take the incredibly original libertarian track that at least he doesn’t use sweatshops so why don’t we bitches just suck it up and get on our knees. It depends on which employee you ask.

            I’d link to my sources but it’s all too depressing. Interested parties can Google it.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s