Topic: american apparel

If You Really Were What You Wear

If You Really Were What You Wear

A thorough but by no means exhaustive look at what where you shop says about you.

American Apparel: you have a rash somewhere on your body right now that you definitely plan on getting checked out, even though you have yet to make a doctor’s appointment.

Lululemon: all of your scarves are infinity scarves. Somehow you are still unhappy.

Anthropologie: you are reading this on a bicycle. You have always been on a bicycle. You don’t know where you’re going and you can’t stop the bicycle, no matter how much you want to. There is a dog in your basket – a dog you have never seen before in your life. It’s raining gently and you’re frightened. More »

Pick Of The Week: All Rompers Everything

Pick Of The Week: All Rompers Everything

How do I love rompers? Let me count the ways. Much like Jennifer, I dislike having to place more than one article of clothing upon my person in the morning. But unlike Jennifer, I love rompers, because I ride a bike around and climb up ladders to rooftops and dance on inappropriate surfaces and occasionally, get drunk and fall over, which are all things it’s better to do in a romper than a dress. Also, they’re versatile and flattering and possibly even sexy, provided you don’t get one that makes you look like a giant baby. Here are ten excellent rompers that I’ve found for you to consider purchasing this summer. More »

Gallery: These American Apparel Ads Were Just Banned In The UK…Do You Find Them Offensive? (NSFW)

Gallery: These American Apparel Ads Were Just Banned In The UK...Do You Find Them Offensive? (NSFW)

The UK’s ban-happy Advertising Standards Authority set its sights on American Apparel today, banning a total of eight ads for being “gratuitous…pornographic and exploitative.” In other words, for being American Apparel ads. “The complainant” also said that the ads “inappropriately sexualised young women,” a statement that the ASA decided they agreed with in regards to eight of nine images the complainant brought to their attention.

Interestingly enough, the ASA also objected to the amateurish quality of the photos, saying that in “the particular context of images which featured nudity and sexually provocative poses, there was a voyeuristic and ‘amateurish’ quality to the images which served to heighten the impression that the ads were exploitative of women and inappropriately sexualised young women.” I’m similarly creeped out by these kinds of images, but is that (very subjective) response enough to warrant censorship? Take a look at them and see what you think. (Note: there are only seven images because out of the eight banned ads, two used the same image.)(NSFW!) More »