2/01/2014

American Apparel's Hairy Situation

This article comes in a couple of weeks late, but I thought I'd write it anyway, because I can.


There was a lot of talk about American Apparel's unveiling of mannequins that feature prominent pubic hair. The reactions seemed to be divided between revulsion (how dare they show a woman with pubic hair, hair does not belong on a woman!) or celebration (they've broken the taboo! Finally, real women!). My reaction was f*ck that brand. American Apparel's stunt had nothing to do with women's natural body hair, or natural body in general. It was purely for shock value.

  • There is no underarm hair.
  • The usage of the cat eye glasses and hairstyle suggests that it is reflecting a stereotype/trend as opposed to  simply naturally occurring hair.
  • The mannequins are still confined to the body standards of the fashion industry.

American Apparel has zero interest in fairly representing women. They have a history of sexist marketing, and ads built around sex, even to sell socks.

Furthermore, I don't respect this brand at all due to the fact that their entire premise is that it is "Made in USA", with prices far above the norm, which is a reflection of what the West thinks of foreign work- When it is made in the US, you pay top dollar, when it is made in Indonesia, Mexico, or anywhere else in the world where corporations have no problem exploiting workers, the prices drop considerably.

Again, f*ck that brand, and every other like it. I leave you with this photo of myself not giving a gosh darn about a narrative where women's body hair is a trend.

No comments:

Post a Comment