22. November 2005 • David Boyle
Email this article
I was walking in front of the “American Apparel” clothing store on Liberty tonight and saw that they now have some TV’s in the window, playing mostly G-rated fare but also showing some of their ads, including one with an immense expanse of woman’s thigh etc., as per their “provocative” and scanty-clad ads which plaster the inside of their store. Is this all a good thing, for women or anyone else?
There are larger problems in the world, but still. With the Britney Spears-Kevin Federline(-Shar Jackson) mess, and the white phosphorus bombing of Fallujah scandal, it almost seems like the culture is becoming a whorehouse domestically and a slaughterhouse internationally. Hm. Bad combo of ‘houses.
Or not. Have some cawfee. Tawk. If you like. Ann Arbor awaits your attitude.
« Previous Article Fire at State and Stimson
Next Article AATA considering express service to Canton Twp. »
|
There should be new paragraphs starting after ”...anyone else” and ”...of ‘houses”. Sorry bout dat.
—David Boyle Nov. 22 '05 - 01:07AM #
—Brandon Nov. 22 '05 - 01:20AM #
I don’t have time to Google it, but the Am Apparel founder is being accused of massive sexual harassment of employees, I recall…
—David Boyle Nov. 22 '05 - 02:14AM #
—Dale Nov. 22 '05 - 03:02AM #
American Apparel has had its harassment issues in the past; see my post from when the store here opened for more details.
—Murph. Nov. 22 '05 - 03:24AM #
—Murph! Maybe I was subconsciously channeling your old diary all along! Should have attributed etc., had I remembered. Sorry!
—David Boyle Nov. 22 '05 - 03:43AM #
—Juliew Nov. 22 '05 - 11:20PM #
—eston Nov. 23 '05 - 05:08AM #
Yeah, that’s the output my moral calculus gave too. Which is why I do buy AmApp stuff, but buy it at Sam’s. (Though I think Sam’s prices on AmApp have gone up since the dedicated store with higher prices went in…)
—Murph Nov. 23 '05 - 02:44PM #
—js Nov. 24 '05 - 02:10AM #
Thank you Colonel Sanders. :D
—David Boyle Nov. 24 '05 - 02:53AM #
mike s
—mike s Nov. 25 '05 - 07:14AM #
—Anneka G. Nov. 25 '05 - 04:12PM #
—Dale Nov. 25 '05 - 04:37PM #
On one hand the CEO Dov Charney is a sexist pig and there are several accusations of sexual harassment at the AA headquarters (which is also the factory). That, coupled with his refusal to allow the employees to unionize have led some activists to regard American Apparel as “sweatshop labor.”
I can certainly sympathize with that position, but on the other hand, American Apparel is for more ethical than the average corporate brand. When we went looking for apparel vendors, we found that most brands offered nothing whatsoever to indicate that their Third World factories were not sweatshops. Which suggests that they are sweatshops.
American Apparel might not have ideal working conditions, but they are far better than the brands that pay children 10 cents an hour for sixteen-hour days.
We have three ways of verifying whether a company is operating a sweatshop:
-If it’s made in the U.S.A., it’s good enough (even minimum wage in the U.S.A. is still better than Third-World conditions)
-If it’s made by a unionized company, it’s OK.
-If it’s made by a company approved by the Workers’ Rights Consortium (WRC) it’s OK. The WRC is reliable, unlike the Fair Labor Association which is a charade.
I recall having a potential T-shirt vendor on the phone, and when I asked if his tees met these qualifications, and he gave a sigh and explained that it’s impossible to compete paying the extra cost of workers’ rights. This seems to be the prevailing attitude in the apparel industry.
So, while American Apparel is far from ideal, it’s also far from the worst conditions. Plus it’s an excellent product, and very popular. Many of our printed tees come from companies that use their shirts. They’re wholesale rates are so good we can sell their stuff at half the price they do at their store and still make good profit.
There are better companies like No Sweat and Carhartt (which we also carry—both are 100% union-made), but neither one fills American Apparel’s market niche.
So, I’m pretty ambivalent to their corporate policies, but they’ve at least passed the bar for being eligible for sale at our store.
—Adam de Angeli Nov. 26 '05 - 06:52PM #
It is publicizing it, but I said it wasn’t publicized much. By that I meant that the store here doesn’t make it readily known, which is too bad for them because it’s a good selling point.
—Anneka G. Nov. 30 '05 - 02:59AM #