American Apparel & Boba Tea Co. (Albuquerque: hoa, showing, rental)

[rybert]

Originally Posted by catrinac

You actually think that the Limited, the Gap, Old Navy, Express, Target, Aeropostale, Wet Seal, Forever 21, Victoria's Secret etc. use full-blown soft core porn to market their merchandise? Do you have any proof of this? It is a well known fact that American Apparel uses sexual images, not just sexy but actually borderline pornographic, to sell their merchandise. Their entire marketing campaign is deeply offensive.

Nice and sleazy | Life and style | The Guardian
Porn Stars In My Underwear / There's sexy advertising, and then there's hiring hot porn starlets to sell tube socks
American Apparel: Clean up your act! - Forum - The Pioneer Log

I was simply saying that SEX sells and that there are many other merchants that use SEX in other ways to sell their product. I would say that Victoria's Secret ventures into the softcore porn arena, along with A&F.

[catrinac]

Okay this may be somewhat true but the difference between American Apparel, Victoria's Secret and A&F is that AA is so brazen that it actually uses pictures of females who are braless wearing thin see-through t-shirts in poses that are explicit. I picked up the American Apparel catalog the other day when at the store (I wandered in to see if it was a nice place, which it wasn't) and had to throw it out it was so shocking.

Originally Posted by rybert

I was simply saying that SEX sells and that there are many other merchants that use SEX in other ways to sell their product. I would say that Victoria's Secret ventures into the softcore porn arena, along with A&F.

[ABQConvict]

OK, I checked out their catalog and have to say that while it does seem a bit more risque than say, a Sears catalog, to call it soft porn is an exaggeration. It definitely contained some sensual images but that is not the same thing as sexually exploitive. As far as the near-nudity (see through t-shirt), I guess some people see the body as a shameful curse from God. Then again I spent the summers of my youth on a Norwegian fjord where entire families would sunbathe, swim, fish and grill moose steaks in the nude. Good Lutheran families :-)

The 'dirtiest' thing in the catalog in my opinion was the expression on one of the model's faces. She must really like tube socks!

ABQConvict

[stingraynm]

Originally Posted by ABQConvict

OK, I checked out their catalog and have to say that while it does seem a bit more risque than say, a Sears catalog, to call it soft porn is an exaggeration. It definitely contained some sensual images but that is not the same thing as sexually exploitive. As far as the near-nudity (see through t-shirt), I guess some people see the body as a shameful curse from God. Then again I spent the summers of my youth on a Norwegian fjord where entire families would sunbathe, swim, fish and grill moose steaks in the nude. Good Lutheran families :-)

The 'dirtiest' thing in the catalog in my opinion was the expression on one of the model's faces. She must really like tube socks!

ABQConvict

Yeah, while I believe there are good things to be said for innocence, there are also bad things to be said for "forbidden fruit". In the nature of how sexuality is handled, I'd say the U.S. could take some lessons from some Western European countries (Norway among them). You know you've got some cultural issues when it's easier to rent a movie containing sadistic violence than it is to rent a movie containing explicit mutual pleasure. Also, most European sex scenes are much more real and much less awkwardly absurd than most U.S. sex scenes.

I'd personally argue that cultural prohibition on mutual sensuality actually only goes to serve the hard-core porn industries as well as sadistic violent crime. Many older countries have had time to realize that dominance is no virtue and reciprocation is much more sound to self-preservation, and their childrens' media exposure reflects this in putting sexuality as more appropriate than violence. Our culture in many ways owes itself to dominance and suppression of outside cultures and sexuality, and is now looking at a global century ahead where that mentality is bound to leave us behind economically and socially.

Much of the world is in better shape at the close of the 20th Century since it took a lesson from our way of life, culture, politics, and economics. However, we're still stuck on the ethnocentric idea that we're perfect, and a lot of their differences from us are already pushing them ahead now that they're applying some lessons learned from us. The main differences would be their more reciprocal and open views toward worldwide social, political, and economic developments.

In a funny way, sexually and violently explicit material reflect this on a very individual front. Ironically, you are much more likely to find rape in a sexually repressed culture than a sexually aware culture. I'm not arguing direct causation because there are always plenty of exceptions to that, but the overall frequency and skew in the correlation is possibly quite telling.

[catrinac]

That the U.S. is somehow repressed and this accounts for the sadistic violence and sexual expression in the media is a bunch of bull. This does not in any way excuse the use of soft core porn to advertise clothes. In my opinion American Apparel represents the steady decline in moral values. People would be shocked and upset if pictures of braless females in thin t-shirts were displayed with their fingers in their mouth and in overtly sexual poses all over the Banana Republic, Gap, Old Navy, J. Crew, Forever 21, Aeropostale, Limited, or Express (which has started to use some of these types of images which hasn't increased their sales or image one bit) That American Apparel relies on these types of tactics to sell clothes is sending a terrible message to the younger generation who will be warped because of it. American Apparel is not a step up for Albuquerque. It's a tawdry noveauish type store that ought to be put out of business.

[stingraynm]

Originally Posted by catrinac

That the U.S. is somehow repressed and this accounts for the sadistic violence and sexual expression in the media is a bunch of bull. This does not in any way excuse the use of soft core porn to advertise clothes. In my opinion American Apparel represents the steady decline in moral values. People would be shocked and upset if pictures of braless females in thin t-shirts were displayed with their fingers in their mouth and in overtly sexual poses all over the Banana Republic, Gap, Old Navy, J. Crew, Forever 21, Aeropostale, Limited, or Express (which has started to use some of these types of images which hasn't increased their sales or image one bit) That American Apparel relies on these types of tactics to sell clothes is sending a terrible message to the younger generation who will be warped because of it. American Apparel is not a step up for Albuquerque. It's a tawdry noveauish type store that ought to be put out of business.

Well, you can take a differing opinion, but in the absence of any argument to counter that theory, you can't call it b.s. You can believe it's b.s. on the ideological front, but keep that irritation to yourself please. I'm trying to engage a reasonable discussion, not incite an ideological debate. Ideological bias wastes so much time and money, I'd like to at least get beyond it in my own mind, even though I don't control Congress and public/private interest funds.

All in all, I'd say between violence and sex, I'm a lot more offended by violence. The only offensive thing I find in sexually explicit material is the warping of young and impressionable minds that can distort their taste and ultimately detract from the ability to enjoy genuine relationships and affection. I'm just hoping to help spread the idea that there are bigger fish to fry than sexually explicit images. I'm not trying to tell you what you can and can't be offended by, but I'd like to know why that's so offensive and taboo in some factions of our society while violence qualifies as entertainment and reasonable politics.

[ABQConvict]

If American Apparel's R-rated marketing is indeed offensive to the majority of Americans, they will go out of business due to market forces and their marketing campaign will be moot.

Let us consider a more PG version. Picture a selection of everyday All-American models wearing chaste clothing (they may have to layer up considering the salacious attire being peddled) carrying assault weapons and samurai swords; their foolish GAP and Banana Republic-wearing foes laying vanquished in pools of blood and piles of vicera by the righteous might of American Apparel!

That would hopefully prevent anyone from becoming shamefully aroused and it would not violate any American standards of decency. ;-)

ABQConvict

P.S. I am boycotting Banana Republic because they romaticize countries that engage in the production of narcotics and narco-trafficking. Some of these countries produce terrorists as well. I am also boycotting the GAP because gaps should not be encouraged. I once got my foot caught in one and it hurt.

[GregW]

The time has long past since I could fit in any of this stuff. LLBean stores are more my liking.

[stingraynm]

Originally Posted by ABQConvict

If American Apparel's R-rated marketing is indeed offensive to the majority of Americans, they will go out of business due to market forces and their marketing campaign will be moot.

Let us consider a more PG version. Picture a selection of everyday All-American models wearing chaste clothing (they may have to layer up considering the salacious attire being peddled) carrying assault weapons and samurai swords; their foolish GAP and Banana Republic-wearing foes laying vanquished in pools of blood and piles of vicera by the righteous might of American Apparel!

That would hopefully prevent anyone from becoming shamefully aroused and it would not violate any American standards of decency. ;-)

ABQConvict

P.S. I am boycotting Banana Republic because they romaticize countries that engage in the production of narcotics and narco-trafficking. Some of these countries produce terrorists as well. I am also boycotting the GAP because gaps should not be encouraged. I once got my foot caught in one and it hurt.

Nice amusing take... CTS (chuckles to self)... despite my offense at violence, I have kept enough of my morbidly violent humor for violence that is portrayed outside of real life. I like the 'gunning down the competition' idea. I'd like to see stricter punishment for violent crime and exploitation, and less limitations on innocent portrayals that sway no one other than those who would be swayed regardless.

Also, your initial statement actually does clarify a lot. You're correct that much of our successful cultural/media trends make it apparent that censorship is not an American cultural phenomenon, but more just factions who are trying to censor aspects of American culture (some of whom are quite influential)... something I hadn't thought to clarify, so thanks. That's good for me to note amidst future diatribes on this topic. Luckily, the all-too-easily offended types on the left and the right are slowly losing political sway due to the fact that it is a waste of time/thought and the majority of us would move somewhere else if we didn't like freedom of expression. There are plenty of Islamic theocracies and right-wing totalitarian regimes to choose from, after all.

I'm glad we have the likes of Hugh Hefner and Carlos Mencia in our society and therefore our culture. It sure does beat sadistic despots, bloodthirsty militants, and random death-inducing martyrs. Now if we could just convince the war machine to let us keep some funding on non-contrived domestic issues.

[GregW]

That on line catalog is tame compared to what can be seen walking around downtown Boston in the summer. I think even the prudish should consider the images as art appreciation.