push-up bikini tops for 7-year-olds: what exactly are they pushing up?

Abercrombie & Fitch and American Apparel have done it again. In the past, Abercrombie & Fitch has come under criticism for T-shirts with racist and sexist sayings, thongs for girls as young as ten, and semi-nude advertisements in their catalogs. In 2005, the Women and Girls association of Pennsylvania led a “girlcott” against sexist T-shirts, which read “Who needs brains when you’ve got these?” and “I had a nightmare I was a brunette.” Abercrombie & Fitch eventually pulled the shirts. Now, Abercrombie & Fitch has decided to sell push-up bikini tops for girls as young as seven (clearly a great idea, since the thongs for ten-year-olds went over so well).

The bikini tops which were originally advertised as “push-up” on the Abercrombie & Fitch website are now just described as “striped bikini,” but the padding is still there. The sad thing is, I can imagine seven-year-old girls getting excited about padded bikinis (since our society teaches us from a very young age that certain body types are enviable, and “pushed up breasts” tend to fall into that category). Abercrombie & Fitch certainly isn’t helping this problem with their padded bikini nightmare.

American Apparel is coming under criticism for its leadership (which has not exactly been leading by example). Dov Charney, the founder, chief executive, and some would say uber-creep of American Apparel, was just sued for supposedly having a sex slave. Yep, that’s right. A sex-slave. In recent years, American Apparel has been condemned for soft-core porn-like advertising (am I sensing a theme here?) and Charney himself has already been sued several times for sexual harassment.

The woman suing, Irene Morales, accused Charney of sexual harassment, a hostile workplace environment, and gender discrimination. She also called Charney a “sexual predator.” According to Morales, she was imprisoned in Charney’s home shortly after beginning to work for him at age seventeen, and was forced to engage in sex acts.

So, now that we’ve established that Abercrombie & Fitch and American Apparel may be sleazy in their marketing and products, and could be damaging to girls and women, what do we do? Do we shrug and figure that most stores we buy from are probably engaged in some sort of behavior we’d rather not hear about and just avoid the padded bikinis and racist T-shirts? Or, do we decide to forgo the overpriced, too-tight, stretchy, American Apparel mini-skirt because the guy who’s selling it may have enslaved a girl our age.

Believe it or not (non-teenage girls reading this), it isn’t the easiest decision to try to girlcott popular stores, especially when all our friends are shopping there. Some of my favorite clothes are from American Apparel, and I still remember how excited I was when I got an Abercrombie & Fitch sweater for my birthday in sixth grade.

I can’t help but wonder what my small action of girlcotting would actually accomplish. I know groups, such as the Women and Girls association of Pennsylvania have used girlcotting to get sexist products pulled from the market, but does the girlcott even have a long term impact? I mean, sure, the Abercrombie & Fitch girlcott of 2005 caused the store to discontinue its line of T-shirts, but here they are again with padded bikinis for seven-year-olds!

I can live without clothes from either of these places and I would do so in a heartbeat, if I thought it would make a real difference. Whether or not a girlcott would be effective, I might feel kind of creeped out wearing the clothes anyway. But, with all the possibility for failure and repeat offenses on the part of the company, is it worth standing alone as all my friends shop at American Apparel, because I’m hoping to change the attitude of one of the many companies out there that doesn’t respect women?

When I first heard about Abercrombie & Fitch and American Apparel, I opened up a word document and titled this blog, “A&F and AA Have Done it Again! Do I hear a Girlcott?”, but as I started to write, I realized that the writer of that blog, while I sometimes wish it was me, just isn’t. The world we live in forces socially conscious girls to make tough decisions and sometimes hollering girlcott is easier said than done.

Originally posted on the website Rachel Simmons: Leadership for Life

hey there, beautiful.

It is not a secret: I am addicted to coffee. There was a time in my life when I was ignorant to the bliss that accompanies those deliciously bitter beans. I was cynical, sarcastic, and tired. Now I am cynical…sarcastic…and a little less tired (read: manic) until I crash! Maybe the effect of coffee on my life is found less in its benefits and more in an unhealthy chemical-dependency-like-addiction. Hm.Either way, I’m in that place in my life where I know every Starbucks barrista in my neighborhood’s name, life story and favorite frappuccino flavor.

So when I heard that a while back there was a pretty significant sexual harassment case against Starbucks involving a teen girl, I was pretty bummed. I actually felt personally let down – that is how unhealthily close my relationship is to this corporate chain. It was along the lines of when I found out what douches the people at American Apparal are (seriously…speaking of sexual harassment…) and I stopped shopping there. Then it occurred to me: now that I’ve stopped shopping at AA I tend to look less like a douchey hipster and more like myself…maybe if I stop drinking Starbucks coffee, I’ll act more like “myself”?

But my personal relationship with Starbucks is not the point.

Kati Moore was 16 when she worked at Starbucks, where her 24 year old supervisor Tim Horton (any Canadians chuckle a little at that one?) would sext her and pursued a sexual relationship with her. This story was apparently part of a 20/20 special about teens in the work place and how they often face sexual harassment based on their lack of working experience, and therefore vulnerability in the work place.

Now, I don’t know the details of this case, and conveniently Starbucks was able to settle with Moore in order to cover up the scandal. But seriously, sexual harassment in the work place (and any place) has to stop.

"Do NOT touch my ass, bitch"

A lot of older feminists have asked me why our generation doesn’t talk about more serious issues, like equal pay for equal work, reaching critical mass in the board room, etc. Well…I usually answer, oh so smoothly…that doesn’t really affect teenagers’ lives. It’s not that it’s not important, it’s just not something we’re thinking about yet.

Well, I guess it’s time to start thinking, because now it directly affects us. Just because we’re teens and just because we’re girls does not mean that older supervisors should get away with sexually harassing us. It is freakin 2010. While sexual harassment should NEVER have been tolerated, even in the era of Mad Men when sexual harassment was basically written into a woman’s contract, we should so be beyond this by now. Currently, 31% of women have been sexually harassed at work. What’s worse is that only 62% took action against their harasser.

This affects us not only now at our after school jobs, but it’s something we should be thinking about for the future. I know that I personally want sexual harassment to be obsolete by the time I’m in the work force – partially because I think me slapping a bitch in the office would probably be seen as unprofessional (you better BELIEVE I would…), but more so because I am confident in the fact that I don’t deserve to be harassed and I don’t have to take it. And that, I think, is the root of this issue. Kati Moore didn’t even take action against this guy – her mom did once she found out, a significant time after the harassment started.

Ladies: we do not have to take sexual harassment. We need to act against it – and be aware of it  - now. We should not feel ashamed (even though people might make you feel that way): we’re not the ones doing anything wrong. I think its been long enough…our generation should not have to put up with that shit.

So if you see me in the back of some independently owned coffee shop whispering sweet nothings into the mouth of my coffee cup, you’ll know why.

The Good

Nikol Hasler

Nikol Hasler from the Midwest Teen Sex Show apparently now writes an advice column for Milwaukee Magazine. I know what you’re thinking: Milwaukee Magazine has an advice column focused on issues of teen sex? MILWAUKEE is the progressive one who recognizes the sexual problems of teenagers, and all people for that matter, as truly important? WTF? Well, not quite. It’s pretty general advice for the most part, but it’s Nikol Hasler, so it’s awesome. Good job, Milwaukee, good job.

Here is one column focused on sex and here is the most recent one about forgetfulness. Archives here.

Also SARAH HASKINS HAS A NEW TARGET WOMEN. yayyayayayayyayay!!!! And apparently it was recently Sarah’s 30th birthday, so happy birthday Sarah!

The Bad

LADY GAGA WHY DO YOU VEX ME SO?

You make a feminist statement (“You see, if I was a guy, and I was sitting her with a cigarette in my hand, grabbing my crotch and talking about how I make music ’cause I love fast cars and fucking girls, you’d call me a rock star. But when I do it in my music and in my videos, because I’m a female, because I make pop music, you’re judgmental, and you say that it is distracting. I’m just a rock star.”) and then follow it up with: “I’m not a feminist – I, I hail men, I love men.”

Yes, feminists are man-haters, OBVIOUSLY. And anyone else feel like she’s trying so hard to be eccentric? That finger-licking thing…?  Via feministing. 

Dov Charney

Dov Charney, founder and CEO of American Apparel and my favorite person in the world EVER, is apparently going through AA employees and firing the ugly ones. Besides this being disgusting for obvious reasons, you’d think that considering Abercrombie and Fitch just recently went through the same ordeal and got slammed with a huge lawsuit for it, Charney would think to himself, “Hey…not this time, Dov, not this time.”

This could be complete bullshit…people do seem to like picking on this guy (for apparently good reasons), but if it is true, it’s just another item on my long list of problems with American Apparel.

The Ugly

An fbomb reader just started a petition entitled “The Daily Mail should fire James Slack.” I think this qualifies for ugly not because of the action (it rocks that she made it) but because of the ugliness of James Slack. 

This guy has written such articles for The Daily Mail as “In the week Harriet Harman takes charge, yet another feminist initiative” a lovely piece on how an initiative to teach kids about domestic violence in school is not a good idea, as it costs too much money, and, my favorite line, “This is despite evidence showing that boys and young men are more than twice as likely to fall victim to violence, and that young women are becoming increasingly aggressive.”

Not to say that men are never abused by women, because they are, but considering Amnesty International has found that one in four women will be a victim of domestic violence in their lifetime, and that one instance of domestic violence is reported to the police every minute, I think that statement is incredibly misleading and not representative of what’s really going on. 

Read more of James Slack’s ugliness, if you dare. 

Thanks to Niamh H for starting this. Please go sign! 

American Apparel's "Legalize Gay" T-shirt

In my nominally liberal suburb of Washington, D.C., the sight of two mommies or daddies and their adorable offspring is not uncommon.  In fact, the suburb adjacent to mine, renowned as a bastion of hippies, boasts one of the highest numbers of lesbian households in the nation.  While pride parades don’t exactly march down the street, HRC Equality bumper stickers are plastered on every other car.  So, my community was fairly shocked when the local American Apparel’s “Legalize Gay” window display was destroyed on Wednesday.

The unknown vandal smashed a window, though nothing was stolen, according to the Washington City Paper.  The Georgetown location of American Apparel also received a threatening phone call.

Now, I have my issues with American Apparel.  Their sexist ad campaigns with half-clothed barely-legal women are blatantly offensive and have come under siege before.  Owner Dov Charney was taken to court on charges of sexual harassment.  And though the $30 t-shirts are nominally made without sweatshops, I wonder how much of that money goes to the women who sew them in downtown LA.

If anything in the local American Apparel is worthy of destruction, it’s the mannequins with chopped-off torsos, which bend over and thrust out their legging-clad rears toward the street in a come-hither position. Don’t even get me started on the naked butt poster in the store window.  Even the store’s supposedly progressive “Legalize Gay” t-shirts have the unfortunate effect of turning a civil rights issue into little more than a fashion statement.

For several months, the outside of American Apparel sported unobtrusive, spot-on (and radical, if it wasn’t added by the store to look more ‘edgy’) graffiti that stated “Welcome to the Gender Box.”  Indeed.

Misguided protesters have smashed local shop windows before, ostensibly to make an anti-consumerist statement.  This incident, however, was good, old-fashioned American homophobia rearing its head.  It goes to show that in this era, at least in Silver Spring, that hating gays is enough to inspire destructive protest against a corporation.  Good old sexist advertising is not.

Over at jezebel they posted about the Urban Outfitter’s Ethics Survey – basically checking whether employees will smoke pot on the job or not, or more accurately, whether or not they can effectively lie. 68 statements that you can either strongly agree-disagree with, and unless you are a complete idiot, you should be hired soon enough. 

With statements like: 

Most employees get high on the job at one time or another.
Smoking a marijuana cigarette is the same as having a drink.
Some people work as well slightly high as they do sober.

what the checklist should be...

They seem a little preoccupied with the marijuana. I’ve been in that store a lot lately. Their concern makes sense, to say the least. I mean, for god’s sake, they’ve sold a shirt with a marijuana leaf on it that says “legalize it” who the hell do they think they’re attracting? 

Why not ask about stealing? Urban Outfitters apparently has a history of stealing small clothing companies’ designs. There’s a blog devoted to it. Urban Counterfeiters. Clever. But still. They have some legit examples. Which makes me pretty sad…I like Urban Outfitters. They fulfill my skinny pant/V-neck needs. 

But I guess I don’t want to support big corporations taking advantage of true individuals. How about anthropologie? They’re Urban Outfitter’s sister company…not as cutting edge/pro-marijuana legalization, but still funky. 

Mary Kate Olsen - the epitome of bohemian chic...and skinny white girl

BUT OH WAIT NOT SO FAST. Anthropolgie has some disgustingly racist tendencies, as relayed by a former employee. Employees are instructed to follow “blac–er, African American” shoppers, as everyone knows they have a higher tendency to shoplift (asfasdfkldjsf). Also, people of color and suspected lesbians are thrown in the back where the shoppers can’t see ‘em. All to support the image Anthro is selling to all the 20-30 year old white women who fancy themselves bohemian chic.

Sweet Jesus.

Then we’ve all heard about Abercrombie’s discrimination lawsuit: hiring less women, latinos, african americans and asian americans than white men, targeting fraternities and sororities for hiring – overall just hiring based on skin color and gender not qualifications.

Abercrombie's employees

Disgustingness I can’t support by buying their clothes. And Abercrombie also encompasses Hollister, so that’s out. Oh yeah, and I sort of feel like I’m either being squeezed to death or encouraged to show thong when I’m wearing their stuff. 

Then there is the feminist’s nightmare that is American Apparel. Made in America, that’s great, right? Well, yes, we are eliminating the element of slave labor, that’s always a plus. But then there are their ads.

I’ve heard “artsy” and “unique” as adjectives applied to AA’s ads, which certainly are different. But I think this quote from an NYU reporter put it best: “Photographs of young women in compromising positions, some as young as 15, are juxtaposed alongside text giving accounts of meeting the models on the street and inviting them to be photographed, conveying the feeling of some sort of perverted conquest.”

come on with this shit

 Then there are the two separate sexual harassment cases against Dov Charney, founder and senior partner, who sounds like a complete and total doucheperv.  Apparently, Charney exposed himself to both women, invited one to masturbate with him and ran business meetings at his house next to naked, and sought to hire young women with whom he could have sex, preferably Asians. When asked about this, Charney said the women were suffering from a “victim culture.” Yeah, because women who are sexually harassed are probably just asking for it. Always. But then he continued, saying, “Out of a thousand sexual harassment claims, how many do you think are exploitative? Women initiate most domestic violence.”

Oh. No. He. Didn’t. And also, they may not employ slave labor, but they’re anti-union. Which makes perfect sense. Not.

Okay, so just to make this clear: Urban Outfitters – plagiarize designs. Anthropologie – racist, possibly homophobic, over all close minded. Abercrombie – discriminators and sexist. American Apparel – pandora’s box of misogynistic ugly. 

SO WHERE AM I SUPPOSED TO SHOP??? 

Well, there’s modcloth, which is always a good option. If you want to get really hardcore, there’s AuH20 or  Outspoken Clothing. Point is — there are always other options. It might be easy to walk into a store that is run by a misogynistic asshole, but it’s also pretty easy to get online and find something unique, not corporate, and KIND TO EVERYONE! Happy hunting, fellow feminists!