American Apparel Mannequins now with Pubes

American Apparel have apparently forgotten that the point of mannequins is to show off the clothing, as they’ve recently decided that their mannequins need to be the part people focus on. So they’ve slapped pubes on them.

We’ve been seeing far too much lately in the news about pubes, since Cameron Diaz has started speaking out in their favour, which happens to be medically better for you. American Apparel are clearly fronting up the other side of this argument. Their mannequins clad in unnecessarily high cutaway underwear look ridiculous, let’s be honest. With the fake pubic hair sticking out either side of the see-through panties, they appear to be sending the message very clearly that pubes are ridiculous and you should get rid.

But personal preferences about crotch fur aside, should mannequins really have pubes? No. Mannequins do not look like people; that’s not what they’re there for. What’s next? Fully anatomically correct mannequins with genitalia? Nipples on the mannequins? Oh wait, American Apparel have done nipples too. Because that’s necessary.

Whether you’re a pube fan or not, you aren’t allowed to get them out in public; there are rules. Same goes for nipples (ladies). So why is it okay for American Apparel to have them on a mannequin? It’s not. This is carving a dangerous path. If mannequins are allowed nipples and pubic hair on show, who’s to say it won’t be models in posters next? At the moment, Ann Summers models have any errant nipples airbrushed out of photos, and whilst that looks bloody weird, it’s much better than the alternative that kids can see as they walk past.

Ari Carrington

No comments:

Post a Comment