Beginning in the mid-2000s, Dov Charney faced at least five lawsuits and numerous allegations involving sexual harassment, sexual assault, racist remarks, and abusive conduct toward employees, including workers reported to be as young as 17. The controversy was inseparable from American Apparel’s marketing culture: Charney frequently chose models from local shops and hangouts, photographed advertisements himself, and promoted campaigns that rejected conventional airbrushing while often placing young women in sexually provocative situations. Charney publicly denied the allegations, accused opposing lawyers of extortion, and said he saw no inherent problem with pursuing employees sexually. Many claims were complicated by employment agreements requiring disputes to proceed through internal arbitration and restricting lawsuits against Charney or the company from reaching public courts. One of the most notorious episodes came in 2004, when Jane magazine writer Claudine Ko published an account saying Charney masturbated in front of her during an interview. Ko later argued that the encounter had been misinterpreted and resisted portraying herself solely as a powerless victim, writing that both she and Charney had been used by the publicity surrounding the story. The episode remains significant not because it established a criminal conviction—it did not—but because it exposed the blurred boundaries between provocative advertising, celebrity-founder behavior, workplace power, and consent in the fashion industry. The accumulated allegations eventually became central to the board’s justification for removing Charney in 2014, permanently changing the public image of the once-celebrated “Made in the USA” brand.
Preparing the daily feature…
AI concept artworkArchive Record · 2000s
The American Apparel Lawsuits and the Founder’s Sexualized Workplace
Dov Charney / American Apparel / 2000s
Beginning in the mid-2000s, Dov Charney faced at least five lawsuits and numerous allegations involving sexual harassment, sexual assault, racist remarks, and abusive conduct toward employees, including workers reported to be as young as 17. The controversy was inseparable from American Apparel’s marketing culture: Charney frequently chose models from local shops and hangouts, photographed advertisements himself, and promoted campaigns that rejected conventional airbrushing while often placing young women in sexually provocative situations. Charney publicly denied the allegations, accused opposing lawyers of extortion, and said he saw no inherent problem with pursuing employees sexually. Many claims were complicated by employment agreements requiring disputes to proceed through internal arbitration and restricting lawsuits against Charney or the company from reaching public courts. One of the most notorious episodes came in 2004, when Jane magazine writer Claudine Ko published an account saying Charney masturbated in front of her during an interview. Ko later argued that the encounter had been misinterpreted and resisted portraying herself solely as a powerless victim, writing that both she and Charney had been used by the publicity surrounding the story. The episode remains significant not because it established a criminal conviction—it did not—but because it exposed the blurred boundaries between provocative advertising, celebrity-founder behavior, workplace power, and consent in the fashion industry. The accumulated allegations eventually became central to the board’s justification for removing Charney in 2014, permanently changing the public image of the once-celebrated “Made in the USA” brand.
The daily editorial is currently unavailable. There’s still an entire archive to explore.