Strollerderby

If they are on a toddler then they are not sexy. So they are really cute. I want a pair also.

normally I think leggings on toddler are adorable. My daughter has chubby little legs and quite a few pairs of leggings to show them off. It will be the only time in her life when chubby + leggings = cute.

however, i am not a fan of the gold ones the girl in the picture is wearing. Mostly I think they look tacky. I would never dress my daughter in them, but thats just me.

In toddler-seeped Brooklyn, they had the swell idea of putting silver lame super short hot-pants ( size 2T ) on the window kid size mannequin in the store. That trumped all their other skanky ads. They figured it out after a few days and changed the display - I guess they stopped making the slut short in toddler sizes but kept the more tasteful leggings.

I think the ad is way worse than the product. I mean, what little kid doesn't like shiny things? (I distinctly remember being dragged shoe-shopping with my mother when I was little and always picking out something silver and sparkly for her....she eventually learned her lesson and stopped bringing me :)

But I refuse to support AA because I find their ads really offensive. Even the little girl in the picture above looks way tougher than any 2 year old should.

Oh, hot damn. I need to find these. My daughter's chubby, yummy nugget legs will look so cute in those. I, on the other hand, would look like a jackass.

OMG, I remember wanting a pair of those when I was like 10-12ish and the whole disco thing was in....didn't get them then, and I sure as hell don't want them now!!!  

Coming from AA, I think it is creepy. They are a crazy coked out company and they are spreading the wackness to toddlers, and it is not ok.

Eww

I think it looks like a costume, so in the right hand probably cute - like a little Disco Queen.  But maybe they could come up with a unique description.  

Maybe...as part of a costume for a dance recital/play/Halloween or in the stash o' dress up clothes.  But everyday?  Let's just say I'm silently thankful at this particular moment (after reading an article like this) that I have a son.

I'm totally with Elendy - as a little girl, I can't imagine anything I would have loved more than a pair of shiny, gold pants, no matter if they were baggy or tight.  But I am no fan of the company or the ad campaign.  

Just logged on to american apparal ads...they're disgusting.Why would they think that would improve sales? When my child(now grown) was little, only very soft clothes would do. Lame is not comfortable.But I'm a fan of their sleeveless cool-colors undershirts.

rockin' grandma, I would say that those ads have definitely greatly improved their sales considering where the company was just eight years ago.

I first started buying their stuff (mostly wholesale though) in college because it is some of the best quality stuff you can get for screenprinting.  And I still buy some of their stuff just because you are getting pretty good quality stuff in an amazing variety of colors.

I think that the big problem they are having now with the ads is that they were seen as perfectly acceptable when in the Village Voice and Vice, but now they are branching out to everywhere and it is a bit much for some people.

Look at the kids' section of their online store though, those are some cute pictures of average kids.  I do not know if they find models the same way they used to (not using professionals just people that approach them for the most part).  I do agree that lame shorts for little girls is a bit excessive on many levels.

they are cute and no harm has been done....relax!!!!!

I think they are totally cute! Unless, ofcourse, you'd wear them in pair with your toddler; that's a bit over the top.