≡ Menu
YogaDork

Lululemon Gets Crass with “Camel Toe” Ad, Are They Ready for Backlash and Boycott?

in Business of Yoga, Public Display of Yoga, YD News

WARNING: Exploitation of womanly parts to sell yoga pants! ED: Perhaps the title of this post should be: Lululemon Makes Us Feel Overly Conscious About Our Crotches.

Has lululemon lost their sweat-wicking grip?  The below ad “Say No To Camel Toe” is supposed to be “edgy” with a wink and a nod to a familiar, um, creeping sensation. But since when was it necessary to pull out crotch imagery and exploit the “cleft of Venus” in order to raise market value? We imagine since they make a bazillion dollars doing just that.

2010apr27-lulu_ad

Are you perhaps offended by this coarse use of camel to sell stretchy $80-90 pants? Fact is, there are so many lululemmings it doesn’t matter what you think! Yes, lulu lollies are so voracious they’ve lifted sales 55% for the mondo company in fourth quarter profit, according to MarketWatch. So, really all you naysayers can just suck it. And apparently Yoga Journal, where the ad appears (ed note: June 2010) has no qualms with Lulu corp being blunt and possibly crossing the line of crudeness to offend its very own reader base. Is everyone trying to be American Apparel er what?

But yes, there is a little anti-lulu revolt already on the rise. A grass roots rebellion has been simmering for a while now and this may have been just enough “edge” to push the boundary to a rally of public boycott. Dun dun dun. Really. Will it matter? Probably not. It’s not like they haven’t been offensive before.

Or maybe this is just the way yoga pop is these days…balls out!

What’s your opinion?

Cultural context: So some of you may be familiar with Fannpack’s wretched and comical “Cameltoe” song from 2003, which for your cultural reference, is provided for you below. Tasteless and tactless: those darn kids these days!

EarlierLululemon Goes for Gold, Poaches Olympic Spirit With “Cheer”

Lululemon Seeks Tweeny Boppers, Abandons Yoga Niche for Expanded Fitness Fashion

American Apparel Taps That Yoga Ass, Again

82 comments… add one

  • Meredith LeBlanc

    The ad is really nice looking and has a great explanation in small print. Honestly, the camel toe tag line is a turn off.

  • Sarah

    Hmmm, I think it comes across as trying too hard to be edgy a la American Apparel.

  • Magdalena M

    i like it! it’s catchy, funny… why would anyone get offended by it? i don’t get it…

  • I get their point, albeit crude, women don’t ultimately want to to have uh, camel toe;)…, but it is not just their pants that prevent this “situation”, (see link to Urban Dictionary’s word “Lulutoe”…http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=lulutoe

    …it is the women who think compression in pants solve everything. You can’t buy pants that are too small for you to hug in your butt, or you might get the Lulutoe…Buy good quality pants that fit (with a gusset) and this problem is non existent.

  • Lisa

    Not offended in the least. I don’t LOVE it either; I’m pretty meh…. ok, about the whole thing. I do like the photo in the background though and I think it helps to offset the risque tag line.

    I couldn’t see someone getting so offended by this ad that they seriously boycott Lulu. Boycotting for other reasons… ok, but over the usage of “camel toe” in an ad seems a bit ridiculous to me.

  • “And apparently Yoga Journal, where the ad appears (May 2010) has no qualms with Lulu corp being blunt and possibly crossing the line of crudeness to offend its very own reader base.”

    since when does YJ care about what ads it has? They have ads for diet stuff.

    I doubt this will affect lulu’s bottom line one iota.

  • Ah, free speech…accept in advertising…? I respect a publication having a separateness with church and state, it’s like us being non dogmatic when we teach yoga, right? Putting something out there to ponder…and then letting the students stew on it. I did not think this was offensive enough to pull this ad. There have been other instances where magazines will pull a super offensive ad, can;t remember one at the moment…anyone?

  • I am not a woman but I don’t feel that this ad is offensive. If I were a woman I would love to know that a pair of pants didn’t give me any “camel toe” action. Can’t believe you wouldn’t either.
    This is basically a spin-off of the infamous but yet sacndalous “got milk” ad campaigns. There you had Megan Fox or Britney Spears with what one would assume was a milk mustache…
    The stands you took on writing htis post was very strong towards the negative aspects of this ad. So when your rocking your Walmart special yoga pants next to another girl in their Lulus we’ll see who has the last laugh in “Camel”

  • hey, I just found out what a camel toe was not too long ago. yeah, I get it, but it’s stupid. is “camel toe” a phrase everyone is supposed to know about if you’re cool and hip, young, trendy, whatever? I think not.

  • I am not a woman but I don’t feel that this ad is offensive. If I were a woman I would love to know that a pair of pants didn’t give me any “camel toe” action. Can’t believe you wouldn’t either.
    This is basically a spin-off of the infamous but yet sacndalous “got milk” ad campaigns. There you had Megan Fox or Britney Spears with what one would assume was a milk mustache…
    The stands you took on writing htis post was very strong towards the negative aspects of this ad. So when your rocking your Walmart special yoga pants next to another girl in their Lulus we’ll see who has the last laugh in “Camel”

  • boodiba

    I would buy the pants just to test the claim.

  • Miz James

    Why is there no “Lululemon sucks balls regardless” button available in the multiple choice voting question?

  • Miz James, what exactly don’t you like about Lululemon?
    Ihave you ever sent the an email expressing your concerns or issues?

  • Thanks for the thoughtful post, YogaDork! The imagery does not offend me in the least and frankly, I don’t understand how a woman’s body parts could be offensive. Would we be so upset if a puppy or a baby was used in a similar fashion, clever pun and all, to describe a soft, comforting texture or a youthful attitude?

    To me, this is the more interesting question. No doubt, lulu anticipated a reaction to this “edgy” ad. That was the point, right? But why on earth do we find our bodies, our sexuality, so offensive and shameful? And so much so that a mega-company would see it as an advantage?

    Thanks again for getting me thinking. Now, if I could just afford these coveted miracle-bra of a yoga pant.

  • I totally agree with you Lindsay!

  • Carolyn

    The ad doesn’t bother me. Camel toe is a concern in workout pants. Why not be up front about it?

    What grass-roots rebellion? I’ve only read lots of rumblings on Lululemon’s facebook site that their designs have gotten boring and quality has declined. Although their sales are up for now, I predict a drop in the coming year, particularly in the American market.

  • Luna

    The phrasing of the ad is crude, but that’s advertising for you. No boundaries anymore, I guess. People get to say whatever they want, regardless of how rude they may sound, but the onus is on them then: they get to be the perso/company who is read as “rude” or crass.

    Personally, instead of spending so much money on special pants, I prefer wearing a thong. Holds everything nice and smooth. There’s people in my hatha classes who also *don’t* bother with tight yoga pants. There’s an idea: wear loose clothing instead. I don’t recall it being a requisite of the Pradipika to wear special outfits.

  • Luna

    To add: I don’t think it’s that people feel “ashamed” of the camel toe or their bodies (maybe some do, but you’re supposed to leave your ego at the studio door, right?). Frankly, it’s just *uncomfortable* and distracting to have your pants all wedged up in there.

  • boodiba

    Loose & floppy pants might work for vinyasa class @ the gym but they aren’t so good for Astanga. Then again neither are some Lululemon design details like a small zipper on the back of a pair of pants I bought recently. It’s great if you want some metal digging into your spine in Yoganidrasana….

  • To clarify …. wasn’t referring to embarrassment of experiencing pants wedging up in class (more ouch! than anything), but the emotional response to the mental image elicited by lululemon’s use of the phrase “camel toe.”

  • By the way, I do think the ad is tasteless.

  • Julie

    Not offensive at all! A lot of yoga pants actually do cause camel toe and it’s not a good look. Can’t you love yoga and have a sense of humor too?

  • Camel Toe is a common problem women have with yoga pants. How is Lululemon saying they have some pants that can help solve that problem for you even considered edgy or shocking? They are trying to help their customers solve problems they are facing.

    This is true that there are other ways to solve the camel toe issue as well, but whats wrong with a company educating their customers.

  • Really, the most offensive part is the outrageous price of their clothes–which I suppose is part of their draw, making yoginis feel an acceptable level of luxe when Old Navy works just as well…but, agreed: it’s a purposeless visual pun and a cheap attention-getter.

  • OY! who cares? camel toe a concern for buying pants? maybe if they hurt. but come on! this is just silly. we are women- there are certain things about our anatomy even the miracle of Luon cant camouflage. the LAST thing i think of in yoga is whether or not my cootchie is being accentuated.

    i find many other things about LuLu much more irritating. their “stepford wives” employees are generally a pain in the ass- and they’ve never seemed too concerned about that!

  • ohman, i’m getting soft in my old age, but i have to say… i don’t find it that offensive. i actually find it quite cheeky and charming. i think lululemon has done a good job of treading around the ladyparts aspect of this. in an ad about, well, camel toe, there could have been lots of potential for real vulgarity. but i think pairing the phrase “camel toe” with an image of “camel pose” was clever. and they spared us the crotch shot! i know american apparel wouldn’t have been able to resist the temptation.

  • finally watched the video — I think that could be deemed more offensive than the ad because it’s about shaming a woman for what she’s got. are those singers 12 or what?

  • admin

    agreed, it’s pretty silly. honestly..it’s super awesome if expensive pants will help ladies feel less conscious about their crotches in yoga class. the glaring “offense” to this particular dork is the use of “camel toe” which is slang and annoying, and now has US self-conscious about not only our own coverage of nether regions but now suspicious of those around us. “everyone’s looking at my crotch now”
    What they’ve done here, is act very cleverly to incite a feeling of self-consciousness and inadequacy that maybe didn’t exist prior. Dear lord, I don’t want to have a camel toe! It’s pretty cute that it ties in with camel pose, and it’s not the raciest of ads, but you have to admit their slogan could’ve been a little less crotch-tastic. yes, thankfully they spared us the literal shot.

    “How is Lululemon saying they have some pants that can help solve that problem for you even considered edgy or shocking? They are trying to help their customers solve problems they are facing.”

    I don’t agree that this wasn’t an outright attempt to incite a response (like we said it’s their thing). In fact, we were alerted to this ad by people who were freaking right out because they were offended.

    Anyway, it’s advertising, and it has us guessing what they’ll pull out of their super cool sleeve key holder pocket next. So it worked, as ele might say.

  • Emma

    I feel like I shouldn’t comment on lululemon’s business practice becuase I probably will never be able to afford any of their clothing. For the record, I have yet to have this aforementioned condition while wearing my Old Navy or thrift store yoga pants…..

  • boodiba

    I’ve gotta try those Old Navy pants – any particular style that’s good?

  • J.F.V.

    Post was just as crass making writing the “…balls out!” Misguided assumption about who created the message or just as crass as the message about the camel toe? Advice on the whole thing, like a bad dream…. it will fade like the clouds.

  • it’s not super offensive, but still not a fan. and yj ads suck. when are they going to quit is with the diet ads, like linda mentions?

  • Rock My Soles

    OK I’m a guy and wouldn’t say “C…. T..” to my mother or my 15 year old daughter. Lulu should have used better judgment. I am no prude but I have more respect for women than Lulu’s advertising folks do.
    Rock on Yogadork!

  • RecycleYogi

    I don’t find it offensive as I’m comfortable with my body and don’t really care what the people around me think in yoga. So my pants creep up my crotch on occasion, your balls hang out sometimes. It’s yoga and it’s all good. I think “relief from c…. t..” would have been a better word choice than “say no” but it’s not as strong so…

    The ad only bothers me IF
    1) women in Child’s Pose can’t relax b/c they are worried about their perfectly fine female anatomy and this ad has drawn undo attention to that area and they now are wondering “do I have camel toe” instead of “ooohhhmmmm”.

    2) there is no subsequent ad that addresses the male equivalent. The “say no to ball bulge” or “say no to hard ons” pant advertisement.

  • I would have just glanced at this ad and moved on whilst silently thinking, hell yeah, camel toe sucks. My fellow yogis and I have had jokes about camel toe in the past when discussing pants worn. So really, what’s the fuss? It happens, it’s a real issue for women and why not have a conversation about it? Nothing to be ashamed or embarrassed about. I can think of worse things to get one’s knickers in a knot about, why not direct one’s offence taken to more worthwhile issues instead. Seriously.

  • chris ross

    now i get why this is called yoga dork

  • Jane

    I mean the obscene prices they charge are way more offensive than the ad. Camel toe as an ugly fact of life. I chuckled when I read the ad.

    But I don’t think I’ll ever chuckle at their prices.

  • Tutuji

    Oh my…thanks for giving me a good laugh, YD!! And Lululemon! (I will register my protest by not buying their overpriced duds!! Oh wait…I already don’t buy their stuff!) Fortunately, I don’t equate camel toe with my sexuality…mostly just discomfort and a hilarious Molly Shannon skit on SNL.

  • If I saw the ad alone or with pals or my boyfriend, not an issue. Rather funny. Like Roseanne, I appreciate their cheekiness and their cleverness in juxtaposing camel pose/camel toe.

    But if I saw the ad along with, say, an old-school senior yoga teacher, I might feel a bit awkward. And if I were reading it with my parents, I might need to define CT and that would be really weird!

  • lustingtowander

    @yogaspy.. I hear that.

    saw the ad in my yoga studio tonight and showed it to my teacher to ask their opinion and they immediately said what I had been thinking…it’s just going too far. yoga has a way of opening people up and there’s certainly a vulnerability involved. putting those words out there plants images and thoughts in your head. who needs to feel more self-conscious about their bodies?? especially in yoga class when so much is already coming to the surface, and most of us are in skin tight clothing!

    anyway, this wasn’t even an old fashioned senior teach either. offensive or not it’s mainly just inappropriate and unnecessary… and I’m willing to bet most respectable teachers would feel the same way.

  • Funny! Not offended at all, love the photo. Certainly made me look and link through to read the rest of this story. If one can practice without worrying about the unfortunate camel toe, so much the better I say…

  • I don’t get why some are offended at all.. and am I the only one who thinks the Lululemon marketing team is kind of genius. They wanted to get mentions on yoga blogs.. and guess what? We’re debating it now.. if they hadn’t said “Camel Toe” we certainly wouldn’t be having yet another discussion about the price of yoga pants…

    Though, I’d like to point out that if you’re short you have the opposite problem… Saggy Crotch. I wish there were a corresponding pose for that one!

  • ginger

    Not a fan of Lulu ads or Yoga Journal (home of ads featuring Proctor and Gamble, diet pills, wtf!) and don’t care about camel toe. I don’t find the ad particularly offensive, but then again I don’t find camel toe particularly offensive. Anyone notice the double standard here? Is anyone concerned about obscuring male ‘bulge’? Could they tie a witty link between dandasana and a product which minimizes male genitalia? Ha! But why would anyone do that? Sporting a noticeable ‘staff pose’ would be something to be proud of, however evidence of VAGINAS must be hidden! [/feminist rant]

  • Meredith LeBlanc

    I had another thought on this ad; it’s interesting that the only marking of the brand is the small logo at the bottom & the tiny print up the side. So for company that is trying to be edgy they aren’t shouting out who they are. I mean, not everyone knows who they are.

  • Amanda

    I love yoga and I would consider myself a peaceful person because of it. However, you seem to project nothing but negativity. Every time I’m linked to one of your posts it’s of you bitching about something or someone. Either you have a split personality and can remain calm and irritated at the same time or you have jumped on the yoga train just to have an opinion about something.

  • abbylou

    I don’t find the ad offensive. Camel toe is a real concern for yoginis. I’m comfortable with my body, but I still don’t like it when my pants get all wedged up my ass or my crotch. BTW, “camel toe” is not a buzzword for the young, hip, and trendy. I first remember hearing “camel toe” in 1992, when I was a junior in high school.

    Lulu ads are generally annoying. They focus too much on the hipness factor rather than the quality and utility of the product. I wish they would market their products a little bit more like LL Bean.

    What’s this business about Old Navy yoga pants working just as well as Lulu? I have not found that to be the case. I have tried yoga pants from Target, Gap Body, Old Navy, and other low to mid range retailers. They suck in comparison to Lulu. Even if they are form-fitting when first purchased, they quickly become loose and shapeless after a few washings. For those of us who have a vigorous and/or alignment-focused practice, form-fitting yoga clothes that wick the sweat away are a must to prevent chafing, to allow us to move quickly, and to allow us to see our legs for visual cues so we can align ourselves properly. So far, Lulu delivers more than the other brands I mentioned above.

    Furthermore, Lulu clothes are a good investment. I have one Lulu outfit that I wear approximately four times a week. Nothing else. A year later, after countless washings and dryings, it is still form-fitting, the seams are intact, etc. After one season, my Gap, old Navy, and Target clothes were falling apart.

    Don’t get me wrong, I would love to find another maker of yoga clothes and try their wares out. Any suggestions? I do like to try the clothes on before purchasing them.

  • Rock My Soles

    Amanda you should read Yogadork’s other blog posts think you may be jumping to conclusions. “Its all good………………..Whatever”

  • boodiba

    I love Yoga Dork!

  • The ad doesn’t offend me, BUT the word “crotch” totally does.

  • Laura

    This is not the first time that Lulu has used this tagline in advertising. I live in Toronto, Canada, and last summer a really large Lulu store on a very busy street (Queen West, for those who are familiar) had the front window display all about camel toe. The tag line, “Say no to camel toe” was displayed in large bright letters, and little funny pics were on display too, I believe.

    I walked by and was amused more than anything! Here in TO, there was no blacklash, no one seemed offended….. nothing. And I practice close to this Lulu location and I didn’t hear a thing from any upset yogis during change room talk or anything. Perhaps because it was in a fairly “open minded” part of town people didn’t give a crap? Interesting how the same tag line in a different place has a completely different reaction.

    Another note; Lulu’s prices are in the same range of any local yoga-clothing designer’s prices. (Again, at least here in TO). I try to purchase local designers as much as possible, as I am a bit of a locavore, but I do own a few pairs of Lulus, and honestly, they are some of the best quality yoga pants ever. Like all things in life, you pay more for quality, but it lasts longer. We’ve been so conditioned as a society to pay less for things- food, clothing, gadgets, that we don’t realize the true cost, say a cheap pair of pants from Old Navy or Walmart really cost the earth.

    Please stop buying from people who do not respect the environment. Buy from local designers, find companies using organic cotton (like Lulu) and pay more but buy less.

    Sorry for the rant! Thanks for listening!

  • Well, it must have a name for easy reference. I vote we begin using “Ustra-Toe” or “Ustra-Angusta”. :) The sanskrit sounds pretty, not vulgar and it is quite apropos!

  • Great post!

    If the purpose of advertising is to sell stuff by persuading us then I wonder how effective this ad is. Are we supposed to see a “lack of camel toe” from the angle of this shot?

    I also always wonder about the gender of the marketer when I see advertising in general and ads like this in particular. Can you imagine a group of women sitting around a table saying, “you know what I want from my yoga pants, a pair that hides my coochie”?

    Looking at Lululemon’s manifesto a couple of their own ideals come to mind:
    Communication is COMPLICATED. We are all raised in a different family with slightly different definitions of every word. An agreement is an agreement only if each party knows the conditions for satisfaction and a time is set for satisfaction to occur.

    They know it’s complicated to communicate, yet are willing to throw caution to the wind and put something out that’s completely open to interpretation. (Is camel toe bad? Are we to be ashamed of our bodies?)

    lululemon athletica creates components for people to live longer, healthier and more fun lives. If we can produce products to keep people active and stress-free, we believe the world will become a much better place.

    Perhaps they imagine not having to worry about “camel toe” will reduce our stress and make the world a better place.

    Of course, maybe they went with:
    Do one thing a day that scares you.

    And decided to tempt the fates by alienating their customers.

    Not that this ad offends me, it doesn’t, but it seems like a more effective headline would be “Makes Your Ass Look Smaller”.

  • boodiba

    Why didn’t they shoot the picture from the front under glaring light if they really wanted to prove a point, I wonder…

  • I think a little “camel toe” can be cute. Are we really supposed to have machine-smooth Barbie or mannequin crotches?? I like the groove.

  • This is hysterical. This is going to become my new tag line with my laughter loving yoga friends.

    It would have been funnier had the shot it from the front, exposing the dreaded toe de-camel…either way. Funny stuff! Lulumon rocks.

    “You cannot hold back a good laugh any more than you can the tide. Both are forces of nature.” — Bertrand Russell

  • Liz

    I am far more offended by $90 yoga pants than by an ad referencing camel toe. Seriously, why have we yogis and yoginis allowed ourselves to become so materialistic and ridiculous??

  • uhhh…. i LOVE Lululemon pants. they are all i wear to do and to teach in. they are great! they feel good, they soak up my sweat, they look great and i feel great in them.
    oh, and i can afford them, that does not make me materialistic nor a “bad yogini” who is offensive or has “become” something other than what you might consider yogic.
    having nice things does not make me a nice person, but sure as hell doesn’t make me a bad one either!

  • I have no idea what the “official” term for camel toe is, but I have a feeling it would sound a lot more offensive than “camel toe.” It’s a problem. I have had to get rid of yoga pants that were impromperly seamed up the front and drew too much attention to my lady parts for my liking.

  • lynn

    I think it captures the spirit of what that company is all about. Going where other companies won’t. let’s be real. Since that SNL skit a few years back–it’s something I always check in the mirror for before hitting a yoga class. Kudos to Lulu for getting creative and addressing the issue. Like the bumper sticker says “well behaved women rarely make history”…or good yoga pants.

  • bb

    ha! i am fashionably late to the debate, but just saw the ad for the first time today and have started similar anti-lulu campaign on my Facebook. Now if someone says “cute yoga pants, what brand?” I will say “anything but LuLu.”
    http://www.facebook.com/bari.ann?v=wall&ref=profile#!/notes/bari-ann/lululemon-hits-a-tacky-new-low/394011547141

  • Annie

    Would never have thought twice about it if I had seen it before someone on the Yoga Journal Facebook page slammed them for it. I went looking for a picture of the ad since the complainer didn’t explain what they were referring to. Don’t see what the big deal is. “Camel toe” is classy compared to what we used to call it in high school, which is not fit for print. LOL.

  • flapjacks

    get a sense of humor. don’t be so offended. go stretch.

  • Wrongdog

    lululemon clothing for sheep.

  • J

    it’s ridiculous to be offended by this. it’s effective advertising since you all can’t stop talking about it.

  • On the subject of camel toe itself, and it does happen and can be uncomfortable, a friend posted this on her FB yesterday – http://www.camelflage.com. I wonder if people find this offensive too?

  • unhappy

    This is a very one sided analysis. A great company is one which is ready to address problems and STILL be able to provide customer service when a problem arises. When I went in with a problem a few months after I made a purchase, I was told that it was my problem. When I asked to speak to a district manager, I was told that there wasnt one and the manager in the store had the final say. When I spoke to the rep in the customer case centre, I was told that there was nothing that could be done but i was welcome to take pictures of the problem, send them in to the company, and if i wanted the item back that i should also include return postage! I was disgusted beyond belief! They are very nice before they sell you something, but god forbid something goes wrong with their product. You are made to feel that you have to prove your case in a court of law to have a chance to receive some customer service! Horrible Horrible company!

  • DrishtiMon
  • I agree that the ad is cheeky. I find it funny and not at all offensive. I finally found the perfect Yoga pants, in a stretch Harem pants style. They are ideal because they give you full freedom of movement, they look pretty cute and there is no danger of any “camel toe”.

  • jan

    lululemon gives good camel toe…

    thats why I don’t buy them

    hee hee hee

  • Patricia

    Another attention grabbing stunt (which worked apparently) but I don’t buy their stuff. Way too expensive and I hate the fabric. (and not saying that you are a bad yogini if you want to spend $98 on this trash) :)

  • Red

    This is interesting. LuLulemon has copied Camelflage. I don’t think the term “cameltoe” is offenseive at all. It’s what happens when you wear tight yoga pants. I’m personally more “private” and would rather not show my “cameltoe” to everyone at the gym. I will never buy LuLulemon now, not because of the ad but because they steal ideas from other companies..

  • It’s not the reference to camel toe (an actual problem with some yoga pants) that I find offensive, but the copywriting. They make the visual joke with camel pose, so the joke is there. But over all, I think the headline could have been a little stronger.

  • Seriously?
    :)

  • I’m with Lu (way up there somewhere…) I don’t find the ad that offensive, but the idea that I should pay nearly $100 for one pair of yoga pants seems totally counter-yoga ideals to me.

    I would like to state however, that no, camel toe is not cute. Yes, we should all be smooth in front when we are wearing pants, and please, for the love of God(dess) at least don’t show off your camel toe around me! And I love my body; it’s fantastic. I’ll keep the genitalia between me and my lover though, thanks.

  • pro toe

    why a re women so concerned…? bikinis hide a lot less, and besides, every part ot a womans body is beautiful… if you dont want men to be able to see it, why wear pants that hug your butts so nicely? obviously you have enough confidence… remember, uor ancestors walked around nude…

  • I know that this is a social construct, since, obviously we evolved running around nude; nevertheless, it is a part of how I think and function as a SOCIAL being, so I don’t feel that I’m somehow oppressing myself by observing it: showing some parts of our bodies is sexy, showing other parts is inappropriate. Showing some parts to some degrees is classy, showing other parts or the same parts to other degrees is tacky. A backless evening gown: classy. Camel toe at the gym: tacky. I find camel toe much tackier than an ad that references it. It seems a little odd to want to pretend the problem doesn’t exist. Lululemon is a bad company because they sell all these yoga ideals with an unsustainably high price tag. They are a hypocritical company, and I would never give them my money.

  • A

    Would you rather pay $90 for a pair of pants that lasts 10 years (as I can personally attest that they do), or $20 pants every year because they fall apart, pill or shrink. That is the problem with this country, nobody thinks long term. You’d rather buy a bunch of junk that adds up to much more than buying one quality item? Whatever, have fun wasting your money, I’ll be at lululemon.

  • abbylou

    Emily,

    Lululemon’s pants last forever, and they have a 5-year warranty. I’m not, by any means, a huge fan of Lululemon, but they do make a good product. Quality products cost more.

    Lululemon also does a lot in the community. I don’t know about where you live, but my local store sponsors all kinds of free events including running clubs and weekly yoga classes. Some of the price of the merchandise goes to paying for those kinds of events.

    I don’t really see how a company charging a price that is commensurate with the quality of an item makes them hypocritical.

  • Are they a better product than my $15 yoga pants? Yes, I’m certain they are. On the other hand, my $15 pants have lasted six years so far with no stretching or shrinking (a little pilling yes, but not enough to make them look obviously worn). Charge $30 for them if they’re better quality, then. Charge $40 to cover the cost of the events they offer. $90 pants are an insult to my intelligence. That price is exuberant; the company could turn a tidy profit selling them for less than half that. What makes me feel they are hypocritical is that they (seem to) profess the rhetoric that yoga is for everyone, but their clothes aren’t affordable for many many people, I would venture to say most. I’m not saying it makes you a hypocrite if you buy them. Supposedly they make your ass look better and stuff? Maybe that’s worth the extra $50 bucks left over after the quality and events mark-ups? Buy them if you like them. I feel the company is hypocritical and I don’t want to support them even if I could afford their clothes. No need to get defensive, man.

  • sally

    I’d feel better about those $90 pants if they were made in the USA. Oh, and by adults.

  • abbylou

    I agree, Sally. I buy Beyond Yoga clothes for that reason. Ironically, their pants do give me bad camel toe.

  • kate

    its makes me laugh all the idiots that buy synthetic yoga wear.
    there not even 90-100% cotton lulue.
    there materials are full of synthetic fibres,so your skin cant breathe properly.but they can charge alot more-for there hi-tech crap
    But you look trendy,oh thats what counts yeh?
    i find it more sensible to wear a long cotton singlet over cotton
    not to -tight leggings.
    p.s nxt time girls.,when u wear extra tight shorts etc,spare a thought for the person behind you who has to view your crotch & undies when your legs are splayed open.gross.
    pleese some respect.kate

Leave a Comment