The Use of Cultural Appropriation in Fashion

[dior_couture1245]

^ I like your example of Dries, I was thinking of him in fact ... remember his grunge collection? You really have to be told what his inspiration is, it's typically not obvious. That to me is the difference between being inspired, and ripping something off. I bet if Dries were inspired by Native Americans, they wouldn't be offended ... I would certainly not expect to see a war bonnet on his runway.

But I still think you're missing the point. And it's what Phuel brought up so eloquently. It's so important - and so amazing - that in fashion and in all creative fields there is the freedom to express yourself as you see fit. Dries is an amazing designer and has established such a unique and consistent personal voice for himself. And that's amazing. But there has to also be room for the creative voices that AREN'T subtle or "tasteful." Think about how dull this industry would be if everything was so considered and tasteful as Dries. It's really important for there to be variety - take a look at the thread "The First Fashion Show You Ever Saw" - and see how many people were lured into fashion by the work of John Galliano, myself included, and I think about all of his cultural references that were very obvious and how curious it made me about all of his inspirations and sent me off researching, leading me to discover things about cultures and people I had never realized existed before. How can that be a bad thing?

 

[Phuel]

^^^ Yes-- thank you dior_couture1245 for keeping it simple and to the point while I blather on and on!

fashionista-ta: If creative freedoms are regulated, then we may never see Dries' Native American inspirations in his future collections because Klueless Karl's take was so shallow and offensive to so many... LOL I'm glad there are people that love love love high fashion but also are so compassionate, considerate and conscientious of the world around us. I'm glad it's not just about "fashion" with you and some here. But I feel so strongly that creative freedom be available to everyone, and not just those that are deemed more intelligent and thoughtful or creative in their inspiration of other cultures. Because that's a whole other discussion, and comes down to taste, with a whole other group of people feeling insulted... LOL

Can you imagine if creativity in high fashion had to be approved of by committees...? Oh boy... So, let's say I wanted to shoot an editorial that has Native influences. Would I have to send in all my creatives along with a formal proposal to be evaluated? And for I know, this is a committee that knows little-- or nothing of, or even no interests in high fashion. And, they could possibly be homophobic, chauvinistic, racist... How awful would it be that creativity needs to be processed?

Creative freedom does not need to be regulated, policed, censored and edited. Feel free to criticize it all you want, and everyone should. That's my stand. And we allow full-access to the visionaries along the not-so-good ones, and everyone in between, and people can decide what they like and don't like, they can criticize, they can discuss, like we're doing now. That's it. Creative people need that access, the option, the choice, and they need to learn from their mistakes. The last thing I wish for high fashion is for it to be turned into a generic, homogenized, indistinguishable watercolor of department-store blandness.

And you what? I'd gladly keep the Karls, the Jeremy Scotts, the Rodartes and the J.W. Andersons of the industry even though they gross me out because, it's just more interesting to have so many different perspectives. That gaggle of weirdos, outcasts, outsiders, geniuses, visionaries, mavericks, Rumpelstilskins, Adonises and beauty queens all mixing it up with the various cultures, subcultures, times and eras of this world-- and otherworlds, is what I love love love about high fashion-- not the labels.

(Women and footwear is such an enticing and fascinating duo and subject matter, fashionista-ta. I love the way women look and the way they move in high-heels. I know it's not practical, nor comfortable, and I've never tried on heels, I mean, those 6-plus heels look lethal. All women I know prefer flat-heels, but all wear high high-heels at some point... I guess it's like men with ties-- although ties aren't as nearly dangerous to wear as heels... But, both sexes are... bound.)

 

[fashionista-ta]

I'm not sure where this idea of regulation of creativity, or committee approval of fashion themes, came from ... has anyone suggested that?

I also think it's important to note that the fashion runway is hardly the only venue for learning about other cultures.

Wrt heels, recently two of my male coworkers wanted to walk to lunch, probably 6 blocks or more. I pointed out the obvious--I was wearing heels and couldn't do that. One of them said, sure you can, I've seen women walk in heels before! Utterly clueless. I pointed out that it might be possible, but it certainly wouldn't be wise.

I see a lot of women in heels who can't walk in them, and I find that disturbing. It does require quite a bit of strength, as well as a learning curve for each new shoe ...

 

[Not Plain Jane]

the fashion runway is hardly the only venue for learning about other cultures.

ta, fashionista-ta. indeed. if it were the only venue, we'd be in serious trouble! let's hope people try to learn about other cultures in more direct ways than via some wealthy designer's interpretation and point of view.

 

[dior_couture1245]

ta, fashionista-ta. indeed. if it were the only venue, we'd be in serious trouble! let's hope people try to learn about other cultures in more direct ways than via some wealthy designer's interpretation and point of view.

Wow.

Imagine the only way to discover another culture was through a school textbook? What a f*cking miserable world that would be.

Your view of the way people operate seems very naïve to me. I am visual person. I love and respond most strongly to romantic and poetic and theatrical creations. It's how I'm wired. I'm sorry that a dry and straightforward representation of history and culture is not what piques my interest. I'm an educated and knowledgable person, and I know my facts. I'm not ignorant of history. But facts do not capture my imagination in the same way that artistry does.

So thank GOD fashion did show me the world. Fashion opened my eyes to so many beautiful and incredible people and places and things outside of and beyond my own life. My life has been so enriched by what fashion has had to offer - both the subtle and not so subtle. I have learned so much. I have opened my eyes up to international artists, artisans, craftsman, international musicians, international filmmakers, etc. both past and present.

How sad would that be to restrict fashion in a pathetic and impossible attempt to eliminate cultural offense. The only reason fashion is relevant is because it is a creative outlet for society to deal with the world. If it were just clothes, we might as well be in uniforms. But we're all here because we love fashion - not just clothes. If you start to restrict what designers can and cannot creatively address..you're essentially killing the industry.

 

[Marc10]

Honestly, I believe the opposite. Every individual has the choice to take offense. Being offended by someone's doings or remarks only gives the offender power and their words or actions validity. An individual's self worth has to come from within. As a gay male, do you know how many times I've been called f*ggot? Tons. But I have never once chosen to take those words offensively. I easily could have - and I know many people who do take it offensively - but why would I let someone else's ignorant behavior ruin my attitude and my self worth. Being offended is ABSOLUTELY as much of a choice as offending.

And I suggest you read this article about the age of Political Correctness we DO live in.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/01/not-a-very-pc-thing-to-say.html

Ultimately, I just cannot fathom how you all suggest cultural appropriation to be regulated - since it sounds as though that's exactly what you expect. What do you suggest to be done to eliminate "insensitive" creative uses of cultural appropriation? Who's going to decide what's culturally insensitive and what isn't? What will be the standard of punishment for those who violate these so called standards of sensitivity?

I'm curious, because the way I see it - it's absolutely naïve, destructive and downright impossible to control.

You see there's a difference that I don't think you realize. Like you said, i'm also a gay man and I've also been called that. And in those many times that I didn't take action when someone attacked me doesn't mean that I CHOSE not be offended. I am offended. I am offended that someone would say something so nasty to me just because of my sexual orientation. But thankfully, I have the emotional and psychological strength to know that i'm not the wrong and to not let that get into me. But sadly a lots of people don't have that strength to take that easily. And it doesn't make them wrong to act out. The wrong here is the perpetrator, ALWAYS, whether if we act out or not. This is almost "blame the victim" territory. And I think it's the opposite, the more we accept or look away from intolerance, the more the intolerant feels powerful and think it's ok to go on.

I think the ways we can judge these "appropriation" are very clear. There's an obvious difference between people like Dries and Alber who take inspiration from different cultures and go on to create something referential but at the same time unique, thoughtful and beautiful, from dumbasses like Jeremy Scott and DSquared who take stereotypical inspiration from cultures and amplify those references to cartoonish results. Or people like Helmut and Marc who did feather headdresses with a unique spin, from lame hipsters at Coachella who use literal sacred Native American headdresses without even knowing what they are and what they represent, just because they look "cool". It's a matter of knowledge, sensibility and honesty, morals. The fact that in 2015 we still have to teach some people that wearing or saying something can be offensive to a group of people (and i'm not talking about basic stuff like blackface, which we STILL see from time to time), is quite frankly a big part of the problem. The lack of social and cultural awareness from people, most of the times from "highly developed" places like the US and Europe, is mindblowing.

 

[Phuel]

Oh come on now, I'm not saying high fashion is the venue, or only venue to learn about cultures and subcultures. And if you really are serious, then how dare musicians incorporate musical styles from other genres into their own style of music, including music of other cultures and periods that they're not a part of, right? Visual artists should never present any ideas and concepts outside of their own race and culture, right? Filmmakers should just stick to their generation's subject matters-- and deal with issues within their own race, right? Let's bring back another form of segregation-- but it's all good because it's self-segregation, right?

When my friend tells me about villages in India where the women are mostly prostitutes because that's the only opportunity they know of to earn a living, and their daughters will grow up-- and by grow up, that means by the time they're 10-years-old, they'll also become prostitutes, then I feel strongly that these people need help and there isn't much time. But frankly, when I hear about Native groups decrying and forbidding their cultural heirlooms in high fashion because it offends them, it's really comes off as throwing the baby out along with the bathwater to me, because, there will always be some that will use that inspiration in a throwaway and offensive manner while some will be inspired in such an enlightening manner that is visionary. And the ones that are thoughtful and respectful to their inspirations are what makes it worth it for me to support creative freedom.

And if some groups are so offended by "cultural appropriation", then maybe they should learn about the women and girls in the Indian villages that have much much more at stake than just being hurt by some inconsiderate individuals' use of what they hold sacred.

 

[dior_couture1245]

You see there's a difference that I don't think you realize. Like you said, i'm also a gay man and I've also been called that. And in those many times that I didn't take action when someone attacked me doesn't mean that I CHOSE not be offended. I am offended. I am offended that someone would say something so nasty to me just because of my sexual orientation. But thankfully, I have the emotional and psychological strength to know that i'm not the wrong and to not let that get into me. But sadly a lots of people don't have that strength to take that easily. And it doesn't make them wrong to act out. The wrong here is the perpetrator, ALWAYS, whether if we act out or not. This is almost "blame the victim" territory. And I think it's the opposite, the more we accept or look away from intolerance, the more the intolerant feels powerful and think it's ok to go on.

I think the ways we can judge these "appropriation" are very clear. There's an obvious difference between people like Dries and Alber who take inspiration from different cultures and go on to create something referential but at the same time unique, thoughtful and beautiful, from dumbasses like Jeremy Scott and DSquared who take stereotypical inspiration from cultures and amplify those references to cartoonish results. Or people like Helmut and Marc who did feather headdresses with a unique spin, from lame hipsters at Coachella who use literal sacred Native American headdresses without even knowing what they are and what they represent, just because they look "cool". It's a matter of knowledge, sensibility and honesty, morals. The fact that in 2015 we still have to teach some people that wearing or saying something can be offensive to a group of people (and i'm not talking about basic stuff like blackface, which we STILL see from time to time), is quite frankly a big part of the problem. The lack of social and cultural awareness from people, most of the times from "highly developed" places like the US and Europe, is mindblowing.

Well at this point I'm just going to have to agree to disagree with all of you because this discussion isn't going anywhere. The debate is exhausting, quite frankly.

I'm just a person who believes strongly in personal responsibility. You decide how you feel, you decide your happiness and you decide your life. Living any other way is just playing the blame game. People are dealt different cards in life - BUT THAT'S LIFE. IT ISN'T FAIR. You, and only you, make your life what you want it to be.

I am not here for people telling me how they think I should live my life, and I'm absolutely not here to tell others how they should live theirs. And I should hope that others would be as eager to protect the freedom for all of us to express ourselves as we see fit, but clearly most people online these days think that we need to tell everyone what they should and should not think because thinking differently is racist, misogynist, ageist, privileged, insensitive and ignorant. You don't know me. Don't act like those of us who are advocating for creative freedom are some trailer park American imperialist pigs because we think it can be be beautiful and inspiring and enlightening to see the world filtered and interpreted through the many different perspectives in fashion.

 

[Phuel]

^^^ I hope you don't stop contributing to this discussion dior-- and it is a discussion for me. I feel it gets abrasive at times, but that just means it's more real. You and I may be in agreement here, but I also feel that we may not agree on another issue and I may be in agreement with fashionista, Jane and Marc elsewhere. and that just shows we can have a civilize, and personal discussion without turning one another off.

I'm not trying to change anyone's mind. I have a different, opposing perspective as theirs and I'm learning their stand with this discussion. I'm so glad there are individuals here that love love love fashion but also get that there's a whole world outside as well.

fashionista-ta: You know, some footwear look amazing as they age and take the shape of your feet. High heels look vile when they're misshapen and worn. So, even if you could walk 6 blocks in them without hurting your feet, you'd wear the shape of the shoe out. Tell them that! BTW, how long is your lunch break that you can walk 6-plus blocks away? LOL

 

[Not Plain Jane]

people, i was joking, hence my "lol" smiley! ---> ( )

of course people learn about culture in MANY ways - from books, from music, from fashion, from art, from interactions, etc. I TOTALLY AGREE!

my only point was that INDEED there are many ways, and many more direct than fashion - for example travel! my post was in response to fashionista-ta's comment, which i'll reiterate:

the fashion runway is hardly the only venue for learning about other cultures.

diorcouture1245 says, Your view of the way people operate seems very naïve to me.

oh sigh, i really don't appreciate being called things like naive.

i've worked for 13 years in the fashion industry (buying, merchandising 2 lines, etc), after having studied fine arts, and then went back to school and did a couple of literature and film degrees. now i teach at college.

i live and breathe the arts. i am not naive.

thanks.

we can have different opinions without hurling insults or swearing no?

i thought the discussion was interesting.

 

[rosiecheeks]

But I still think you're missing the point. And it's what Phuel brought up so eloquently. It's so important - and so amazing - that in fashion and in all creative fields there is the freedom to express yourself as you see fit. Dries is an amazing designer and has established such a unique and consistent personal voice for himself. And that's amazing. But there has to also be room for the creative voices that AREN'T subtle or "tasteful." Think about how dull this industry would be if everything was so considered and tasteful as Dries. It's really important for there to be variety - take a look at the thread "The First Fashion Show You Ever Saw" - and see how many people were lured into fashion by the work of John Galliano, myself included, and I think about all of his cultural references that were very obvious and how curious it made me about all of his inspirations and sent me off researching, leading me to discover things about cultures and people I had never realized existed before. How can that be a bad thing?

I agree that in the way it has spurred you to investigate and do research, cultural appropriation can lead to good things. But what if some people do not realize cultural appropriation is going on in the first place?

Personally coming from a European background I didn't realize for such a long time how much cultural appropriation is taking place, not just in fashion, but all over the F-in place. I went on to study Middle Eastern Studies yet have always been interested in textiles and fashion.

Imagine for example that a designer from Dubai* takes inspiration from something that your grandmother used to wear, that you wear, that your children will wear, something that is normal to you. It gets blown up into this whole new thing, the designer gets acclaim from all over. This new fashion is awesome! He is so creative, did such ground breaking work! People are flaunting in this new fashion all over town. It's new, it's fresh.

... Only it is not. It is something that you considered a marker of your identity, and now someone else is taking credit for it. Sure some people will point out that it is actually a way of dressing back in (insert region of origin), that can be the expression of many different things. Yet most people, when seeing you in this outfit will tell you that is a very Dubai-esque (or insert name of designer here) thing to wear this.

Not only did Europeans and more recently the West implement their culture elsewhere through (cultural) imperialism and capitalism, they are also still putting a stamp on cultural expressions that they deem desirable, to appropriate them and continue their dominance.

I'd be pretty pissed off if I would see symbols of my own identity being used of in such a way.


*Just an example, but mostly I chose this because I feel a lot of Westerners feel a sort of cultural gap between the West and the Middle East, it could also be China, India, whatever, somewhere that you feel is foreign, or at least not resembling your own cultural sphere

 

[Phuel]

^^^ So your identity as an individual is completely and only dependent on the material design of your culture...?

I'm slow Jane, so you'll understand if I don't always get that someone would be taking a light-hearted jab when the discussion's been so passionate.

To be frank, it's just not that big of a deal to me if someone finds a design of my culture inspiring in infuse into their presentation, or just nothing more than pretty or "cute" or whatever that they want to wear it at some music festival. As long as they're not mocking it, setting it on fire, appropriate away. It's just material. This attachment some have to a material design-- whether that's of cultural context, or, within the context of high fashion like some overpriced luxury item, seems so superficial to me. That cultural or status signifier shouldn't define who you are. And if it does, you're a very shallow person.

And what's the problem with people appropriating, assimilating and adapting other cultures' accoutrements into their way of dress...? And so what if it's only for fashion? This attitude that you're insensitive, hurtful, disrespectful and offending a culture because you find a design of theirs beautiful and interesting you want to make it a part of your live is just so divisive, so selfish to me. Not to sound sappy, but we are all human, and as I get older, I'm more interested in sharing with and learning from as many people that aren't like myself-- people of various ages, cultures, class... I don't want to segregate myself to only people like myself, my "kind". That's so close-minded, possessive and counter-productive to contributing to coming together.

 

[dior_couture1245]

^^^ So your identity as an individual is completely and only dependent on the material design of your culture...?

I'm slow Jane, so you'll understand if I don't always get that someone would be taking a light-hearted jab when the discussion's been so passionate.

To be frank, it's just not that big of a deal to me if someone finds a design of my culture inspiring in infuse into their presentation, or just nothing more than pretty or "cute" or whatever that they want to wear it at some music festival. As long as they're not mocking it, setting it on fire, appropriate away. It's just material. This attachment some have to a material design-- whether that's of cultural context, or, within the context of high fashion like some overpriced luxury item, seems so superficial to me. That cultural or status signifier shouldn't define who you are. And if it does, you're a very shallow person.

And what's the problem with people appropriating, assimilating and adapting other cultures' accoutrements into their way of dress...? And so what if it's only for fashion? This attitude that you're insensitive, hurtful, disrespectful and offending a culture because you find a design of theirs beautiful and interesting you want to make it a part of your live is just so divisive, so selfish to me. Not to sound sappy, but we are all human, and as I get older, I'm more interested in sharing with and learning from as many people that aren't like myself-- people of various ages, cultures, class... I don't want to segregate myself to only people like myself, my "kind". That's so close-minded, possessive and counter-productive to contributing to coming together.

EXACTLY.

Beyond that, there is simply no way to regulate the kind of appropriation that all of you are concerned about. It is absolutely impossible. You do not have to like it, but the fact of the matter is, it cannot be regulated. You either have Freedom of Speech, or you don't. That's really what it boils down to. When you start outlawing things of this nature, you open the floodgates for anything that anyone finds "offensive" to be taken seriously as law or regulation and next thing you know, we are living in a fascist society in which all of our thoughts, actions and creations are strictly monitored and everything creative must pass through a "sensitivity committee," etc. etc. Think about all of you that eat meat or wear leather. If we lived in a society where those crying "offense" screamed loudest and PETA's feeling of "offense" was turned into regulation or law, none of us would be allowed to eat meat or wear leather.

So, if you want Dries van Noten to continue to culturally appropriate in his designs the way you find acceptable, you have to be OK with DSquared2 or Jeremy Scott culturally appropriating the way they see fit. The power you have in this situation to change things is where you place your dollar. You do not have the power or the right, though, to control someone else's life and creations simply because you find it offensive.

 

[MulletProof]

Oh god I swore to myself I would not participate here (already wrote too long posts a few pages back) but I keep seeing a bit of confusion with the term, even coming from the author of the article Natalia posted a couple pages back, masking his personal feelings towards the social structuring in the US under some collective sentiment backed only by his researcher tone, and not actual facts or arguments, if only for the (quite understandable) 'I've been segregated so you don't get to touch my things'. I'd say good for him but it's not really good for anyone, one thing is for a society to had founded itself upon another one and to be continually oppressing and pretending history only counts starting a certain year or with the arrival of a specific character as if it was a movie, something else (quite the social phenomenon) is for the oppressed group to enforce the elements of division assigned to them in the first place, and not by them!. And by this, I'm referring exclusively to the author's approach to the topic, the cause could certainly be more convincing by not leveling the symbolism of garments towards mocked institutions such as the army or the church but tackling a society's sensibilities, which no longer reside in religion but in tragedies (wars, attacks, tension). The designers that are into turning traditions and cultures into a parody, a cartoon that's cute or funny for its rarity and exoticism would never in their right, sober mind (coughgalliano) would go into that territory. So this distinction between what is okay to grab, replicate or deform kind of makes you wonder...

So anyway, my point was that, no, regular grandma sweater is not an equivalent, unless someone mass murdered Swiss grandmas by choking them with perfectly knit sweaters and someone's making a collection of strangely identitical items.

I'd also like to add that I agree with Diorcouture regarding human legacy (I elaborated on this on page two or three) having no owner and certainly not requiring some committee to tell you what to explore, EVEN with the moral values originally attached to it, symbols are no more than the values that unify a group, they talk about traditions, traditions that for better or for worse are meaningless outside of that group, when another social system with another set of values begins.

What might be worthy hoping for is good education, that's an obligation, not an alternative, we demand this from pretty much every outlet out there, from journalism, art, music, and to a lesser extent, films. Of course the fashion industry has lesser players and doesn't mind going through the trash when it comes to social waste to "create" but, excuse some optimism here, I think things are moving forward and people, especially younger generations, are becoming a little more thoughtful when researching fashion, thanks to the internet. I too come from the Galliano generation, that's what was on television, Dries was already around but why would they feature him on tv? I eventually moved past Galliano's idea of fashion but I do remember the theatricality, some flamenco dancer on acid lost in say, a belle epoque theme, it was a stereotype and a cliche from beginning to end but for me it was completely fascinating, I had a privileged basic education on geography, world history and a full year of local Native American history (which would send me to sleep- I wanted more), being 12, that take on traditional dressing was, yeah, fascinating, and relevant, and I'd definitely look again at my school books with different eyes. And it continues to happen, in recent years it happened with Samuel Drira's work... growing up in the desert and making roadtrips around Native American ruins every time the weather was lethal, there was nothing mindblowing about typical clothing and its traditions.. until this guy that's not even from the American continent showed up and made it all oh so romantic. I always had respect for that part of our past but it kind of awakes a different side of your brain... when it's so visually stimulating and when you can enrich that new space of interest with knowledge about their struggles, values, and it all starts to make sense and it's different but at the same time you realise we are pretty much all the same despite our ceremonies and ornaments.

Anyway I'm losing track, I was actually aiming for something else (typing on my phone in a train- excuse the spelling!).

 

[fashionista-ta]

I'm not sure where this idea of regulation of creativity, or committee approval of fashion themes, came from ... has anyone suggested that?

Still waiting for an answer to this question ...

 

[Phuel]

^^^ Didn't you commented that its up to a certain group to allow or reject their cultural designs to be used when I asked "who gets to decide who gets a pass for 'cultural appropriation'...?" And you further extended this discussion by suggesting that the runway is not the only place to discover and learn about cultures; which is true of course, but since we're on a fashion forum discussing high fashion's use of various cultures' designs, I find nothing wrong with visual people finding other cultures' designs interesting and beautiful and infusing it into their own work-- for better and for worse in the results.

Yay, Mulletproof's once again on board this ship of (thoughtful) fools! LOL

"...we are pretty much all the same despite our ceremonies and ornaments". That's it. That's the point. Thank you.

 

[Not Plain Jane]

good posting mulletproof - agree on the education, on the grandma sweater (your characterization made me chortle ) and on the fact that there can be lines drawn and more design and research sensitivity towards different cultures and values, but without banishing "freedom of speech" (which can never be black and white; there will always be grey areas imo, areas where lines have to be drawn, like hate speech/art, etc). i would hope and think that identifying some sensitive areas or drawing some lines would not necessarily devolve into a dictatorship. that seems overly drastic!

 

[dior_couture1245]

Still waiting for an answer to this question ...

The idea was brought up because those on the other side of the argument are very curious as to how you intend or what you suggest be done to regulate "good" cultural appropriation vs. "bad" cultural appropriation, since there is clearly a very clear cut idea in your minds of what is appropriate and what isn't. That's fair enough to have your opinion of both, but how exactly do you expect the situation to be remedied?

That's why several of us have mentioned a committee...I'm not sure how else you've imagined cultural appropriation to be mitigated or resolved? Because you can all talk about your opinions of cultural appropriation that you find offensive, and cultural appropriation that you don't find offensive, but ultimately, that's just opinion. So, I'm curious what it is you suggest is the solution? From my view point, Freedom of Speech is the only answer.

And in my opinion, Freedom of Speech IS a rather black and white issue. You can't have love in this world without hate. One extreme only exists because there is a polar opposite extreme. Eliminating the hate end of the spectrum only makes love duller, not stronger (please do not read this as me advocating hate). You cannot regulate or limit Freedom of Speech that you find uncomfortable. It's crucial to maintain the freedom for someone to say something or make something that you hate, in order for you to have the freedom to say or make anything you love.

 

[fashionista-ta]

^ If "those on the other side" are very curious, I'm surprised they never asked

Free speech is the law of the land, and more so in the US than, as far as I know, anywhere else. I've mentioned before that I would like to see more of a European hate-speech flavor brought to US speech law, and I stand by that. If I were able to tweak our free speech laws, I can tell you with certainty that idiotic fashion themes would be far (far ...) from the top of my hit list. The first thing I would do is outlaw Stormfront, a racist website whose users have murdered more than 150 people in recent years.

When I said that those whose culture is being appropriated get to say when enough is enough, what I literally meant was they get to SAY enough is enough. I would certainly not mind seeing organizations like CFDA censure the fools who put on n-word fashion shows and other similar stupidity. Let's face the fact that if their fashion were anything to talk about, they wouldn't have to resort to these types of antics. And I certainly wouldn't mind seeing a heightened forum for those who are offended by fashion idiocy to say so. But I thought it went without saying that free speech reform has far more important targets than fashion.

 

[Not Plain Jane]

as far as mitigation/regulation of cultural appropriation, i'd suggest a twofold approach.

first, if a designer / design team is inspired by a particular culture, he or she should do detailed and sensitive research into the meanings of the garment, pattern, accessory etc. that's sort of what mulletproof was suggesting, as i interpreted it, in terms of education.

if the designer/design team finds that whatever they are interested in using is sacred or holds some fundamental meaning to a culture or group, they could either reach out further (elder of tribe, museum curator, cultural leader, etc) on how to proceed, or they could just tread carefully and respectfully proceed. so this means, go for it, but do so conscientiously and with knowledge.

for example if d-squared were sensitive enough, they would have NEVER called their collection "d-squaw" especially at a time when 100s and 100s of aboriginal women are being and have been murdered all across canada and are being almost completely ignored by the justice system. the word "squaw" is historically linked to this derogatory treatment. using that word is stupid and insensitive. i am sorry but that's how i see it.

secondly, other than research and sensitive inspiration/incorporation, if a designer has a group that protests or complains about what they see as an act of appropriation, then the designer should have the decency to communicate openly about it. contact those people, discuss, give interviews - make it transparent. maybe future mishaps could be cleared up just that easily.

it's not that i don't understand anyone's concerns about political correctness, extreme social justice warriors, and police states. i have those too. and yet on the other end of the spectrum, i don't advocate anarchy. when people have no boundaries, then that's when problems happen - wars, terrorist acts, hate.

if "freedom of speech" has no bounds in art, then is it okay to make a snuff film? is it okay to erect a public sculpture promoting genocide? is it okay to print literature saying jewish people need to be eradicated, or homosexuals, or blacks? can't we have some respectful boundaries in our art? i am not a big censorship person, so let me make that clear, but when we have no boundaries, and when anything goes, we risk serious cultural fault-lines.