Why do we need more women designers?

[Creative]

Hello!

I think this is an interesting discussion that so far I didn’t really understand.

In some other fields women didn’t have the same opportunities than men and I would kind of understand this debate there, but when it comes to a feminine industry I’m more intrigued.

Till a few months ago we had three women in the three most important fashion houses: MGC at Dior, VV at Chanel, VN at Hermès. We had also FG at GUCCI, AF at Valentino and Gucci, at Chloé almost every designer (PM and KL aside) were women, Prada, Versace, Céline with Phoebe, Miu Miu, Alexander McQueen, now Givenchy, the new designer at BV…

Also, in terms of design I would understand that what usually people with prejudices would say is that women design a more practical fashion, but Sarah Burton for instance at Givenchy didn’t. Or Rei at CDG. And some men designers do have this practicality…

What are your thoughts about this matter? I’m genuinely curious about why there is so much push in every thread about discovering more women designers in an industry in which the three top positions were covered by… women till not so long ago and in which they are usually very well considered.

 

[tourbillions]

maybe because women are tired of being used for gay men's dress-up fantasies. There are many parts of the body that men will never understand about women and vice versa.

it's like asking women to design urinals for men. they would know how it works but could never put their foot on the actual function.

 

[Lola701]

I think it’s important to have women designers leading major fashion houses or leading creative fields period. I think there’s a sort of passivity that can be sometimes attached to women and their place in creative spaces.

Before WW2, there were a lot of women designers. They never saw themselves as artists and fashion wasn’t seen as any sort of art. After the war, men took ownership of the idea of fashion as art, women as muse and clothes as a way to « sublimer » women. That idea of devotion of beauty at the ultimate service of women.
It came with a great dose of objectification but women have always been willing participant, because they were the tastemakers (journalists) and the consumers.

What I think is dangerous is that there’s behind that discussion of women designers, a great dose of hidden homophobia pushed by most of the time, people who don’t work or get the industry.
Because, even if the fashion industry has still a lot of issues regarding prejudice to address, it’s still the industry where women and gay men can flourish. And even within the creative spaces, it’s still the most progressive industry: look in Art, Cinema, Music or in the Media, it’s not the same game.

And I mean, the most influential designer of the past decade is a woman: Phoebe Philo.

Now, there’s also another discussion that is more politics and that is more linked to corporatism. Women have an enormous disadvantage in corporate spaces when it comes to having access to top roles, either executive and creative. And it’s a discussion in every field.
At some point, some women will decide to have a child, have a maternity leave and what will be a shift a priority for a short period of time could be seen as a disengagement for suits. I had the luxury to decide what I wanted to do during my pregnancy and even to not work from a certain period of time.

In fashion, it’s the same issue. And for me it plays in the decision making of having a woman as a CD of a brand. When a brand is having an overhaul, they wants somebody totally dedicated an focus on the mission. Because executives are usually men, they have a kind safety in betting on a another man (who happens to be gay) for the job because they know if the person is ambitious enough, they will do the necessary hours for the thing.

Add to that the fact that women don’t allow themselves sometimes to be ambitious and you have a lot of women totally fine with being in the studios and having a nice work/life balance. Because the studios are filled with women.

Phoebe Philo left fashion to have her children and raise them. How many women could have afford that, just as a decision? That’s where having women leaders in executive spaces helps as they are willing to employ women because they will do the job. And it’s culture you create in a company. We see it with Chloe, Chanel, Dior and a lot of European fashion companies to be honest.

Finally, about the male gaze, beyond the perception from outside, as someone who started to work in fashion at 15, having left the industry years ago and now entering my 40’s, I’m glad I became a woman through the eyes of gay men instead of straight men. It gave me a lot of confidence and their kindliness maybe helped me to not be a desperate pick me looking for the validation of men. But maybe I was just lucky.

 

[minkflow]

i think there has been a rampant issue of males designing women’s fashion but obviously not knowing/caring about a woman’s body. tbh some designs come across as if they HATE a woman’s body. on the other hand, a lot of the designers throughout history that truly understood how to make clothing for women were male as well… maybe a balance of both genders would be more favorable?

 

[blueorchid]

I want to change a word in the title to present the question: "Why don't we need more women designers?"

I'm confused by your premise. Are you saying that we already have enough female fashion designers because of your examples?

 

[JohannesL]

I think this topic applies mostly to high/luxury fashion because their CDs are always part of the fashion conversation, but in reality as far as I know there is far more women designers that I have worked with in mass market fashion because no one knows better than themselves about ordinary women and their needs. High/luxury fashion is living in its long-lasting bubble to need Maria Grazia's feminism 101 class to educate itaelf.

 

[Phuel]

The very notion that only a woman knows how to design for a woman is is as false as “we need more women designers leading a bluechip brand” LOOL Everyone can learn very quickly what suits a woman’s body and apply best practices. Or not. For every one pre-Raf Miuccia, there’s an army of Elena Velez, Dilara Findigoklu, Simone Rocha etc etc (And I’m sure there are people that love those 3 and feel that they’re worthy heiresses to Miuccia.) Even talents I find solid like Shawn Wauchob and Khaite, someone else will roll their eyes at the mention of these brands. It’s all a matter of preference.

Experience has taught me to be wary of everybody and trust nobody. And unfortunately, experience has also dealt me some of the most toxic people that happen to be women whom had denied me opportunities. But some of the individuals that have supported me from the very beginning, have also been women. Just like we should judge talent and appoint the highest of creative leads to the most talented, the most experienced and the most skilled— but that never really ihappens IRL. We’re all biased. We’re all prejudice. We all discriminate. And we all have our preferences. It’s never been fair. More so in this industry.

And talent is not only so subjective, it’s dependant on the context that it seres to optimize strategic performances. Someone had mentioned that how is someone like Christopher John Rogers a talent worthy of supporting; and this is how I see his worth even if I’m not a fan of his design. I’ve learned long ago— since having to get along with people whom employ me, to see and appreciate brands with different sets of standards— but not lowered standards. Christopher will never be in the same league as the best of Hedi, Theyskens and Ghesquiere; and they’re not in the same league as the best of Helmut, Tom and Miuccia; Just like Helmut, Tom, and Miuccia are not in the same league as the best of Armani, Gaultier, and McQueen. But Christopher is someone who has highly improved from his sloppy ragtag beginnings—unlike so many of his contemporaries Luar/Pyer Moss/Sergio Hudson, and continues to improve at his own pace. And he’s that classic local dressmaker who’s modestly succeeded and that’s worth praising in these days of cynical, greedy famemongers only capable of pushing basic merch, while displaying silly costumes for socials likes/follows.

As to how this perspective may also be applied to how someone may favour a woman instead of a man leading a bluechip brand or a high-profile publication: Same trajectory— and factor in ethnicity alongside identity-politcs, because that’s the way it is in 2025. Talent is subjective. It comes down to how well that individual is at navigating the social and political labyrinth of the current industry, as well as possessing skilled maneuvering to reach a brand’s/publication’s demographic in this current fashion climate.

And I mean, the most influential designer of the past decade is a woman: Phoebe Philo.

Phoebe being highly ripped off doesn’t confirm that she’s a generation’s greatest design visionary— more so when you see the lessers that are ripping her off LOOL That isn’t to say she isn’t talented— she is of course, just that she’s also highly hyped. And oftentimes, one is confused for the other— just take a gander at the epitome of hype himself: Jacquemus. (…And he’s considered hot, to boot That alone, is proof how low the standards have fallen in everything, everywhere.)

 

[Lola701]

Phoebe being highly ripped off doesn’t confirm that she’s a generation’s greatest design visionary— more so when you see the lessers that are ripping her off LOOL That isn’t to say she isn’t talented— she is of course, just that she’s also highly hyped. And oftentimes, one is confused for the other— just take a gander at the epitome of hype himself: Jacquemus. (…And he’s considered hot, to boot That alone, is proof how low the standards have fallen in everything, everywhere.)

Her work at Celine shaped the aesthetic of the last 15 years. From the way people do their campaigns, to the stores to even the way people cut clothes. She reintroduced those boxy shapes we see everywhere. It’s not even about the designers copying her, it’s in the streets. All the trends are by-products of what she started.

But her success in a way has nothing to do with the fact that we need more women designers.

I think people have the feeling that there’s some sort of gatekeeping happening when those nominations comes around. There’s maybe a negative biais from Suits when giving a position to someone but it has never really things to do with the capacities of women designers.

MGC was the first woman at the helm of Dior. She experienced a great success. I’m a woman and her work never spoke to me. So the idea that « a woman knows what women wants » is ridiculous. It implies that we are a monolith.
At the same time, she is leaving Dior and will be replaced by a man who at Loewe also proved that he knew what women wants.

And for me that « WKWWW » is ridiculous in the context of HF. It’s not rooted in the idea of want. Nobody wants 3K bags or 6K dresses. The desire for the unexpected is also the base of the success of those brands.

I want a black pant, my first idea won’t be to go to Dior for that. Never!

 

[Phuel]

^^^JW’s offerings being "what women want” is such solid proof that it’s not remotely about "understanding a woman’s body” and designing for it. People— both women and men, are drawn to the most impractical and even ridiculous contraptions when it comes to high fashion. If people wanted comfort, then wear Uniqlo.

Phoebe clued in one the zeitgeist with the sharpest eye of the strongest of stylists at a time when the overly-primped sexpot looks and teh overly-posed and even more retouched sex-craving campaigns were at a saturation, while borrowing so much from other designers, and other imagemakers. And I don’t mean that in a dismissive way. The boxy silhouette with the broad shoulders was already being pushed by Gaultier from 95 onwards; his 97 winter collection was so forceful in its push for this silhouette, I can’t help but see it as a blueprint for the boxy, menswear influence that remains modern to this day. Phoebe was just less dramatic, less theatrical, and more accessible while still convincingly sharp and high-concept. And her campaigns were always a combination of Juergen’s work for Helmut with a touch of M+M Paris.

Dressing in Phoebe's design isn't going o transform the wearer into a more sophisticated individual. Just like wearing Yohji isn't going o convince anyone that the woman is more poetic and intellectually-sensitive. And I'll bite my tongue on what I feel about JW LOOL But the strong branding for all 3 of them are absolutely a masterclass of seduction. I'll give them that.