Fashion, class and race: time for you to weigh in
CVK
Sorry folks, this is gonna be a long one because it’s important. If you’d like to weigh in after reading this post, I’d encourage you to post your thoughts on Almost Girl’s blog. Hopefully it’ll spark some important conversations there so we’re not just talking about it here on MMW.
I blogged on Friday about the ridiculous ways in which the fashion industry exoticizes and thereby dehumanizes women of color (see original post here), citing as examples a New York Times fashion writer who compared Kimora Lee Simmons to Masai warrior and geisha, and the way a Prada spokesperson described the all-Asian cast in the new Miu Miu campaign as “warrior dolls.”
I suggested that if these companies had more diverse staffs, they might be more conscious of how these statements could be construed as racist. I also pointed to the Cristal/Jay-Z flap as an example of this.
After the post went up, I emailed a couple of fashion bloggers whose blogs I read regularly to introduce myself and let them know about the post. After all, it’s not often that I get to write about fashion on this blog.
One of the bloggers, Julie Fredrickson who writes the blog Almost Girl, emailed me a long response, which she has also posted on her blog. You can read it here.
I have to say that I was really disappointed. Instead of addressing the race issue at all, she immediately steered the conversation towards class, arguing that this was a much bigger factor. Of course class is a factor, but you can’t honestly have spent any time in the fashion industry and tell me that the lack of diversity isn’t a problem. I’ve worked in both the mainstream and independent magazine worlds (Hearst magazines and Surface magazine, respectively) and believe me, I’ve seen the problem up close.
It was also disappointing to read that she was “turned off” by “several hyperbolic comments about white men raping and pillaging colored women for centuries” and that she thought “people stay as far away from race as possible in this country” because “the dialogue turns vitriolic so quickly.” It’s too bad she overlooked the many important points made by MMW readers in the comments, choosing only to focus on what she considered to be “vitriolic” — what I would consider an honest discussion of the history of miscegenation.
I’m pretty disturbed by her comments in reaction to the Cristal/Jay-Z controversy:
I imagine that these luxury brands view hip hop culture like Burberry views the chavs, as one clearly one of over indulgence by a group of people that don’t necessarily understand the social signaling implied by a luxury brand… However, my major problem with these types of cultures is there is an unfortunate tendency to emulate this type of consumption regardless of your means to do so… and it is due in no small part to the bling culture we are fed via MTV or BET.
more after the jump…
Especially given that she then quotes a sneaker designer who said in an interview (without citing any sources, of course) that:
…the # 1 athletic shoe franchises in America all have their biggest sales spike on the first of the month when Public Assistance and Welfare come in…
What’s the difference between say, Carrie Bradshaw on “Sex and the City” owning $400,000 worth of shoes but not having a penny in her savings account, and an inner city teenager who makes minimum wage but is wearing $200 Nikes?
(Yes, I know that Bradshaw isn’t a real person, but I know plenty of women just like her who run up massive amounts of debt in an attempt to live the New York City life they think they’re entitled to but can’t actually afford: designer clothes, an apartment in a hip neighborhood, fancy restaurants, expensive bars, etc.)
There is no difference. People like to perpetuate this notion that hip hop culture is unusually materialistic, but have you looked at pop culture lately? All American pop culture is pushing materialism and consumerism. Hip hop is just one tiny piece of a much larger puzzle. Americans at all income levels are stretched beyond their means in an attempt to keep up with the Joneses. Why do you think the mortgage industry came up with adjustable-rate mortgages? To let people buy more house than they can afford.
I find it interesting that Julie chooses to single out inner city teens and hip hop heads (let’s face it, the latter is usually code for black and Latino folks) for their moral failures in caving in to “bling culture.” It sounds very Cosby-esque to me.
But what do you all think? Since we discuss race so much on this blog but no such discussions are happening on fashion blogs, I’d encourage you to post your thoughts on Almost Girl’s blog. Hopefully it’ll spark some important conversations there with her audience. And um, let’s keep the “vitriol” to a minimum. 
real men are not » Blog Archive » 1-and-2-and-1-and-2 and heel-toe, heel-toe: i’m a vitriol spewin’ angry race junkie! on 12 Jul 2006 at 5:03 pm
[…] I decided to post about this because what you just saw here, dear readers, I think happens frequently in discussions of race/skin color/diversity. Edit##: Also check out Carmen’s response to Almost Girl’s reply here. […]
Mixed Media Watch - tracking media representations of mixed people on 17 Jul 2006 at 10:30 am
[…] RANT The coded ways people talk about race without appearing to talk about race is the subject of Carmen’s rant today. For more on this topic, check out Ally Work’s post with excerpts from Uprooting Racism: How White People Can Work for Racial Justice by Paul Kivel. To see the correspondence that sparked this rant, see here, here, here and here. […]
ATR 32 - July 17, 2006 - Voicemail 206-203-3983 - addictedtorace@gmail.com at Addicted to Race on 05 Aug 2006 at 11:09 am
[…] RANT The coded ways people talk about race without appearing to talk about race is the subject of Carmen’s rant today. For more on this topic, check out Ally Work’s post with excerpts from Uprooting Racism: How White People Can Work for Racial Justice by Paul Kivel. To see the correspondence that sparked this rant, see here, here, here and here. […]