Fashion is not Vain, Dumb, or Stupid.

Ziad Ghanem Catwalk Show, AW14. (My image)

There is an assumption that fashion and feminism are on opposite ends of the 'interests spectrum', the former is compromised by the latter, and they never go hand in hand. The general outlook is that you cannot be a feminist if you like clothes, because clothes are vain, shallow, and insignificant and females, in the eyes of feminism (all rational people) are none of the above (correct) and should therefore disassociate themselves from such a mundane past time (incorrect). What is so often over looked is the fact that the opinions surrounding fashion are intentional and have been socially conditioned because this artform is the one area in life where women have a greater freedom of expression than men. 

Fashion is treated as trivial because women are treated as trivial. 

It is the height of irony that women are perceived as ornamental beings, objects of desire, and are constantly encouraged to tirelessly seek out a better physical self, yet when we take an interest in the very same attire that we are supposed to shower ourselves in in order to achieve all of this, we are punished for it. We become self centred creatures. Really, there is no winning. As a woman, you're either not good enough or you're trying too hard and this is exactly why feminism needs to be associated with fashion.

It is a definite form of sexisim to turn one of the only forms of expressions where women are free to liberate themselves and twist it into something that is worthless; an interest you should be embarrassed about taking a liking to.    

When the shoe was on the other foot and the most exquisite clothes were worn by the richest men in the land, frills, fabrics, and wigs were a status symbol and a goal to aspire to whilst those who weren't elites, Lords, or Ladies had to make do with rags and a palette of greys. But over time, more fabrics became widely available and more people were able to dabble within the realms of fashion, including women. And this isn't liked... the whole 'women having power' thing.

The tide has turned and women are free to adopt an androgynous appearance, in fact it's on trend, but it's a rather different situation for men. I'm not saying this is right, because it isn't, and anybody who knows me understands my firm belief that if I were a boy, I'd be a drag queen. I'm all for a man in a frock. But not everybody else is and whilst women are free to take on masculinity within the fashion sphere, the same does not go for men and even the idea of a 'man bag' is met with a widespread cringe. Men adopting female clothing styles can expect mockery at best and prejudice or even violence at worst. There are also sexist reasons for why it's this way around- masculinity offers an admirable sense of power while femininity is inferior and is not a quality worth aiming for- but the point remains, women have greater flexibility. And men, in history, have found this power unsettling because women have risen above their place and this is where the negative stigmas come from... men tied women down to stop the art form from revolutionising a females position within society. 

The sad thing is that it worked and can by proven by the fact that women's fashion is not made by women. You are far more likely to succeed within the industry if you are a man. Where is the justice in having an industry that is heavily targeted at women being controlled predominantly by Men? Of course, there are powerful women... let us not forget Dame Vivienne Westwood and the infamously fearsome Anna Wintour of Vogue. But she's most likely been a bitch because she's had to be- it is not easy to earn enough to survive in fashion never mind making millions as a woman at the top. On a small scale, of the 20 students on my art foundation course, which has recently drawn to a conclusion, only 3 were male and yet the odds are in their favour in terms of being the most successful. Likewise, the girl:boy ratio at UAL, a group of London art universities which include the best fashion & arts institutes in the world, is 75% female and 25% male. These students are the creme de la creme and yet 75% of students studying are at an immediate loss because of their gender.

Despite men being far and few between at the relevant universities, the situation is completely reversed at some point during the translation of studying and forging a career. Although it's difficult to gather statistics, the Womenswear Designer of the Year is perfect in showing the gulf between genders. Over the last 13 years, the prize has been given to a man 8 times but a woman is yet to win the Menswear Designer of the year award. Fashion is therefore a feminist issue and instead of one being completely disassociated from the other, they need to start working together and allow women to swim, not sink.

For this to happen, there are a number of ideas that have been forged and need to be undone again in order to rid the negative tones that have been attached to the interest that someone may choose to have in clothes. We need to modernise the thought process when people hear the word 'fashion' and I also think the fashion industry has to do a bit of work too:

1. Having an interest in fashion does not equate to a lack of intelligence. One of the biggest stigmas surrounding fashion is that anyone who takes an interest is in no doubt an air head. The underlying reason for this is because of the degrading of fashion that I have discussed above; the assumption is that anyone who takes an interest in something so superficial must therefore have no substance themselves. Obviously, my argument is that fashion isn't superficial, and nor are the people involved. In every industry, and in very work place, there will be a materialistic, shallow person, and yes- these people also exist in the fashion industry... but you can't tar everyone with the same brush. 

The assumption that you must be a little bit dim if you wear nice clothes and spend time putting an outfit together is wrongly entrenched to the extent that I've actually seen feminists attack and/or belittle other women because they like fashion. I'm currently reading Jo Brand's autobiography, and as much as I love the woman, I was upset by her remarks about some girls she came across during her school years:

She states early on in the book that: "I subconsciously absorbed the message that being a girly girl and dressing to please was not the way forward". This doesn't really seem that bad, but it immediately isolates "girly girls" for what they wear and pictures them as something fragile.... this is the start of a sarcastic dig at women who like fashion. 

She continues by comparing her choice of clothes of: "a T-shirt, trousers and plimsoles" with the other girls waring "pretty dresses and nice shoes"... making them sound a little bit inferior to her 'boyish' choices.  

And the insulting part comes when she sarcastically refers to their interests: "A few girls whose heads were filled the very important details of what was fashionable that year" ... making it sound as though this is totally insignificant and because they happen to take an interest, they did not have the capacity to care about anything else. She explicitly labels them as "sad" and "empty-headed" making the assumption that liking fashion makes you a bit thick.

... This really upset me because I usually completely idolise the woman.

2. Women do not dress to impress men. The belief that fashion is anti-feminism because women use it to attract the opposite sex is massively flawed. Women use fashion as a feel good tool- they dress for themselves. When women dress to impress, it's often for other women because it is a form of expression that a large proportion of us are interested in- fashion is a uniting common ground that women from all over can identify with. The best place to see this in action is at fashion week, women flock to one other in awe of each others outfits and often, once a conversation starts rolling, you forge friendships as a result of someone liking your watering can shaped handbag.

3. There is absolutely nothing wrong in caring about your appearance, focusing on your best bits, and being body confident. Because women are bombarded with a constant stream of airbrushed images of goddesses as a target to aspire to, being told what diet to try next (according to the latest edition of Grazia magazine it's all about 'The Clay diet' which simply involves drinking clay), and generally being told that we don't look good enough ever, we've got used to feeling crap about ourselves and being battered and bruised by outsiders opinions. 

I think it's tragic that only 1% of women in this country consider themselves to be beautiful. It shows how we've been socially conditioned to believe that the word 'beautiful' is about your face, not who you are, and links with my belief that women are almost embarrassed if they're happy with they're body. Well there's nothing to be embarrassed about. Being comfortable with the way you look does not mean you're shallow or vain, it's a very positive way of thinking. Flipping go ahead and love yourself and be proud about it.  

4. Being 'fashionable' is not the same as being 'high maintenance'. A fashionable woman may not actually take three days to get ready to go out for tea. And even if it does, don't be quick to judge it as high maintenance behaviour. Fashion is often about knowing your style, having an eye for creativity, and being able to visualise what 'works'. This means that a lot of 'fashionistas' can put outfits that may appear to have been carefully planned and thought down to a 'T' in just matter of minutes. It can take 5 minutes to get something together, or it could take 50. If it's an interest, then there is absolutely no problem in experimenting with outfits- I reckon it's healthy for your self esteem and mental health to play about with your wardrobe. Using the word high maintenance is simplifying and shunning a creative process and a hobby.    

5. Make-up is totally OK too! I only wear make-up occasionally and never did do for college, which was often met with remarks such as "you're so brave!!!!" which is actually both insulting and patronising. However, if I did to choose to wear make-up I don't think it would make me any less of a feminist. Obviously, if someone feels as though they can't leave the house without make-up on then there is a massive body image problem going on, but wearing make-up, I believe, is just another branch of the fashion industry that allows scope for extra creativity. You can do some amazing things with make-up. And if you feel as though popping on a bit of lippy, mascara, and bronzer makes you look that little bit more fabulous, then go for it... work your assets!  

6. If someone is interested in fashion, it doesn't mean they're a bitch. Not much explanation needed here but for some reason this assumption is made (this was another thing that Jo Brand suggested in her book) and I THINK it's because people are intimidated by people who look good. Especially when big sunglasses are involved. Just remember that just because a girl likes her fashion, doesn't mean she wants to morph into the personality of Anna Wintour.

7. Live television reports/newsrooms need to stop patronising women with 'powerful' high heels. Never have I seen a woman reporting the news, on breakfast telly, or on a panel, in a pair of flat shoes.  (Actually I think Caitlin Moran wore a pair of converse for an interview on NewsNight once). It's old fashioned minds at work and I find it all a bit unsettling. Why do women on the telly need to wear them? A smart heel is no smarter than a smart flat. And I'm quite certain that not every woman on the screen wants to be sat/stood there in a pair of shoes that are crippling their feet... especially when they're on air from 5.30am. There should be a choice. Having all female news reporters in high heels is a bit patronising and turns the 'empowering women' attempt into a 'lets-dress-our-women-up-like-pretty-little-dolls-and-make-them-a-bit-taller' horror show. (Production and styling teams, sort this out please.) 

8. The fashion industry needs to acknowledge that 'plus-size' is NOT a size 12. BUT we need to acknowledge that fashion is not the only source responsible for the country wide "lack of body confidence crisis." I am sympathetic with anyone who discredits what seems to be the industries projection of an ideal (stick thin) woman and I agree with the fact that 'plus size' should mean exactly that on the catwalk. Using tiny models is also a problem, and yes, many models do have eating disorders because of the brutal nature of the work. But sometimes magazines are forced to use tiny models because the samples they're sent for shoots are tiny as it's all about minimal waste and maximum profit. There are also many designers who do use plus size models, such as Ziad Gahnem who walks complete novices and as well as plus sized models with blue hair, covered in tattoos, he also hires transgender and transvestite models, as does Pam Hogg. So there are actually designers within industry, working vehemently to change it- they're not all the same. 

9. We've been taught to judge others instantaneously based on what they wear... this stops us wearing what we want to wear. On a personal level this follows a similar theme to the make-up comments I receive, my clothes aren't especially 'normal', and so I get the "You're so brave/daring to wear that".... which, as I say above, is not actually a compliment!! People seem to find it acceptable to discredit my clothes just because they think I can handle it. I get the "what on earth is that?!?!" reaction quite often. 

But I'm not 'brave', I'm just me. I wear the clothes I do because I like them not because I wake up every morning and think to myself "Today I'm going to be visually courageous". I much prefer the terms 'adventurous' or 'experimental' because thats what I do with my clothes, I explore with combinations and constantly find new things that I like, and I show the world this by walking down the street in an a pair  of my mums old dungarees, clashing patterns, and battered doc martens that are covered in paint. I don't let the mainstream trends or opinions effect my choice in clothes and I really wish more people thought this way. Wear the clothes you do because you like them, not because you saw 307 other girls wearing it first. 

There should be no shame in wearing the clothes that make you feel good. This is empowerment, and everything about that is rooted and supported by feminism. Womens fashion is feminist!

Just be you. 

10. Fashion is not Vain, Dumb, or Stupid. Need I say more?

Hannah

x

Facebook rant I made earlier.....

Slow Hand-Clap Awards 2013.

Borrowing the phrase from Caitlin Moran's tweet, it's safe to say that the 'Slow Hand-Clap Award (she said of 'yesterday' I reckon it's a big enough boob to be the award of the whole of 2013)' goes to the 1000 idiots- and yes it's a strong and accusing word but I 100% stand by it- who complained about the BBC's "excessive" coverage of Mandela's death which consequently cut short the airing of a repeat of Mrs Browns Boys by 12 minutes. 

In my latest post over on Style Freak, I discussed a wonderful photographer who captures and affirms my faith in humanity, these people on the other hand are possibly enough to obliterate it. 

I don't really know where to start with this actually. I'm a bit gobsmacked (takes a lot).

Nelson Mandela was one of the greatest freedom fighters of the 20th and 21st century and was denied this very right- freedom- for 27 years of his life whilst he was imprisoned for committing the crime of having black skin and speaking out for equality. In the year 2013, Civil Rights have come a long way since Mandela was released and yet 1000 British people chose to completely abuse this fact, and would have preferred a refusal to celebrate huge advancements in equality because of Mandela's work, instead opting for a two year old episode of a comedy sitcom.

During the years of his imprisonment it was illegal- punishable with a prison sentence- to have a picture of Nelson Mandela in any home or building in South Africa; the government attempted to erase him from memory in a bid to deter people from pursing the fight for racial justice. The government in power back then tried to brainwash the people to forget. Now, 49 years on from the first day Mandela served in prison, the people wanted to stop government organisations from remembering. The coin has flipped. And the irony of the progression that Mandela was responsible for is frankly disgusting. This goes to show the amount of shame a handful of people can impose on the general public; I am repulsed by the idea that I'm walking on the same ground as the 1000 individuals who, without shame, went to the effort of complaining to the BBC.   

And what did the viewers miss in those twelve minutes? Simulated sex with a cupboard. And it's not just those who complained that stepped out of line either... the press has joined in too. Metro published this article today which headlines:

In today’s multi-channel age, the BBC was wrong to interrupt Mrs Brown’s Boys with Nelson Mandela’s death

So not only were the complaints disgusting, the Metro lowered itself to similar standards- passing on the message that Mrs Browns Boys had just as much reason as Mandela's death to be aired because the news could have simply been popped on a different channel instead. 

What the fuck is going on?!

How a newspaper can even try to justify this argument is beyond words and the fact that I should even have to give a reason as to why the death of the first black President and a world famous Civil Rights fighter had absolute reason to interrupt all the programmes on every channel for the rest of the evening has left me aghast. This was a man who, as President (and prior to this) lead a tireless fight for equality in the middle of an era when numerous world leaders, such as Thatcher, refused to cooperate and legislated to effectively support apartheid through the refusal of applying economic sanctions. As late as 1987, two years before Mandela was released, Thatcher was quoted to regard the ANC as "a typical terrorist organisation". This was the kind of attitude Mandela was faced with when he left prison and yet, within a year, he became President of South Africa. 

.... But of course, the announcement of the passing of this great man should have been left for a further 12 minutes, or at least been broadcast elsewhere instead of causing disruption to an outdated episode of a comedy series. Do these people have ANY IDEA how moronic they are?!

The fact that the BBC felt that they had to issue a statement in response to the hundreds of complaints, stating that Mandela's passing was of "singular significance" and even going as far as an apology, seriously upsets me. To me, it stands as evidence to confirm the argument that I have put forward in previous articles; we live in a society that is disillusioned by how 'equal' we really are. Racial equality is still very much an 'issue' and the naivety and stupidity of these complaints will hopefully shock people into realising that certain priorities urgently need to be reconsidered.   

*****

Whilst I was writing this piece, my attention was diverted to a certain photograph and I am saddened to announce, that today brings a second 'Slow Hand-Clap Award'.... and  it breaks my heart to have to present this to Barack Obama and David Cameron along with Denmark's Prime Minister Helle Thorning Schmidt. The offending act was the below photograph:

It's a 'funeral selfie'.... the trio were caught red-handed at Mandela's memorial service taking the above shot on the Danish PMs phone. Again, I don't quite know where to start. I mean, I know it was a celebration of life, but this is just a low blow. A complete lack of respect. Here we have two of THE most powerful people in the world taking a selfie.... something I'd cringe at myself doing on a normal day, in the privacy of my bedroom, never mind doing it a service of someones life. But this isn't about me.... It's world leaders at a fellow world leader's memorial service acting as representatives of their countries. At what point did they think this would be OK? It makes me want to weep.  

 It's nice that they were happy to be there, but lets not trample all over the pride and honour they should regard for a man that is responsible for the multi-racial societies they preside over. David Cameron ought to be taking much more care, he is after all the current leader of a political party that refused to help end apartheid and in fact, Thatcher supported it, AND that same party is now attempting to rewrite their history and portray themselves as a Mandela, racial-justice-loving, organisation. Please, for the sake of humanity, do not let your memory kid you into thinking that the Conservatives in any way supported Mandela's policies.     

I was more repulsed and shocked by Obama than Cameron. I thought he'd accrued a significant amount of genuine life experience (not that it takes much... I'm 19 and know that this is completely wrong) in comparison to the mollycoddled removed-from-reality Etonian. I've had it in for our PM since he took leadership because I think he's a posh, power seeking, career driven, elitist twat, so it's not as though I feel as though any amount of admiration has been lost because there wasn't any there in the first place. Of course I'm appalled at him, because he's painted a very ugly picture of our governments (and general public's) attitude of all that Mandela has done, but I was much more disheartened and outraged with Barrack Obama. In a sentence, he's played up to the typical apathetic remark that "all politicians are the same". Obama, a Democrat, has tarred himself with the same brush as Tory David Cameron... why he'd want to be seen in the same light is beyond me. This photo has caused me to loose a lot of trust and respect in the man. I will no longer liken my desire to become Prime Minister of his successful journey to President.... we are very different people. 

Although, despite my decreasing love for Obama, my faith has not been lost in his wife, who looks increasingly annoyed at her husband throughout the series of photographs that have been released. Team Michelle.

But it looks as though that if things are to really going change in the political arena, I better become Prime Minister sooner rather than later.

“I have walked that long road to freedom. I have tried not to falter; I have made missteps along the way. But I have discovered the secret that after climbing a great hill, one only finds that there are many more hills to climb. I have taken a moment here to rest, to steal a view of the glorious vista that surrounds me, to look back on the distance I have come. But I can only rest for a moment, for with freedom come responsibilities, and I dare not linger, for my long walk is not ended.” 

― Nelson Mandela

(a rather apt quote)

Hannah Riley.

@hannahtheduck  

"Hashtag" Twitter Silence.

Since having watched this a while ago I've decided that, on a good day, I am a young Caitlin Moran. I love the woman. She and I have a lot of similarities and as she started the whole '#twittersilence' thing, I thought that publishing this post at midnight on the 5th August 2013, would be the perfect way for me to mark the ending of an all important 24 hour silent protest.

This all started with Caroline Criado-Perez's campaign which ran to ensure that at least one British woman would feature as the face of our five, ten, twenty, fifty pound notes and alas!... the Bank of England announced that the wonderful Jane Austen would feature on the new tenners. But of course this all turned sour.

It was shocking enough to hear that some grotesque individuals hurled abuse at Perez- threats to rape and murder her- that eventually reached fifty an hour. But what was more shocking, as Caitlin Moran outlined in her blog post last night (well actually two nights ago as we are technically now into the 5th August), was that the number of threats by these twitter trolls increased AFTER an arrest was made.

And to give a few examples, here are the list of abusive tweets, put together by Moran for her article, that were sent non-stop to Caroline Criado-Perez: 

“I love it when the hate machine swarms.” 
“Rape rape rape rape rape rape.”
“Everyone report @CriadoPerez for rape and murder threats and also being a cunt #malemasterrace.” 
“Wouldn’t mind tying this bitch to my stove. Hey sweetheart – give me a shout when you’re ready to be put in your place.”
“HEY GIRL – WANNA THROW THAT PUSSY TOWARDS THE BLACK MESSIAH?”
“Rape threats? Don’t flatter yourself. Call the cops. We’ll rape them too. YOU BITCH! YO PUSSY STANK!”

The threats quickly expanded to include MP Stella Creasy, who backed Perez's campaign, along with TV critic Grace Dent and Guardian fashion columnist Hadley Freeman- all three women were sent bomb threats and Creasy was sent a disturbing image of a white-mask-wearing-man brandishing a large knife as a death threat. As Moran explained, these women have been told to "“block” the abusers, and get on with their lives."

And that's going to make them feel all warm and fuzzy inside again is it? Of course not. 

The fact that the ugly trend escalated AFTER an arrest was made, goes to show that the steps made towards protecting twitter users- who use it for the right reasons- have been far and few between, and all of them too late. Many people shun social networking sites because "this kind of thing happens".... that doesn't mean we should let it happen. A very small minority of twitter users have set up accounts to terrorise women and unfortunately their laptops and keyboards are acting as shields protecting them from the law; these twitter trolls are the modern day 'untouchables'.  

Not enough has been done and that's why the protest took place today. 

In fact, today saw Mary Beard being the latest target of twitter trolls as she was sent tweets telling her that her house was going to blow up. Prior to this, Beard was sent the following: "Retweet this you filthy old slut. I bet your vagina is disgusting."  This one was sent a few days ago, when it was more difficult to report abuse, but today Mary Beard tweeted the fact that she attempted to fill in the report form and it failed to work; this is AFTER twitter has promised the new "report abuse" button with every tweet that is published on the site.

I accept that twitter cannot be held responsible for what people publish on their site, however, they are more than responsible for the difficulties in reporting abuse and their slow speed in reacting to what has been reported. An official apology from the networking site is all well and good but it HAS to materialise. This is serious, and yet to me, it seems that twitter is trying to distance itself from the problem. The targeted women have simply been left to manually block users that are sending abuse, and at 50 tweets an hour, it can all be too soul destroying to face.      

So why silence over throwing out masses of joyous and feminist tweets?

As a feminist and a gob on a stick myself, I made, perhaps the more surprising decision (certainly in the eyes of my mother) to join in with the 24 hour silence, backing up the rather more influential types such as Clare Balding, Alice Arnold, and  Martina Navratilova. 

I saw silence to be the perfect protest to the tragic bombardment of disgusting, confidence-destroying messages that took control of twitter- the otherwise brilliant online tool for communicating and networking. I think Moran summed it up perfectly in saying that the walk-out would "focus minds at Twitter to come up with their own solution to the abusers of their private company." And I really hope it did. 

Moran went onto outline the fact that popular social networking sites can become looservilles within the space of a couple of months. Twitter could easily become the next Bebo rather than the next 'Big Thing'... there's always something new around the corner waiting to be the next online craze. And so with there having been a mass of people- including and endless list of celebrities- not tweeting a thing for the last 24 hours, the heads at twitter HQ will have been knocked together- with force- to come up with the best solution possible in monitoring the evil minority and, in turn, protecting twitter at large. No more sweeping under the carpet.

As much as I understand the other side of the argument, that we should be shouting and screaming, instead of, what is argued to be, sitting and doing nothing- I think a lack of tweets will have turned more of the right heads than a surge of tweets would have done. 

As long as there are people tweeting, the twitter people are happy; if we stop- they're fucked.

And to the lovely lady who posted this for the world to see:

Caitlin Moran did not tell, or force anyone to do anything; she just threw an idea out there and that idea became popular. She simply adopted a technique that twitter was made for- promoting, connecting, and inspiring.



“Seeing her sitting there unresponsive makes me realize that silence has a sound.” 
- Jodi Picoult


Hannah Riley
@hannahtheduck