The Two F Words: Feminism & Fashion

This is an updated version of a brand piece I wrote in November for a job application that it seems timely to share after Dov Charney's (ex American Apparel CEO) presence in recent press...

Until recently feminism was referred to as the hushed ‘F-word’ because, ironically, it wasn’t feminine to be a feminist and it certainly wasn’t cool. However in the last few months, thanks to digital media and a series of high profile women championing the cause, a new wave of feminism has begun to emerge. With Emma Watson’s UN speech spreading through social media like wild fire, suddenly everybody from Harry Styles to American comedian Anzar Ansari, gloriously declaring himself a feminist on the Letterman show, is publicly #heforshe.

Feminism even infiltrated fashion. A surprising ‘he for she’ supporter is Karl Lagerfeld. One wouldn’t normally associate Chanel’s high-end product with political agendas, and yet back in September Lagerfeld sent his models down the runway armed with slogan-bearing placards shouting in favour of equal rights for women. Lagerfeld knows full well that most of the Instagrammers and Tweeters watching his shows unfold are unable to afford his creations, but he is buying a stake in youth culture by embracing matters closest to their heart. In recent collections he has adapted street-level, normcore-youth fashion trends (trainers, tracksuits and backpacks) and graffitied them with the Chanel logo and signature tweed to translate them into luxury. He appeals to the noisy and visually active young, with their Tumblrs and Pinterests and virtually-voiced opinions. Chanel maintains its luxury status through its prices, but is figuring out ways to reach the masses that will promote the brand for free. Once on board they buy into the cheaper licensed Chanel products (sunglasses, makeup) that keep the brand afloat. Young girls love Emma Watson, and if Chanel loves her too then they’ll keep buying into its brand at a level they can afford. While remaining largely exclusive of this audience, Chanel seems simultaneously to understand and reach it universally.

Fashion filters down from the top. If Karl is a certified feminist, then inevitably the high street will soon be too. But what about the old ‘sex-sells’ approach at American Apparel? Now that Dov Charney has made a final exit, and a woman (Paula Schneider) is in charge perhaps we’ll see some much needed adjustments. It’s strange to recall that in 2005 the brand won for marketing excellence at the LA Fashion Awards; could it win again now? Perhaps, once Schneider’s turned things around. The retailor has “sweatshop free” production and low prices on its side, but in the reinvigoration of female empowerment, its old, sexualised imagery would let the side down. As Veronique Hyland wrote for New York Magazine, “The curse of American Apparel’s original branding is that it worked too well — and now we can’t get it out of our heads. The key for whoever takes over from Charney will be to make a completely new message stick.” She writes that American Apparel needs to build on its altruistic credentials and these alone. They need to become squeaky clean.

However, Schneider is playing a clever game that might just allow the brand to transform and align more with relevant cultural movements, and retain some of the elements from its branding that clicked with the consumer. She’s hardly commented on Dov Charney’s seedy past and the way it seeped into the whole brand identity, only saying that “there are moments in time for different types of advertising” which would imply she’s realised (like the rest of us) that the company needs to sell more than just sex. Her first campaign for American Apparel, in December, was a witty one. She cast Brendan Jordan, a viral Youtube sensation thanks to his flamboyant, unconscious dance moves during a news broadcast (just check it out), posing not dissimilarly to the old-school, semi-pornographic images of American Apparel ads past. And yet the tone has been altered entirely; this approach has brought the brand bang up to date without dismissing its past altogether. The images still hold the retro feel Charney founded his business on, and possess a humorous self-awareness through quite literally sticking with the same format and design. Instead of being degrading to women, the ads embrace individuality, and sell originality. They show American Apparel is still selling for hipsters, but no longer selling sex. A brand that cuts in on a social media-created trend or personality is the kind of brand that will appeal to modern day millennials, the young and get free mass marketing from their engagement with the campaign. Savvy stuff. 

Before Schneider sent out this campaign, a completely new message seemed crucial amidst the media outpouring of Charney-controversy, but now one can see how a complete u-turn to feminist campaigns would surely have seemed superficial when a Google image search for American Apparel is still very much NSFW (I'm serious - don't do it at your desk). It will be interesting to watch where the brand goes from here, and at some point in the future, it would be stirring to see them take up the torch for feminism like Lagerfeld, but then again, they aren't selling to an all-female base. For now, this subtle tweaking to the brand message seems to be working a treat. And it's a big step in the right direction when you compare the two campaign images here - the one above being the least pornographic I could find. In my book, promoting the cause of self-confidence and individuality is just as worthy as women's rights, and shouldn't be forgotten.