Synopsis:
This article is about the “feminist fashion” trend and the questionable ethics of it. Over the past few years clothing branded with “FEMINIST,” “GRL PWR,” and similar slogans have proliferated everywhere from fast fashion to high end couture. Immediate questions that come to mind include: Should/can feminism be commercialized? What type of feminism exactly is meant to be expressed by a “GIRL GANG” t-shirt? Is advertising feminism on your clothing activism? Or does it just water down our society’s collective idea of feminism? And perhaps most importantly, who is profiting off of this trend? This article looks at the example of Forever 21, a popular fast fashion chain that sells sequined “FEMINIST” tops (amongst other feminism-branded materials) and was sued in 2001 by the Asian Pacific American Legal Center for alleged “sweatshop-like conditions.”
Rationale:
This issue is relevant to our discussion on transnational feminism because it is a clear example of the gap between popular Western/white feminist understandings of activism and the realities that women are actually facing around the world every day. As the article points out, 80 percent of the world’s clothing workers are women, and many clothing companies in the Global North outsource their labour to countries in the Global South where there are fewer laws in place to protect workers and ensure a fair wage.
In the case of Forever 21, the company actually relocated most of their clothing manufacturing to factories in Asia and Africa after a lawsuit alleged “sweatshop-like conditions” in its Los Angeles locations. This is an important reminder that while we are looking at the exploitation of marginalized women, we are not just talking about women “out there” somewhere, in some “poor country.” These injustices happen within what we consider the “First World.”
While some smaller companies and higher end brands sell feminism-branded clothing and donate the proceeds to actual feminist organizations, fast fashion brands like Forever 21 are simply profiting off of a popular social movement. The CEOs and majority of upper management for most of these companies (including Forever 21, H&M, Topshop, and Urban Outfitters) are all men.
The obvious atrocity of male-dominated companies retaining 100 percent of the profits from clothing made by underpaid female workers and sold to self-identified feminists aside, this article relates to core differences between transnational feminisms and dominant feminisms. Transnational feminism requires us to consider the ways popular Western feminism is often intertwined with neoliberal capitalist activities like “feminist fashion” and to actively resist and dismantle them.
URL/Link: https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/feminism/2018/06/grl-pwr-does-feminist-fashion-do-more-harm-good
Keywords: labour, capitalism, Western feminism
Author: Seymour Butts
Retailers jumping onto the trend of feminist terms and slogans for profit appears to follow the trend of popularity and social acceptability. Celebrities like Taylor Swift and Beyoncé have endorsed these terms through their social media and performances which in turn has allowed fashion to join in on the momentum of having the language originating of feminist pedagogy without any deeper discussion. This provides a surface level of visibility but only for those that can have the financial means to afford such products, have the body size for these garments, and live in an area in which these items are accepted. Companies such as Forever 21 and H&M have different sizing scales and have directed their products for particular types…
The ‘branding’ of feminism in today’s age is something fascinating and horrific. I find the article’s question ‘Should/can feminism be commercialized?’ an interesting one, and it made me question how things can be defined as feminism. What makes something inherently feminist? As of March 28th, Forever 21 still has shirts with ‘feminist’ explicitly on them, but just because the large corporations co-opt this term doesn’t mean that true feminism can be commercialized. The way fast fashion companies use feminism is by term or brand only, but in actuality (I like to believe) true intersectional feminism cannot be simplified like this. Additionally, I question why this merchandise is profitable and who buys these shirts. It seems like this ‘trend’ is inherently…