Press "Enter" to skip to content

Clothing gone cray

For many, fashion is an art form. It helps define an individual as an easily accessible display of self-expression. Is it ethical to censor and remove clothing from a store if it is deemed offensive, or is it more immoral to even produce the product in the first place? Should companies succumb when backlash arises, merely as an attempt to avoid detrimental consequences?

I don’t enjoy writing question leads, but these are worth pondering, even if, like most things in life, they don’t have a clear-cut answer. In history, it wasn’t uncommon for artwork, most commonly literature, to be banned and ridiculed only to become a roaring success with time.

However, in today’s culture, a similar outcome isn’t likely for clothing scandals, and it’s due to modern society’s tendency to walk on eggshells around controversial topics rather than embracing change and issues that push boundaries.

Instead of immediately condemning inappropriate designs, leading to a hasty apology and quick removal of the product from the company, people should start healthy discussions on why it’s unwarranted.

For example, take a look at Forever 21’s latest scandal about a men’s graphic tee reading “Don’t Say Maybe If You Want to Say No.” Personally, I did not read this and draw an immediate connection to sexual assault, but I definitely understand how it is seen as a rape-rationalizing slogan.

Plenty of men saw the fury on social media and summed it up as crazy feminists. Anyone against the shirt had the perfect opportunity to start dialogue about consent to those who didn’t see the tastelessness, but instead, they were more concerned with erasing the tangible problem as quickly as possible, which will only lead to further oversights in the future.

Forever 21 is no stranger to controversy, receiving hate for the featured women over its Forever 21 Plus clothing line on its Instagram page. The same can be said for Urban Outfitters, the most notoriously daft designers. Between the “Eat Less,” shirt, the “I Drink You’re Cute” shirt and plethora of St. Patrick’s Day wear, the store retracted quite a bit of its merchandise over the years.

The embodiment of its idiocy was its bloodstained Kent State University sweatshirt and Holocaust-esque garb. It truly is the essence of everything you shouldn’t do, exemplifying the line one should never cross by belittling a situation involving the loss of human life.

The only recent controversy that did not result in pulling the product from shelves was Target’s “Obsessive Christmas Disorder” sweatshirt, which offended some mental illness advocates.

Also, a little advice to Aerie: do not start a realistic, well-received campaign a week before April Fool’s Day and then chalk it up as one big joke. The good news is they still ended up donating $25,000 to the National Eating Disorders Association despite their faux campaign promoting male body-positivity.

Aerie was attempting to be humorous, and comedy shouldn’t be shunned because it’s also an important art form. While some things can certainly be insensitive, ultimately art should not be censored because it’s your decision on whether or not you wear it or support the company who produced it.

Copyright © 2023, The Scout, Bradley University. All rights reserved.
The Scout is published by members of the student body of Bradley University. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the University.