Luxury Labels & Their Dirty Secrets
The names of luxury fashion brands have long been associated with wealth, prestige, and exclusivity. But when you peel away the deceptive facade, you will find truths that are both disturbing and humiliating for the glorified labels.
1| Burberry
On the Burberry website, among the chic handbags and up-scale clothing, you will find their sincere Global Environmental Policy. The statement highlights the company’s commitment to respect the environment by minimizing their operation’s environmental impact. The luxury fashion brand has also set the goal to become carbon neutral and eliminate the use of chemicals that may have a negative environmental impact by 2020. This devotion to saving the environment, however, has not always been part of their policies. In fact, the company’s past relationship with the environment prompted fierce criticism from environmentalists and green campaigners.
The 2017/18 annual report released by Burberry, revealed that £28.6m of merchandise was physically destroyed that year, including £10.4m of destruction for Beauty products. The company’s percent of waste had also appeared to be worsening, with the value up 50% since the 2015 report and almost six times greater than in 2013. The news had left consumers and investors outraged but came as no surprise to those in the fashion industry, as the practice of unsold stock and fabrics is a commonplace among luxury brands. At the risk of reducing full-price sales by becoming too widely available at discount stores, brands like Burberry would rather destroy their merchandise than risk their exclusivity. Sending products for recycling also runs the risk of making the merchandise accessible to thieves who can sell them at a discount and devalue the brand.
Though destroying merchandise has become common practice for the fashion industry, with retailers describing it as a measure to ensure the supply chain remains intact, it comes with some very negative consequences. In 2019, it was recorded that the fashion industry is responsible for 10% of the annual global carbon emissions. By 2030, this percent is expected to reach higher than 50% if the industry does not reinvent itself. Incineration contributes greatly to this percent, releasing carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere, thus exacerbating global warming. By burning their merchandise, Burberry is increasing its environmental footprint exponentially. Among the burned items are leathers, furs, and other skins that cost animals their lives. A former Burberry employee describes her experiences with the luxury brand in an interview with Forbes explaining how, “It was killing [her] inside because, as a vegan, seeing all that leather and fur went to waste and these animals had to die for nothing.” In 2018, PETA exposed Burberry for burning the merchandise that contained the skins and furs supplied by animals who endured the worst conditions imaginable as well as horribly painful deaths.
In September of 2018, Burberry announced that it will stop the practice of burning unsold goods, along with ending the use of real fur in its products. The 2018/19 report highlights the significant reduction of destroyed products that year (£1.4 million worth) along with the integration of recycled fibers into their collections. In 2020, Burberry has committed to addressing climate change impacts within their own operations and aim to achieve a zero-carbon footprint.
"We are committed to respecting the environment, minimising the environmental impacts of our own operations and activities in our supply chain."
— Burberry (Global Environmental Policy)
2| Hugo Boss
Before Hugo Boss established a name for himself through classic men’s suits and dapper ties, the clothing manufacturer produced uniforms for the Nazi party.
In 1924, Hugo Boss founded a textile factory in Metzingen, Germany, under the title ‘Hugo Boss’. It originated as a family-run business that manufactured police and postal uniforms. Two years after it was founded, in 1931, Hugo Boss joined the Nazi Party and began his first big contract supplying brown shirts to the ‘National Socialist Party’ later becoming known as the Nazis. The Party continued to supply Hugo Boss with the production templates for its uniforms, which is a contract that propelled the small-time business into a successful international corporation. Much of the work that took place under the supervision of Hugo Boss consisted of forced labor from 180 Polish and French prisoners of war and concentration camps. These workers endured extremely poor working conditions, including uncertain food and hygiene conditions.
According to Dr. Eckhard Trox, a military uniform expert at the museum in Ludenschied, the Nazis had contracts with thousands of companies to produce the black SS uniforms, brown shirts worn by SA storm troopers, and the black and brown uniforms worn by Hitler Youth. Among these companies was Hugo Boss.
Following the death of Hugo Boss in 1948, the factory returned to making uniforms for postal and police workers. The first men’s suit was produced in the 1950s and by the 1970s the company focused solely on men’s fashion.
In 1997, the company became aware of the upsetting history behind the founder, Hugo Boss, when he appeared on a list of dormant accounts released by Swiss bankers. Following the publication of his father’s history, Siegfried Boss stated, “Of course my father belonged to the Nazi Party, but who didn’t belong back then? The whole industry worked for the Nazi Army.” In 1999 the company finally agreed to contribute to a fund that compensated former forced laborers.
In 2011, luxury brand Hugo Boss issued a public apology on their website, wishing to “express its profound regret to those who suffered harm or hardship at the factory run by Hugo Ferdinand Boss under National Socialist rule”.
"It is clear that Hugo F Boss did not only join the party because it led to contracts for uniform production, but also because he was a follower of National Socialism,"
— Roman Koester, Economic Historian at Bundeswehr University
3| Gucci
In 2019, luxury fashion label Gucci was under scrutiny for cultural appropriation – twice. The first incident took place in February when its fall 2018 ready-to-wear collection was dropped on the runway and on the Gucci website. The backlash was immediate on social media, including Gucci collaborator, Dapper Dan, who expressed his disappointment with the brand on his Twitter account: “I am a black man before I am a brand,” he wrote. “Another fashion house has gotten it outrageously wrong. There is no excuse nor apology that can erase this kind of insult.” The controversy surrounded the balaclava-style sweater, which many claimed to resemble blackface.
Gucci treated this problem with urgency, quickly issuing a statement from chief executive officer, Marco Bizzari, in an interview with WWD: “Certainly, it was not intentional, but this is not an excuse. We make mistakes, and certain [ones] are worse than others because they offend people. The lack of knowledge of diversity and the consequent understanding are not at the level we expected, despite all the efforts we did inside the company in the last four years.” The brand also issued an apology on Twitter stating that the wool balaclava jumper had been immediately removed from their online store as well as all physical stores. The statement also highlighted Gucci’s fundamental value of diversity which would be implemented throughout their organization.
Despite this controversy, Gucci made headlines again in May when they began selling a headscarf dubbed “Indy Full Turban” which cost $800 on the Nordstrom website. Critics labeled the sale of the turbans as cultural appropriation, emphasizing the deep religious significance that is not appreciated by those wearing it as a designer accessory. Nordstrom changed the product’s name to “Indy Full Head Wrap” before completely removing the item from the website.
Among the backlash on Twitter that Gucci received was a powerful tweet by Simran Jeet Singh, reading “Wow. @Gucci and @Nordstrom are selling turbans as fashion items. We’re attacked and killed for how we look, and now corporations get to profit off that same look? Feels wrong to me. Your thoughts?” The Sikh Coalition also took to Twitter to express their disgust.
Though many considered Gucci’s release of the turban to be offensive, others described it as a celebration of other cultures and beliefs. Gucci failed to formally apologize for the misstep, and requests for comments on the matter remained unanswered. In an indirect response to the two instances of cultural appropriation, on July 30, Gucci appointed its first global head of diversity, equity, and inclusion.
"We're attacked and killed for how we look, and now corporations get to profit off that same look?"
— Simran Jeet Singh
4| Dolce & Gabbana
In November of 2018, Italian luxury fashion brand, Dolce and Gabbana, launched three short videos on Weibo, the Chinese social media network, to promote its upcoming Shanghai runway. The videos feature an Asian woman in a beautiful Dolce & Gabbana dress, attempting to eat pizza, spaghetti, and a cannoli with chopsticks. In the background, a Mandarin-speaking voiceover says “Welcome to the first episode of ‘Eating with Chopsticks’ by Dolce & Gabbana” – purposely pronounced incorrectly in a way that mocks Chinese speech. Within 24 hours of posting the videos, D&G was forced to remove them from all platforms.
Sadly, the racist remarks didn’t end there. A mere 4 hours before the D&G Shanghai runway show dubbed The Great Show, was set to begin, screenshots of a reported conversation between Stefano Gabanna and fashion blogger, Michaela Tranova circulated the internet. The screenshots quickly went viral in China, along with the hashtag #boycotdolce. Within hours, hundreds of Chinese models that were supposed to walk in the show had withdrawn, forcing the show to be canceled.
Gabbana’s response to the mounting situation included a screenshot of the conversation with the words “Not me” in bold. Dolce & Gabbana’s account posted a similar message, claiming both Stefano’s personal account, as well as the brand’s account, had been hacked. An additional message was put forth by D&G on Instagram, labeling the situation “very unfortunate” for the company as well as “the people who worked day and night to bring this event to life.”
This situation did not come as a surprise, as Stefano Gabbana has a long history of offensive comments. At the Spring 2013 show in Milan, white models wore dangling earrings depicting images of stylized black faces. ‘Blackamoor’, the style of the faces, is usually associated with slavery and leans heavily on racist stereotypes. In March 2015, in an interview with Panorama, Gabbana made degrading comments about same-sex parenthood, stating: “ I’m not convinced with what I call chemical children, a rented uterus, semen selected from a catalogue.” In 2016, Dolce & Gabbana made yet another cultural misstep, releasing the “slave sandal” as part of the spring 2016 collection. While most retailers omitted the name, the D&G online store waited for the backlash to finally prompt an alternative name. In April 2017, D&G released a sneaker intended to appeal to the millennial generation, featuring imitation doodles in Sharpie that resembled the ones teens covered their Converse with in high school. Among the sporadic drawings was the phrase “I’m Thin & Gorgeous”. In an interview with Claire Mysko, CEO of the National Eating Disorders Association, she addressed the issue, “Though there may be an element of cheeky humor at play in the design of these sneakers, equating thinness and beauty with success and status is a message that hurts everyone.” Instead of responding to the problematic phrase printed on the sneakers professionally and apologetically, Stefano Gabbana fired back, “Darling you prefer to be fat and full of cholesterol ??? I think u have a problem.” Gabanna seemed unfazed by the criticism and continued to make mistakes regarding sexism, racism, and other controversial issues.
The fashion industry supplies its customers with merchandise that promotes self-expression. The clothes and accessories an individual wears gives a brief insight into the type of person they are. Researching the values a company stands for can prevent customers from draping themselves in the racist views of the designers who created the merchandise they are wearing or giving their money to a company that cares more about their exclusivity than the environment they live in. We are all guilty of- as a designer lover myself – purchasing extravagant merchandise produced by luxurious brands without knowing their beliefs or cruel histories. It is our responsibility to be mindful of the designers we support in order to make the fashion industry free of racism and sexism while minimizing their carbon footprint.
We need to talk. PERIOD.
We need to talk. PERIOD.
‘That Time of the Month’. ‘Aunt Flo’. ‘The Curse’. ‘Period’. How many different words or phrases can be created to disguise what it is actually called? The Menstrual Cycle.
Menstruation is a health reality for roughly 50 percent of the world’s population, yet conversations about the menstrual cycle have been deemed unacceptable. This is a consequence of not only cultural discomfort but the societal etiquette women have been expected to follow for centuries. Instead of educating young girls on the beauty of their reproductive system and the life it can hold and nourish, they are taught how to manage it privately and discreetly. Behind every culture, there is a long and troubling history of menstrual taboos, which continue to manifest themselves today.
Jane Ussher, professor of Women’s Health Psychology at Western Sydney University, explained, “Periods [have long] been associated with dirt, disgust, and shame, and some might say fear.” She describes this manipulation as misogyny, “a sign of positioning something that is essentially feminine as other, dirty and disgusting." This stigma that surrounds menstruation has lead to a troubling history of suppression, isolation, and sexism which can be found in countries all over the world today.
Nepal
While the physical ostracization of women on their periods is no longer legal in countries like the United States, the ancient Hindu practice of chhaupadi remains in place in Nepal, parts of India, and Bangladesh. This belief, that is rooted in the belief that menstrual blood is impure, “is a form of seclusion connected to Hindus’ deep religious beliefs and feelings about ritual purity and impurity” explained Mary Cameron, a professor of anthropology at Florida Atlantic University who worked extensively in Nepal. The chhaupadi practice, which is characterized by the banishment of women during menstruation from their usual residence due to the belief of impurity, has long been
criticized for the violation of basic human rights of women and also for the physical and mental health impacts it is associated with. During the isolation process, women are expelled from their homes and forced to stay in small closet-like huts for the duration of their period as well as prohibited from entering the kitchen and touching food, religious icons, cattle, and men.
Though chhauapdi was banned by Nepal’s Supreme Court in 2005, identifying it as a violation of human rights, it has continued to flourish across the country of Nepal, where fear for the consequences of breaking menstrual taboos had taken control. Following the highly publicized deaths of three women in just ten months, who were forced into the inhumane practice of chhauapdi, Nepal’s government took action. The deaths emphasized the dangers of the practice, which put women at risk of violence, rape, a plethora of health issues, and death. In August 2017, Nepal’s Parliament criminalized chhaupadi, passing a law that reads: “A woman during her menstruation or post-natal state should not be kept in chhaupadi or treated with any kind of similar discrimination or untouchable and inhuman behaviour”. Though women’s rights activists indicate this is a step in the right direction, they were quick to point out that one law is not powerful enough to rid the country of the deep-rooted practice that is written in Hindu scriptures. A deeper cultural transformation is required.
China
According to the Guardian, only 2% of women in China use tampons. This is reportedly due to the belief that using a tampon will tear the hymen and rob them of their virginity. The hymen, a membrane that stretches across the vaginal orifice is insignificant in the purpose of the female reproductive system. Dr. Jonathan Schaffir, an ob-gyn at the Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, reveals this misunderstood tissue to be remnants of the development of the vagina during embryonic growth. What societies across the world have glorified as the sole representation of a woman’s sexual purity is nothing of the sort, just some leftover tissue. This realization accompanied by the cultivation that the hymen is quite easily torn through exercise, tampons, medical exams, and just over time reveals how critical society has trained us to be when discussing the woman’s reproductive system.
Among Chinese women, there is an extreme lack of education surrounding sex and their body parts, which exerts the country’s “virginity fetish”. Those with this fetish consider a girl’s virginity to be the one trait that defines her character. Hymenoplasties, nicknamed ‘revirginity’ is an extremely common surgical procedure in China, designed to repair and reconstruct the thin, ring-like membrane known as the hymen. The aim of this procedure is to cause bleeding during post-nuptial intercourse, something women feel they need to endure after lying to their fiancés about their sex lives, according to the Shanghaiist. There is a long history behind the emphasis of virginity on Chinese women that continues to exist today as a result of men’s correlation between virginity and love, responsibility, and virtue.
China’s media regulator has also banned feminine hygiene product advertisements on TV during prime time, deeming them “disgusting”. This provokes fear and shame in women, making them think their natural cycle is unacceptable.
Kenya
In Kenya, the educational disadvantage young girls and women are put at, is extremely alarming. According to the ZanaAfrica Foundation, 1 in 4 girls do not know they can get pregnant once starting their periods, as well as 95% of girls not knowing that rape, incest, and coercion are violations of their human rights. More than one million girls miss up to six weeks of school each year because they do not have access to the menstrual products that are needed. ZanaAfrica has worked tirelessly to change this, by distributing free menstrual pads to schools in low-income communities and providing health education to increase the number of girls that stay in school. While menstrual taboo still is prevalent in Kenya, National Public Radio notes the political efforts in Kenya have succeeded in increasing access to menstrual products.
India
This year at a hostel in Gujarat’s Bhuj, 70 female college students were pressured by their principal to remove their undergarments to prove that they were not menstruating. This came as a result of the hostel official complaining to the principal that some of them had broken the norms that were enforced while they are on their period. In India, women are not allowed to go to temple, enter the kitchen, or touch other students when they are on their 
periods, rules that arestill in place today. At mealtimes, menstruating students are expected to sit away from others, clean their own dishes, and sit on the last bench. The next day, the students alleged that they were abused by the principal and hostel official before they were forced to strip. Three years ago, in a very similar ‘menstruation check’ case, 70 girls aged about 10 years old were forced to strip naked at Kasturba Gandhi Girls Residential School after a female warden found blood on a bathroom door. Discrimination against women on account of menstruation is extremely common and widespread in India, where periods have long been a taboo. In 2017, CNN exposed India for the 12% tax on pads, leaving only 12% of women able to afford this necessity. In recent years, it has become increasingly common for urban educated women to challenge these regressive ideas, and fight for periods to be seen as what they are - a natural biological cycle. Following months of protests and campaigning by activists, India announced it has scrapped its 12% tax on all sanitary products in 2018, a year after the government introduced the tax.
The United Kingdom
Statistics published in the Huffington Post reveal that in the UK, over 90% of girls worry about going to school during the duration of their periods because of shame, teasing, fear of leaking, boys knowing, or not being able to go to the bathroom during class. Polling company YouGov found 43% of girls have experienced teasing or jokes about periods by boys - with 40% of this teasing occurring during class time, while teachers are present. The ‘Fear Going to School Less’ report conducted by the menstrual care brand, Bodyform, brought attention to the increase of stigma that has resulted from a failure of period education for boys. The statistics support this statement, with 94% of boys admitting to a clear lack of knowledge about periods, 42% finding the topic to be awkward, and 38% embarrassing. Bodyform has pledged to work with high schools to create positive and informative conversations surrounding periods to normalize and remove the stigma. As a result of the #FreePeriod Campaign by Amika George, the UK government announced in 2019 they are taking measures to ensure sanitary products are free across all schools in England.
The United States
You don’t have to look very hard to identify period stigma in the United States, as it is made evident in many places. Close to 14 million women across the U.S. aged between 12 to 52 live below the poverty line, and most of them don’t have access to sanitary pads. In states like Texas and Alabama, you can buy a Snickers bar from a vending machine tax-free, but when it comes to purchasing a tampon or pad, which are not considered “necessities of life”, women must pay taxes. Due to this tax, women are estimated to spend an additional $150 million per year on menstrual products in the United States. A number of countries around the world have already begun eliminating taxes on menstrual products, but America remains absent from this list. Though some states have been successful in adding pads and tampons to the list of necessary items, 70% of states across the country continue this sales tax.
Period stigma is not only present in convenience stores. In 2015, then presidential candidate Donald Trump, said in an interview with Megyn Kelly that, “you could see there was blood coming out of her eyes. Blood coming out of her wherever.” These denunciations made by sexist men hiding behind society’s cloak of masculinity subdue and mock the pure and essential anatomy of a woman.
The Impact
Feminism has been on the rise in the last decade, but few find it comfortable to engage in conversations about menstruation. In order for women to be looked at and treated equally, there needs to be an acceptance of the period. Rather than dubbed ‘shameful’, ‘impure’, and ‘dirty’, we must acknowledge as a society that it is a natural biological cycle that creates life. Approximately 26% of the world’s population is made up of women of reproductive age, many of which do not have access to basic hygiene or necessary feminine hygiene products. Period poverty coupled with the stigmatization and shame associated with periods, not only restricts the vital knowledge and relationship between a woman and her anatomy but impacts us all on a global scale.
As a global community, to ensure a healthy and prosperous future for girls and women everywhere, we have a responsibility to continue the conversation in order to minimize the stigma that surrounds menstruation.
Join the movement! Fight to end period poverty with these nonprofits.
