Yesterday, between the chaos of my classes, homework, and just general college stress, I remained somewhat distant from the outside world. I don’t usually bother to check Instagram or Facebook in between classes, because honestly what’s the point? It was in this period of ignorant bliss that I received a text from a good friend of mine (and fellow fashion lover) asking if I had seen the Chanel Paris Fashion Week show yet. I hadn’t, but felt that more important things were currently demanding my attention, and vowed to watch it later, at which point I promptly forgot about it. It wasn’t until later that day, when I checked my Instagram, that I realized said show was clearly a much bigger deal than I had thought: Vogue, Glamour, Cosmo, and pretty much every major fashion magazine imaginable had posted about the show. Turns out, the show took place on a Paris street appropriately deemed “Boulevard Chanel,” and featured the crème de la crème of models/celebs including Cara Delevingne, Kendall Jenner, Gisele Bündchen. Oh, and one more thing: it ended with a feminist protest. My news feed was a blur of gorgeous models wielding “feminist” signs, reading “Ladies Power,” and “History is Her Story” and other vaguely politicized slogans, with captions like #GirlPower.
While some may applaud the effort, I’m less than enthused by Chanel’s “feminist” display. Although I’m really not one to jump to conclusions, my first reaction was a resounding “WTF?” Did everyone forget that Karl Lagerfeld is the biggest misogynistic asshat in fashion history, who’s finest moments include saying that Pippa Middleton should “only ever show her back,” because he doesn’t like her face, Adele was a little too fat (and then proceeding to claim that his comments helped her lose weight), and telling Focus magazine that “no one wants to see curvy women”?! Excuse my cynicism, but it strikes me as somewhat unbelievable that a man once quoted as saying Coco Chanel was never a feminist because she “wasn’t ugly enough for that,” really has gender equality at heart. A more likely scenario? Chanel is jumping on the feminist trend bandwagon as a way to increase sales. Karl Lagerfeld may be a dick, but he’s not an idiot. They are a brand after all, and as much as I wish fashion were used more often as a platform for social and political change, it’s a capitalistic industry. Chanel is a business first and foremost, and Lagerfeld clearly knows how to maximize profits by drawing on consumer interests – after Beyoncé’s VMA’s performance, and Emma Watson’s speech at the UN, feminism has become an increasingly popular topic in mainstream media (it’s no coincidence that one of the signs read “He for She,” seeing as everyone and their mom has seen Watson’s inspirational speech by now.)
The difference between these public displays of female power, and Chanel’s half-hearted “protest,” is that Chanel didn’t really say anything. It was an underwhelming mix of ambiguously politicized slogans like “feminist mais feminine,” and signs that literally had nothing to do with anything, which only further confused Chanel’s already garbled message (my personal fav is “tweed is better than tweet” – like wtf does that even mean?) It seems to me that, if Chanel really cares about women’s power and gender equality, they should be using their pull in the industry to actually make a statement. Fight for a cause, like He for She, or equal pay, or reproductive rights, or ending sexualization of women in the media – which is something Chanel could surely advocate for, considering their widespread ad campaigns. Or perhaps they could at least include models of different body types or more women of color in their shows, considering gender equality affects all women.
What I find most ironic about the tasteless display of faux-feminism (coupled with the fact that Lagerfeld could clearly care less about women, unless they’re throwing cash at his clothes,) is that Coco Chanel actually was something of a feminist. Though she wouldn’t have identified as such, Chanel’s clothing liberated women of the 20’s – she rejected the impractical corsets and petticoats of the Victorian era and embraced menswear-inspired silhouettes that emphasized function as well as form. Funnily enough, remnants of Chanel’s original aesthetic be seen throughout this year’s collection, which was an eclectic mix of 70’s-inspired prints, military garb, and the original Coco Chanel tweed suit. The clothes were, in a word, beautiful – there’s no doubt about that. In fact, the collection itself may have said more than the actual protest: as a good friend of mine pointed out, “the clothes ranged from more masculine – the show even included one male – to very feminine, which may be a commentary on the roles women can now play. And the military undertones, mixed with the setting, could also be a comment on the female Jacobin leaders in the French Revolution.” But then why the artificial “protest” at the end?
Let me play devil’s advocate with myself for a second, so as not to dismiss the main point that people have made about the show: even if a post-fashion-show protest isn’t the ideal platform for social justice, isn’t it great to get people talking about gender equality at all? “Feminism,” unfortunately, has long been associated with women who are, as Emma Watson pointed out, “ too aggressive, isolating, and unattractive,” so in some ways, yes; it could be a good thing for people to see the word being carried as an accessory on the arms of the most gorgeous women in the world. Not to mention that the media attention around the show will spark the interest of young girls and aspiring fashionistas who may not know the slightest thing about the fight for gender equality, or why we’re fighting in the first place. Here’s my issue with that logic, however: even after seeing the show, do they really know any more about it? Probably not. Because nobody at the show actually talked about feminism. Nobody discussed what it means, or how to make a difference. Instead, it was used as an accessory, as a marketing tactic. It was imposed onto vaguely girl-powery signs, and lumped in with the other hot new trends, like tweed and 70s style sunglasses. Harper’s Bazaar even posted an Instagram of the show with the caption “Feminism is on trend for Spring 15.” I’m sorry, what? Feminism (n.): the advocacy of women’s rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men. Not a fashion statement.
It may not be immediately apparent, but there is danger in making gender equality a “trend.” The advocacy for women’s rights is not –nor should it ever be – a trend. It is a movement, and a much-needed, long overdue one at that. If feminism is “in fashion,” then what happens when it falls out of style? Unlike the pair of bell-bottom jeans that woefully disappeared in the back of your closet after years of disuse, we cannot afford for gender equality to fall by the wayside. In our society of extreme hashtag activism, a cause can be forgotten in an instant. Is anyone doing #IceBucketChallenge anymore? While that wildly popular trend really did benefit the ALS Association, this cause requires more than donating money. In order to achieve gender equality –gain equal pay, reproductive rights, put an end to rape culture and victim blaming, just to name a few facets of the cause – it takes more than a Facebook post. And if feminism continues to be seen as a trend – a word that intrinsically implies fleeting superficiality – it will never be more than a Facebook post to many. Using the feminist cause as a marketing ploy only furthers its status as a bandwagon craze, and trivializes the decades upon decades that have been spent thus far trying to gain gender equality.