Emma Watson: The Newest Face of Ethical Fashion September 18, 2009

I make no secret of my exasperation with certain celebrities who have no talent, no taste, and zero design skills, yet are inexplicably taken seriously as fashion designers when they decide being rich and famous isn’t enough. I’ve gone over the subject enough times that I really, really don’t feel like rehashing it all again (when I read about the unholy Lohan-Ungaro alliance in the New York Times recently, I struggled to keep from vomiting) so read the archives if you don’t already understand.

The Guardian reports that Harry Potter star Emma Watson is now launching her own line.  Am I mad? Not at all. Actually (even though I’m not about to forget she’s the face of fur-heavy label Burberry), I’d like to shake her hand.

Unlike some celebs I can think of, Emma isn’t doing the line for purely selfish reasons:

“I was excited by the idea of using fashion as a tool to alleviate poverty and knew it was something I could help make a difference with,” she said.

“I think young people like me are becoming increasingly aware of the humanitarian and environmental issues surrounding fast fashion and want to make good choices but there aren’t many options out there.”

A celebrity using her influence and popularity to encourage ethical dressing? I, for one, can get behind that.

Emma’s collection for People Tree (which is fair-trade, largely organic, and creates fair-wage jobs in Nepal, Bangladesh, and India) is expected to be released next February. (Heads-up to my fellow strict vegans: when buying from People Tree, watch out for wool, silk, and seashells. Fortunately, much of the line is organic cotton. And the Jessica dress is too cute.)

Covering Your Own Arse July 7, 2009

This month’s article of Inc. Magazine included an article originally published online last year: A Cold Call, a Blog, and a $20 Million Lawsuit.

I strongly advise all of my fellow small-business owners (or aspiring small-business owners) to read the article. In fact, email it to yourself for future reference. This is something we ALL need to know.

To put it simply, the owner of a small online eco-fashion store was contacted by a company wanting to know if she would agree to be interviewed for a documentary…then told she would have to pay them a total of $25,900 for production and travel costs. Ouch!

Of course, she wasn’t about to fall for that, and posted a warning to her fellow small-business owners on her blog. The production company retaliated with a $20 million lawsuit (as if ANY small-business owner has that kind of money).

While I certainly can’t fault her for wanting to get the truth out there (it’s the right thing to do), the fact of the matter is, we live in the age of lawsuits.

I have quite a bit of dirt on certain companies. When I see fit to call them out on my blog, I obfuscate. I change or omit names and identifying details. (Granted, there’s always a chance someone will figure out who I’m talking about…but I don’t refer to anyone directly, and it’s not my fault if someone else realizes exactly which company has earned my disapproval.)

Another word to the wise: there are production companies that do “advertorials” – that is, they’ll give you positive coverage, but only if you pay them for it. This may be the answer for some companies seeking publicity, but if a production company approaches you, do yourself a big favor and ask them to clarify whether it’s a documentary or an “advertorial.”

I myself have been interviewed for a couple of documentaries (one of them, I’m Vegan, is currently being edited). The producers have never asked me for a penny. The only thing I have ever been asked to supply is a signed form consenting to the use of my image and voice on film, which is pretty much standard procedure.

I’ve also been approached to purchase “advertorial” coverage. I will not say who approached me about it. The (nonprofit) entity in question produces advertorials to cover their own costs, and I really can’t blame them for that. Still, I am not comfortable with the idea of paying for positive coverage. It feels wrong to me, positive side effects or not, and I can’t bring myself to do things that don’t feel right.

Consider yourselves warned, people.

(Disclaimer: I’m not in the legal profession. This advice is not intended to be exhaustive. If you need legal advice, consult a good lawyer.)

Don’t Buy the Lie – Shearling Is Fur! February 20, 2009

In this On the Runway blog entry, posted earlier today, Eric Wilson brings a solid line of reasoning to the shearling debate. Shearling, if you are just now tuning in, is sheepskin with the hair still attached – to put it bluntly, sheep fur. Yet, Ralph Lauren and Donna Karan, who have stated they will not use fur, both used obscene amount of sheep fur in their runway collections. Calling it “shearling” does not change the fact that it is fur, and that both of them lied.

The post goes on to state that PETA also differentiates between shearling and fur – not a smart move on their part. PETA VP Dan Mathews, it seems, favors a one-thing-at-a-time approach. Oh, please. If only it were that easy. Some designers are still using other species’ furs, despite numerous animal rights groups’ best efforts, so why not condemn sheep fur? If a few highly influential designers (such as Lauren and Karan) can be convinced to leave those poor sheep alone, demand for sheep fur will drop, and other designers will follow suit. (Not all of them will, but some of them will, and that’s a start. Trust me on this, my great-aunt designed dresses on Seventh Avenue back in the day. She shared a lot of designer wisdom with me when I decided to study fashion.)

Tolerating sheep fur but condemning other pelts isn’t just hypocritical, it’s speciesist. I’m not the biggest fan of sheep myself (pigs are cleaner and smarter), but I would never, EVER condone the use of any part of their bodies for fashion.

Whenever someone waddles into the shop wearing (eew! ick! evil!) Uggs, I want to throw up. Hello?! There is a very polite no-fur sign posted on the door. Shearling is fur. Ignoring the sign is deeply disrespectful. The least those people could do is leave those hideous boots outside. (I’ve been tempted to remind them of the dress code, but I’d rather not perpetuate the “vegan Nazi” stereotype. I already know some people who call themselves veg*n think I’m “too strict” because I won’t allow “recycled” wool or “ahimsa” silk on my shelves. Refer to the archives for the reasons why.)

Kudos to Wilson for a well-written, logically sound piece.

In other news, Italy’s fashion industry, which generates a fortune (or used to, anyway), has been hit so hard it is now asking for government help.

Blind Item: Shoe Shame December 31, 2008

What animal-friendly lifestyle magazine, which sells a fair amount of ad space to veg*n retailers (including yours truly), saw fit to put Payless at the top of their list of veg*n-friendly shoe companies in a sidebar to a larger article?

Words cannot describe how disappointed I am. These people know better. What’s worse, they have people who know a lot about veg*n apparel (myself included) at their disposal. The sidebar should have featured *ethical* companies.

Oh, and do I really have to remind anyone why cheap shoes are still a bad idea?

Is It November 4 Yet? October 26, 2008

The countdown clock is ticking so loudly it’s giving me a headache.

In nine days, America will FINALLY settle a question that’s been on everyone’s mind for the past few years.

And it can’t come fast enough.

It was about two years ago that I first started to get sick of the media jumping all over who might be the next President. Ugh, couldn’t they find something else to report? Election years are irritating enough. When everyone’s speculating so far in advance, it’s easy to get sick of campaign coverage before it’s even supposed to start.

There are even pictures floating around the internet of jack-o-lanterns carved to resemble McCain and Obama. Egad, can’t *Halloween* be free from politics this year?! Halloween is supposed to be fun! If I start seeing Christmas ornaments in the likeness of whoever wins, I am going to scream.

Of course, America needs this election. We need a fresh start. And I am digging the recent Mutts comic strips in favor of Prop 2, but I’m a devoted Mutts reader anyway.

I’m so sick of politics that I’m shutting off the radio in the store every time one of those hate-spewing Prop 8 ads comes on, staying the hell away from the evening news (not that I watch it much – I can read a newspaper a lot faster than anchorpeople can talk), and sending back every last shred of politically oriented junk mail that is sent to my address (as if I would allow that disgusting filth into my home!).

You might think I’m one of those people who is too apathetic to vote. That is simply not the case. I’ve been voting since I turned 18 and I will vote this year, too. Nothing could convince me not to do so. I’ve just really had it with the election being the only thing anyone can talk about (besides the economy…everyone seems to be forgetting that the mortgage crisis is only affecting a small percentage of US mortgage holders). I’m even dreading post-election coverage…regardless of who wins, it’ll be all over the media for months.

Still, I think we’ll all be glad when the election insanity is finally behind us.

A few parting thoughts:

1. If the people lead, the leaders WILL follow (eventually). They will have to get with the times if they want to keep their jobs.

2. Bad politicians are elected by good people who don’t VOTE. If you are eligible to vote, DO IT for the good of the world. If I can get over the gag-inducing nature of politics and vote in every election, so can you.

3. If you value your friendships with people who happen to be elsewhere on the political spectrum, I strongly recommend making politics “off limits” for conversation (unless you have one of those rare friendships that thrives on bickering).

4. If you have requested an absentee ballot and it hasn’t arrived, watch out – it might not show up at all. This has actually happened to me several times, in two different counties, and the registrar of voters was no help at all so I’ve had to just set my alarm earlier and vote in person.

Curvy Women are People Too September 30, 2008

I’m going to go slightly off-topic today.

If you know me in person or have seen pictures of me somewhere, you know that I am not a twig. I’m curvy. I got back down to a size 6/8 (in pants, anyway – that myth about weight loss reducing one’s bra size is, in my experience, not true) once, but it was from nonstop stress (design school is not for the lazy), not eating enough, and having nonstop food poisoning when I did eat (ah, college cafeterias…). When I’m eating enough to sustain my (busy) activity level, I’m a 12 in dresses and a 10 in jeans. America Ferrera of “Ugly Betty” fame is actually smaller than I am (I base this on having seen the famous butterfly costume at close range – she’s close to a “standard” 8, which I’m sure of because design students learn to drape and make patterns on “standard” size 8 dress forms).

As you can imagine, it really chips my nail varnish when curvy women are slighted based on their size.

Last Saturday my best friend and I went to Pioneertown to see The Donnas (the show was fabulous, of course).

Bassist Maya Ford (aka Donna F) is nowhere near as thin as her bandmates. She’s zaftig enough to make me look almost skinny. Artwork for the band’s first three albums (American Teenage Rock and Roll Machine, Get Skintight, and The Donnas Turn 21) shows all four members, left to right, as equals. Which they are. I’ve been listening to The Donnas since high school and am quite sure the band would fall apart if they suddenly had trouble functioning as a quartet. Then came the band’s big-label debut, Spend the Night. The slumber-party-themed cover showed singer Brett Anderson in a short robe, drummer Torry Castellano in a tank top and long pajama bottoms, guitarist Allison Robertson (widely considered the band’s “hottest” member) posed flirtatiously in something short, slinky, and pink, and Maya in the back, in a frumpy brown checked pajama top. All you can see are her head, shoulders, and ample chest (since it’s okay to have a big chest as long as the rest of you looks rail thin). The implication is that she’s not as important.

Which is garbage, of course. The Donnas would not be the same without her. Maya is the resident bad girl who cracks the funniest jokes, writes many of the band’s sassiest lyrics, and probably parties the hardest (she supposedly made out with two male fans after one show because they were both very cute, and allegedly puts a certain herbal ingredient in her homemade rugelach – for the record, I don’t even drink coffee, but I have to admit the very idea of “special” rugelach is a little funny).

I know she was probably put in the background deliberately because I’ve encountered a few fat-phobic photographers myself. It’s annoying as hell. Given that the average American woman is currently a size 14 and my BMI was actually in the “normal” range when I was heavier, I don’t really qualify as “fat” in the first place.

On one such occasion, a local magazine oriented toward young men hosted a show at the House of Blues. One of my favorite local bands was playing, and my friend’s sister was in the magazine’s recently released calendar, so the three of us went, along with my friend’s then-boyfriend.

Of course, one of the magazine’s photographers had to get a picture of the hot calendar girl and her friends, and professional photographers can be very aggressive about dictating blocking and poses (especially when working for a publication with a narrow concept of beauty). My friend’s sister, a model whose “double feature” is not entirely natural, was front and center, with my friend (who is skinnier but has a smaller bust) pulled off to her right, her very tall boyfriend in the very back, and yours truly awkwardly positioned left and back. In the final picture, I could be seen only from the shoulders up and in shadow.

Honestly, this was insulting enough (especially since none of them would have even gone to the show if I hadn’t suggested it). What ticked me off a lot more was being photographed for some of the store’s early press coverage.

I’m well aware of the fact that fashion-oriented publications put the sticks front and center. As Alexis Meade snappily (and accurately) put it on “Ugly Betty” last season, “Models are hangers! Designers don’t want to see their clothes on fat hangers!” But I am NOT a professional model, and I should NOT be expected to resemble some toothpick from a Chanel ad.

Most of the people who have interviewed me have been perfectly professional. But when the time comes for pictures, they typically play around with different angles, trying to hide my non-arexic frame. Usually I’m photographed from the chest up. One magazine that has featured my flagship store does occasionally print pictures of store owners – IF they resemble the skinny models used in their fashion spreads. My semi-famous vegan Doc Martens were good enough to merit a photo, but I apparently wasn’t (the accompanying article was also full of mistakes and misquotes, but that’s another subject for another rant).

One glossy publication did show me in profile – in a fitted top that was hanging a bit loose at the time because I’d recently had my wisdom teeth removed and lost a few more pounds due to not being able to eat anything solid. Even then, they positioned me VERY carefully so my pelvis wouldn’t look wide. (My best friend is a gifted amateur photographer, so I know about little tricks like this.)

Am I hideous? Offhand, I’d say no. I’ve rejected marriage proposals. I’ve done some amateur modeling at friends’ requests (and, in a pinch, for my own ads). I was even offered a co-starring role in an independent film once (which I turned down because I have a business to run). My measurements do not make me ugly. Nor do they make me less of a person or preclude my ability to be as stylish as I want to be. Just as nobody should have to sacrifice style for ethics, nobody should be made to feel inadequate because they aren’t rail thin.

Some of the most powerful people who have worked in fashion are or were not beautiful. Diana Vreeland, for example, was pin thin (at a time when *some* curvature was preferred), had small eyes and a big nose, and had such oddly-shaped feet that all of her shoes had to be custom made. But, she knew how to make herself look interesting and is still widely respected as a style icon. How someone looks only matters when society allows it to matter. (Which isn’t to say that we shouldn’t groom ourselves and try to dress somewhat nicely. We can’t control our bone structure unless we resort to plastic surgery, but we can and should brush our teeth and polish our shoes.)

I am a fashionably curvy vegan. And there’s nothing wrong with that.