At the Bstroy fashion show, a model walks down the runway with his head held high, feet moving confidently beneath him, eyes piercing the camera. But no one is focused on that. Instead they are fixated on the hoodie he wears and the words emblazoned across it: Sandy Hook. Three models come after him; one after another they enter with sweatshirts proclaiming: Columbine, Virginia Tech, Margery Stoneman Douglas. If this wasn’t enough, the hoodies are riddled with bullet holes.
As most Americans know, these are the names of some of the worst and most gruesome school shootings in this nation’s history and have become synonymous with pain, violence and loss of innocent lives.
What we have here is an example of a fashion brand using tragedy for profit, and, unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident.
At Gucci’s show on September 23, models were dressed in outfits that drew inspiration from straight jackets and then sent down a conveyor belt runway. Now, you’d think that by now Gucci would have learned their lesson, especially considering their blackface sweater fiasco earlier in the year. But once again they have abandoned all sense of reason and decency in an attempt to be “edgy.”
But this did not sit well with one model in particular named named Ayesha Tan Jones, who uses They/Them pronouns. They chose to take a stand and wrote the words “Mental health is not fashion” on their palms which they held up as they came down the runway. They later took to their Instagram to explain their choice and motivations behind the protest. They stated, “As an artist and model who has experienced my own struggles with mental health, as well as family members and loved ones who have been affected by depression, anxiety, bipolar and schizophrenia, it is hurtful and insensitive for a major fashion house such as Gucci to use this imagery as a concept for a fleeting fashion moment.”
Now there is something to be said for shock value, as proven by the amount of press coverage and shares that these images have received on social media platforms. Of course, the majority of comments have been negative with many people saying how offensive and inappropriate both the hoodies and the straight jackets were. However, other viewers have said that the hoodies in particular were not glorifying school shootings and were instead raising awareness for gun safety.
There’s a difference between making a statement and using tragedy to garner publicity. Shock value is only useful if there is a positive outcome rather than just gaining free advertising in order to line one’s own pockets. If Bstroy really wanted to raise attention for gun control then they would donate profits to a charity that works to regulate guns. It’s not as if these charities are difficult to find. Just google gun control charities and 7 million results will pop up.
Not because of the stigma surrounding the issue but because of the sensitivity of it, mental illness is a topic that should be approached with sincerity. And as for Gucci, their lackadaisical and tactless attitude was a serious misstep by the brand.
Both fashion brands produced controversial collections without much thought as to the ramifications. While fashion can and should make a statement, there must be a certain amount of care and respect when dealing with such sensitive subjects. Both Bstroy and Gucci have an obligation first and foremost to the victims and their families, not their profits.
Written by Sarah Minor
Graphic by Mary Fant