eeehhh.....well at least its not a white model, right? Because then it would be simply outrageous.

sorry to offend....but I really don't understand this and the "Afrika" AA thing.

I actually think the line is attractive. Especially that first gown. I take your point on the shoes, though.

As for the previous discussion (I sat it out), I will just say that there are white Africans, though they're descended from colonists. I'm not saying that at ALL excuses having an all-white show, nor does it excuse anything American Apparel EVER does ever, but I did have some neighbors who were white South Africans and who grew up fighting apartheid and embracing the African side of their surroundings, who were SHOCKED at how anti-white Americans were at African functions (art shows, culture days, etc).

Idk, I think having any shoe where your weight is supposed on the back of a woman is pretty fuct, whether or not racism is a factor...

I actually think the line is pretty... but those heels.
Oh god, they look painful.

I meant to say "supported". Sorry!

The heels are creepy, and I do think that comment on the "Afrika" thread should be highlighted- it's a great explanation (which is what I was asking for on that thread, I was one of the heathens that didn't initially get it)!

*Hopefully constructive criticism* Your post comes off somewhat condescending to those of us that haven't studied racism in depth and need a bit more explanation than those that do.
Not having knowledge doesn't mean I don't care, and I would assume that goes for most people. It just means that I am open to be enlightened by those that do understand.

samhita, that is a very good post and thanks for calling it out. I still disagree though...fashion does this sort of thing to a great variety of cultures and societies. You can find examples of "inspired" clothing lines that mimic Scandinavian culture or Japanese culture or Indian culture- yet no one has highlighted them as offensive.

I also was really discouraged reading the various comments that found the white model offensive. Many posters said white people shouldn't wear ethnic type clothing- zebra prints or moccassins or chop sticks in their hair. If anyone ever said something along the lines of "Black people shouldn't wear clogs or saris or chop sticks in their hair" they would be immediately chastised for it.

I understand its a touchy subject....and I still don't get it...I apologize if my views offend people.

I will never understand high fashion. Is that a sexified nun's habit?

" You can find examples of "inspired" clothing lines that mimic Scandinavian culture or Japanese culture or Indian culture- yet no one has highlighted them as offensive"

Thank you, I am always unsettled by celtic jewellery on those who don't always know what it represents.

Samhita-

They would get hateful looks and comments when they wore african print and style clothes, because they were white and blonde. They came back absolutely amazed that people would a) be so brusk and b) assume that someone who is white has no cultural association with African style.

jro, actually, people have commented on fashion's other cultural appropriations as offensive. You're just not looking in the right places. And the old "if Black people did this..." doesn't work. There is a difference between those in power ripping off the cultures of those they oppress, and oppressed cultures borrowing from each other. (This is not to say that even all POC are conscious about adopting another culture's fashions--sometimes everyone acts thoughtlessly.) Similarly, if African people adopt Western dress, it's not appropriation, it's assimilation--they are adopting the clothes of the powerful so that the powerful will respect them more, hire them, etc.

bifemme- I get that. Companies that basically steal trends from other cultures to turn a profit suck, undoubtedly. But really- why can't a white person wear moccasins or other ethnic type clothing? Maybe they find that particular culture fascinating, maybe they even study it, maybe they know a lot about it. I don't get why anyone would discourage it, tell people they can't be curious about other cultures...it seems detrimental.

And maybe some African people adopt Western dress because they like it? Its a possibility...just saying.

"jro, actually, people have commented on fashion's other cultural appropriations as offensive. You're just not looking in the right places."

Where are the right places? I'd like to know. And anywhere on this site in particular?

jro--No one says westerners or white people can't be curious about other cultures. What *is* bad is adopting a foreign style of dress without an understanding of the culture that dress came from, or doing anything to benefit that culture. For instance, several Indian-American bloggers pointed out, when Madonna was wearing mehndi and Gwen Stefani was sporting bindis, that they themselves would get flack from friends and neighbors for wearing those things to school as a legitimate expression of their background, but when a pretty white girl did it, suddenly it was "cool", "hip" and trendy.

Look up "exotification" for the perils of finding a foreign culture fascinating. And btw, I do sympathize with your position, as a white girl who has always loved Indian fashions and decorative arts myself. However, there came a point when it just didn't feel right for me anymore to wear salwar kameez no matter how cute I thought they were. I realized that if I truly loved that culture, I had to respect it and acknowledge my outsider status. That doesn't mean I've stopped renting Bollywood movies, eating curry and naan and dreaming about visiting India some day. Some forms of cultural exchange are less fraught than others.

bifemmefatale-

The one that really annoys me is the appropriation of East Asian cultures, but my Chinese husband LOVES kimono-and-corsets on white/Latina/Persian girls.

On the other hand, I remember reading in a British magazine about people who get stupid tattoos to look "exotic" and end up looking the fool. Kids who ask for Japanese or Chinese characters and go around for months not knowing they have "This is an ugly boy" tattooed on their flesh. My favorite was a trend in Texas for men to get Maori chin markings as a sign of virility, when in Maori culture, those tattoos are a sign of female fertility.

jro--
Just some quick resources I found googling fashion, cultural appropriation:
http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~caforum/volume3/pdf/shand.pdf
http://www.passtheroti.com/?p=388#more-388
http://givemespacetorock.wordpress.com/2008/09/17/cultural-appropriation/
http://www.modelminority.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=241
http://media.www.themhnews.com/media/storage/paper999/news/2008/03/27/Opinion/More-Than.A.Fashion.Statement-3290587.shtml

Many people wear clothing that represents other cultures and they don't even know the meaning of it. I do not think that the makers of this clothing line intended anything to be seen as racist.

Many people wear clothing that represents other cultures and they do not even know the meaning behind it. They wear it because that is what is in the stores, on the run ways, and in the magazines. I do not think this designed was thinking of this in a racist way. I just think they were trying to put a new spin on fashion.

I think this is a good that we are pointing this out.

Maybe while we are at it we can also point out how ad agencies and the tv and movie industries here in America are racist in there portrayals of white males. Here are some association words: Moron, inconsequential, morally immature, unintelligent, bad father and husband, cowardly.

Lest we forget, if it is wrong to portray minorities and women in those ways, then it is also wrong to portray white males that way.

Oh stronggirl18, who will pity the poor white mens?!? How will they ever overcome their abundance of privilege and the crushing burden of power?
*cough*splutter*

Yawn. Boring troll.

Maybe she didn't say it exactly right and maybe she was trolling, but I get what stronggirl18 was saying - I was raised to believe that two wrongs don't make a right.

In other words - you cannot raise yourself up by standing on the backs of others, even if they had it coming. ;)

I love saris and wish I could wear them but as a truly homogenous white girl of Scottish descent I feel completely out of my element and offensive to do so. I also have several friends with "Asian" tattoos - that just makes me grit my teeth.

That looks a lot like the Venus of Willendorf. Even if Galliano meant it to be "African", the statue I'm referencing was found in Austria.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_of_Willendorf

I have a different opinion on the AA 'Afrika' line, and this post could have been phrased in a less condescending manner. It's not my blog, but some people may have not understood the 'racism' while others simply do not agree. Holding a different opinion about this is not ignorance of the issues around it.

I'm calling "her" out as a troll because she's hitting several threads in order to distract from the topic at hand in order to post a hand-wringing "what about the MENZ?" message. The very definition of a troll.

I think one of the most offensive aspects of this fashion shoe is the placement of the figure at the heel, not only "supporting her weight" in a very subordinate manner, but touching the ground, which is considered often to be a sign of disrespect. Imagine if another culture made a shoe with the statue of liberty or a "mainstream" religious figure as the heel. I'd imagine it would be met with measurable outcry.

The fertility idol shoes are just weird. It's kind of ironic to see a figure like that one -- fat, with breasts and an ass -- held up as fashionable when the fashion world idolizes skinny girls.

I tend to think of fashion as art, which means I'll give it a lot of slack when it comes to appropriation. As long as it's not completely disrespectful, I don't usually have a problem.

And I still don't think that wearing leopard print is at all racist.

I don't think you have to "oh no" bringing up the topic again - in fact, I think the more examples and explanation you provide, the more people will "get it." I took many women's and minority's studies classes in college, and this is a new topic for me. But I think it's important to not ridicule or insult people who don't get it - like Halo mentioned above, just because we don't understand doesn't mean we're not open to figuring it out.

Civchic, whether or she "stronggirl18" made a point, it's not even relevant to this conversation! No one was attacking men anywhere in this thread. The only reason to keep bringing it up in everything single post is trolling.

stronggirl18 = troll. ignore him. yes, him.

Oh come on! Stronggirl was hilariously bad at trolling. It was amusing me. The delicate phrasing was priceless, as if we are stupid enough to go "Gee, I never realized white men were so oppressed and rape victims were lying!"

::Throws feminist cap to the ground, adds McCain pin to t-shirt::

the one thing i have to point out is this: generally when someone copies something, it's because of a perceived lack of their own. i think that applies here. in the past, many artists of dominant cultures have gone to/appropriated from less technologically advanced cultures (think gauguin going to tahiti) because they perceived some level of "realness", some genuine quality to those cultures that is lacking in their own. i think this is very active in our own culture today; we seem to almost fetishize tribal and ancient cultures, in my opinion, because of the high degree of confusion, upheaval, lack of identity, etc. that characterizes our postmodern condition, with its myriad viewpoints and tensions between faith and science. i can't find the exact quote right now, but the philosopher cornel west said something about how "we are facing an existential crisis that transcends time and space" in american/western culture, and i think he's absolutely right....we spend so much time getting advertised at (and AA is ironically one of the worst offenders) that i think they are trying to appeal to consumers through the idea that native/indigenous cultures are simpler but more pure than our own. yes, this gets into "noble savage" territory, but rather than make quick value judgments (i.e., "AA is racist! racist = bad!"), let's explore what this says about us. the reason this keeps cropping up says less about racism (in my view) than it does about our own sense of isolation and cultural confusion.

baddesignhurts,
I think you do have a point. But I don't think that makes it any better at all, because it's still about our culture viewing non-western cultures as simpler / less complex ... and more primitive. It's about our fantasy of what these cultures are rather than what they are in reality.

jlw,
i think you're exactly right....it is definitely about a short of cultural shorthand: we have "symbols" that indicate "africanness" in our culture, and those certainly have to do with being "primitive" or "tribal" or whathaveyou. i guess i just don't think it's awfully productive to merely identify or enumerate the myriad companies that are playing with essentially elementary symbols. (i mean, i remember being abroad and telling people i met that i lived in arizona. more people that i can count asked me if i was a cowgirl or if i knew how to shoot a six-gun or if i'd ever killed a coyote. i live in phoenix, the fifth-largest city in the country, for god's sake.)

i agree that use of symbols in this manner is by its nature simplistic and can be exploitative if the consuming group mistakes the use of those symbols for the intricacy and complexity of people's real lives, and as we know, africa is a large place with all different kinds of people. yes, AA is most likely ass-ignorant here, not overtly trying to be hurtful, but instead being unthinking and uncritical about its messaging. but i don't think that's really ground-breaking news here.

i'm more interested in what AA *was* thinking about, rather than what they *weren't* considering (though they have certainly been offensive). and i have the suspicion that the reason they created this product line is (obviously) because they think americans will buy something that evokes, to most people, a foreign culture, and the deeper reason for this is because americans are at heart dissatisfied with their own. to acknowledge this is most certainly not excusing aa's actions, but instead to explain them. to me, it's not very interesting to end the discussion with "it's racist!" it's much more interesting to explore what gives rise to racism....usually the answers are more complex than any of us think.

i think much of this essential dissatisfaction with american culture comes from a loss of cohesive identity among the dominant class/ethnic group. that, however, is a much longer discussion.

I'm sorry but at what point can the western world refer to African (or others') virtues, concepts, tenets, ideas, etc without it coming off as a brand of racism stemming from exoticism? I agree that we as a part of the western world still heavily entrench fetish ideals along side foreign countries, brown skin, African patterns, sexual preference, musical taste... but it's almost unavoidable even for those who look towards the U.S. with their own fantasies and misconceptions.

What about the cargo cults of WWII: the islanders who created ritual performances mimicking American military actions under the belief it would bring the magical white man and "cargo" to their islands. This is nothing new. This is nothing that only applies to the white world fetishizing African ideals. Maybe we should encourage further understanding of this phenomenon as opposed to labeling all of it as intrinsically bigoted.

baddesignhurts,
I do think you bring up some good points, and I totally agree that the discussion should not end with the determination that something is racist. It is interesting to look at the motives and causes behind these ways of thinking. I guess the only other idea I was trying to add is that it is also important to have a discussion about western appropriation of non-western cultures that seeks to make a space for non-western cultures to speak for themselves. In order to do that, we first have to acknowledge where the appropriation is taking place.

On top of everything else, the shoes are hideous. Heels are so small, and so far from the eyesight of anyone but a foot fetishist getting down to lick, that all you'd really see is a lumpy shape.

OT: augh, can't something be done about that godawful Bud Light ad?

"Some folks didn't understand why putting thin, white models, in faux tribal and animal prints with the title, "Afrika" was racist. So be it."

Um, Samhita? The post you're referencing was animal prints only. Which I still maintain, some people like because they like animals. If you want to keep arguing that liking tiger and leopard prints is always, under all circumstances, racist, go ahead, but don't misrepresent what the original argument was.

I think the real question is when ads that just so happen to include a dismembered female body or less than respectful treatment towards a woman can stop being linked to systematic misogyny. I mean really, maybe it's just a joke or only the legs fit in the frame. (argh, I've failed to control the snark!)

The problem isn't the individual instance, it's the system it springs from and reinforces. Disembodied representations of woman can be part of good work against confining definitions of womanhood (warning: nekkid ladies). Not that I can think of any, but certainly there has been work in the world of fashion that broadened and deepened understanding of Africa in the states. The AA Africa line is not an example of that.

Designers or individuals can and will take all the inspiration they want from cultures not their own, and the question (to me) is not whether that individual is doing it thoughtfully or respectfully, the question is how their product moves the big cultural needle. If someone accidentally creates something that increases anti-racist sentiment, I don't care why or how they did it, I just think it's lovely it's there.

The problem with the AA Afrika line is that it reinforces an already present habit of imagining Africa as a monolithic continent defined by animals and minimally contextualized tribes. Mr. Charney's line of clothing won't last as long as this perception of Africa, and their Afrika line is one little contribution to that fact.