The Afro is beautiful, contrary to what the Fashion industry says

During the late 1960s fashions changed with the times, reflecting the independence and identity of a young generation determined to break free from their parents' values and 1950s sensibilities. One reflection of this trend was the increasing popularity of the Afro, a natural hairstyle worn by African Americans that reflected the growing political and cultural progressiveness and self-esteem among black people during the 1960s.

But 50 years later the Afro still has a bad rep. People don't see the beauty and simplicity in it. Its a sensual and beautiful hair style.

But the Afro was also a political statement during the 1960s, and perhaps this is why the bad rep has stayed so long.

The Afro became more than a hairstyle or fashion trend but a political statement that allowed black people to express their cultural and historical identity. The hairstyle emerged out of the Black Power movement, which rejected Dr. Martin Luther King's emphasis on non-violence as a form of political struggle, but instead embraced the idea of progressive defense (ie. If you someone attacks you, you should be prepared to defend yourself).

However the media at the time demonized the Black Power movement, claiming it endorsed violence for the sake of violence, which was wholly untrue. The Black Power movement was about DEFENDING YOURSELF and enjoying the freedoms you are entitled to.

The Black Power Movement, both politically and culturally, offered black people greater expression that moved away from the subservience of their forebears. Natural hairstyles were considered offensive and therefore many black people during the 1950s would process, perm or conk their hairs to attain a texture that was similar to or mimicked white hair. Wigs were also popular among black women.

Only members of the Nation of Islam (people like civil rights leader Malcolm X) rejected processing and straightening, believing that to do so was to embrace notions of white superiority and that the natural attributes of black people were unattractive. Some of the Muslims still wore their hair in short and neat hairstyles, but it kickstarted the movement towards embracing the Afro for its natural beauty.

But by the late 1960s the civil rights movement and political protests had given way to the Black Power Movement, more young African Americans stopped processing their hair and allowed it to grow out naturally, affecting a halo-shaped hairstyle which was dubbed the Afro.

In the beginning, the Afro was not popular in the black community, particularly among older black people who were still driven by older values that the young people were rejecting. By the 1970s the hairstyle grew more prominent as people such as Stokely Carmichael and members of the Black Panthers began wearing the hairstyle. Women, such as feminist Angela Davis, whose Afro was a famous image of the late sixties and early seventies, let their hair grow out as well, fashioning them in large naturals or in Afro puffs (two ponytails tied together by ribbons).

But one person who would make the Afro more acceptable was musician James Brown. Throughout most of Brown's early career he conked his hair, but by the time he recorded "(Say It Loud) I'm Black and I'm Proud" Brown let his hair grow out naturally as a statement of Black pride and self-sufficiency. His song and the Afro came to define Black America during the 1960s fashions and became a political and cultural statement.

Next lets flash forward to 2012...

I hate to be a spoilsport, but I don’t see anything fabulous about Vogue’s Black Allure shoot.

In the unlikely case that you have missed it, their latest gimmick is using hair styles and fashions from the 1920s to 1950s... periods when black people were enticed to conk their hair to look more like white people.

There has already been a lot of criticism the Vogue editorial has received, mostly on the topic of segregation since Vogue likes to include the occasional Asian or black issue of the magazine and then 99% of the time forget that non-white people exist. That criticism is certainly valid and worth saying.

When Vogue first did a black issue in 2008 it sold like hot cakes. People went crazy buying them and so it makes sense that Vogue would try to repeat that simply for the sake of profits... but why make it a rarity? Why not just include more articles for EVERYONE on a regular basis?

Vogue’s editor, Franca Sozzani, may argue and try to convince us that this was a politically conscious decision. But Sozzani knows he is running a business, not a charity. He is thinking about free buzz and sales.

My criticism is more worried about black and other so-called minority women that are so often greatly excluded from the western high-market fashion industry.

Although to be fair who really wants the white standard fashion model which is based on starvation, submission and exploitation just to be considered as something fashionable?

And so when a VOGUE editorial wants to think of oldie goldie times when black people were emancipated but still treated like second class citizens I seriously question his morality. And what is he really promoting? Black people styling their hair to look like white people? Hmm. Or does he just hate the Afro?

Do we really need photos of black women who are starved, submissive and exploited? I think not.

Women need to be empowered, proud and their hair styles should reflect that.

There may be other fashion blogs which have touched on these topics but I was unable to find one. Sad really. The Black Allure spread and the video looks like it could be an ad for a brothel.

And there is nothing empowering about black women being depicted as prostitutes.

It makes you realize that feminism and equality really needs more focus and attention in the fashion industry.

It’s not all doom and gloom however because there are many brands which embrace empowerment of women. Nike shoes for example. Nike is pretty smart about this too... they market to everyone.







After all do you really want to be marketed to as a separate ethnic group and then placed in a stereotype? Or do you want to be able to make your own choices?

Post-Feminism (the belief that all women have a choice) says that in order for women to make choices they need to know all their options. When choosing fashion or hair styles we need those options so we can show who we really are on the outside.

Telling women they should wear hair styles from the 1920s isn't a choice. Its not even a trend or a fad. Sure, its nice to look at and its nice to have that option, but where is the Afros?

Think about it. Why did Vogue only pick hair styles from the 1920s to 1950s? Its because the 1960s meant Afros and they didn't want to get into that topic. They want to steer women away from the option.

But I say they're wrong.

In the 21st century we now have white women and asian women getting afro-style perms. They're doing it as a fashion statement and because they've recognized its beautiful. Because it is beautiful.

The Horror of Fashion Sweatshops

By Imogen Reed - April 2012.

The National Labor Committee (NLC) and the The Institute for Global Labour and Human Rights have just produced a shocking report into the fashion empire headed by Peter Nygård, the purported ‘number one sportswear manufacturer in Canada’, and 70th richest Canadian with a net worth of $817 million. Quite a success story for the Finnish son of immigrant bakers, who will have known their share of struggle. Strange then that a man from such humble beginnings should be shown to be so indifferent to the working conditions of other poor workers, highlighted in the report, Dirty Clothes (April, 2010).

The Institute for Global Labour and Human Rights is a non-profit human rights organization ‘dedicated to the promotion and defense of internationally recognized worker rights in the global economy.’ Their investigative work in Jordan has brought the most appalling human rights abuses to light, abuses that should concern anyone with an interest in the fashion industry or clothing manufacture. We cannot divorce ourselves from the responsibility to speak out on these issues, or enjoy a passion for fashion in good conscience while these practices are still widespread.

Peter Nygård’s Business Empire

Peter Nygård has built his brand successfully, using 1,200 mainly young female workers from Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and India to sew his garments in the IBG factory in Jordan. However, the workers have been brought to Jordan only to find a world of pain and suffering at the hands of Peter Nygård’s organisation, and he himself has done nothing to stop the human rights abuses happening in the factories he owns. The list of suffering is almost unbelievable and it is to the credit of the NLC that they took on a private investigation, which brought matters to the world’s attention. Please read the Dirty Clothes report and circulate it as widely as possible, to raise awareness of the young women who are being exploited and enslaved by Peter Nygård, and other large manufacturing groups. You will never see mass produced fashion in the same way again. So what is the heart of the story? Let’s look at it in a little more detail.

Human Rights Violations in Peter Nygård’s Factories

So what did the NCL report uncover? The women arriving to work in IBG factories, who produce clothing for Nygård, were stripped of their passports on arrival and kept in conditions of indentured servitude according to the report. They were forced to work sixteen-hour shifts from 7 a.m to 11 p.m, every night of the week. On top of this there are compulsory, night long 23-hour shifts required of the workers, at least once a week, which run from 7 a.m to 6 a.m. 

This is nothing short of human slavery. 

For this 110-hour week they are paid less than half of the legal wage, just 35 cents an hour. When they objected they were hit and threatened with deportation. This is in clear breach of Jordanian labor laws. According to Jordanian law, overtime must be voluntary and must not exceed 14 hours a week, or 60 hours per month. Yet IBG workers are routinely forced to work 102 ½ hours a week, including 54 ½ hours of overtime, exceeding Jordan's legal limit by 289 per cent. Hardly a minor lapse.

The exhaustion suffered by one worker from Sri Lanka, on February 9^th 2010, was so extreme that she stumbled into the path of a truck as she walked to her accommodation after a 39 hour shift. She was died of her injuries.

Furthermore, the report uncovered serious allegations of sexual harassment, rape and even the death of some workers who could not sustain the level of work required of them. With young children at home dependent on the wages the women earned many will endure these conditions to ensure the survival of their families. But exploiting women’s human wish to feed their children should not be part of any modern day manufacturing process. It’s a return to the worst conditions of the early Industrial Revolution. 

 

Who Is To Blame?

Who is in charge of this operation in Jordan and responsible for the conditions? Mr. Anup Sharma, is the head manager for both IBG factories.  Mr. Ahamed Khan is the logistics manager for IBG, and Mr. Arlok is another manager. The women suffering under their regime are mainly between the ages of 18 and 30. NCL produced evidence that the major producer in IBG factory 1 is Nygard, with its Alia, TanJay and Investments (Slim Fx) clothing lines being produced there.

Under the management regime of these men, young women are docked two days wages if they miss a shift for whatever reason. The wages themselves are pitiful, falling far below the legal rates demanded by Jordanian labor laws. How can a company whose owner is worth $817 million not afford to pay its workers a legal wage? Managers at these companies manage to evade responsibility for the workers in their care, some of them little more than children themselves. NCL believes it is time to name and shame those whose actions have led to human right violations.

Filthy Living Conditions

When the workers have finished these exhausting shifts they must walk for half and hour to reach their dormitories for their permitted 5½ sleep. It is a dangerous journey down a busy unmade road, and transport for them has been refused by management. Their accommodation can only be described as ‘unfit for human habitation’. Filthy, infested with insects, vermin and bed-bugs, with no heating and only sporadic access to water for a few hours a day, the women somehow attempt to survive in these conditions.

Peter Nygård’s IBG sweatshops are owned by G4S, the world's largest security service company. At no time have any employees stepped in to try and protect these vulnerable women, who can be paid as little as 9 cents for making a pair of pants which will sell in stores for $38. The mark ups are astonishing and it is not hard to see how Nygård has made his millions. But what price a clear conscience? How is it possible for a decent man to sleep at night – probably on the world’s best memory foam mattress with silk sheets - knowing that vulnerable women, far from home, are being abused and enslaved like this, in order to drive his profits? The answer is clearly that Nygård simply doesn’t care. If it were not for the work of determined humanitarian campaigners the world would be unaware of these shocking practices.

Indentured Slavery

Not only do workers have to endure these conditions, they have to pay for the privilege too. The report is worth quoting here, on the issue of indentured slavery:

In their home countries, the workers had to pay large amounts of money to local broker agencies to purchase their three-year contracts to work in Jordan.  In the case of Bangladesh, the workers had to pay 120,000 to 160,000 taka --$1,735 to $2,313-to purchase their work contracts.  It may not seem like a lot of money to people in Canada or the U.S., but the average cost of work contracts, $2,024, is more than a year's regular wages in Jordan, which is $1,860.46.  It is common that whole extended families have to go into debt to send a daughter to Jordan.  Interest rates in the informal sector are also extraordinarily high, so there is tremendous pressure on the young workers to toil long hours to pay back these loans.

The IBG guest workers' contracts guaranteed that they would receive free and decent accommodation, food and health care in Jordan.  This turned out to be a lie.

NCL Report, Dirty Clothes, April 2010

Call For Action – Fashion Lovers Unite

Canadians are known for their fairness, gentleness and mild manner. It is no surprise then that campaigners are calling for an end to these practices and are turning the heat up on Nygård personally. With Wal-Mart proposing to expand their production work to the Jordanian factories it is long past time for reform. For Nygård’s operation to pull out now would mean financial ruin for the women workers, who have already suffered enough. Demands are now being made for Nygård to simply do the decent thing – pay a fair (and legal) wage, house his workers in decent conditions, stop the abuse and shorten the hours these modern day slaves are being forced to endure. Action is needed, and we are hopeful that fair-minded Canadians will boycott Nygård’s clothing lines until things improve.

People have attempted to create Facebook groups promoting the boycott of Nygård's products but his lawyers always pull some strings and have the groups deleted.


Why is he covering things up so much unless he has a lot to hide?

Prostitution in the Fashion Industry

FASHION / SEX - Say what???

If you didn't notice or know that there was rampant prostitution (and drugs) in the fashion industry you would have to be sticking your head in the sand.

Its there.

People don't really talk about it that much.

You certainly won't see it mentioned in glossy fashion magazines wherein advertisers don't want to upset the feminists by talking about the rampant problems within the fashion industry (sweatshops, child slavery, anorexia, bulimia, overemphasis on beauty, toxic chemicals in makeup, etc).

But WE are not a glossy fashion magazine. We can talk about stuff they won't talk about.

Regardless of what you've seen in films like Pretty Woman, being used for sex is not a love story. Its a heartbreaking, nerve wracking and depressing experience often coupled with drug addiction and an abusive relationship with one's pimp.

A more realistic film to watch would be the French film "Baise Moi"... except cut out the part where the two women go on a killing rampage.

In the fashion industry its different. The women are looking for easy money by being a fashion model and often fall into the partying and drugs crowd and due to their addiction need to find extra ways to make money.

Enter the prostitution rings, like the French prostitution ring which was recently busted and caught Dominique Strauss-Kahn in the process.

It is really only a hop and a step from the catwalk to the escort industry and the sex workers industry. In France and other countries where prostitution is legal its really not that surprising.

Take Germany for example. The industry has become so rampant they have glossy websites like Escort Berlin which let men choose which woman they want to have sex with.

What you may notice about sites like Escort Service Berlin is that the women are mostly imported from other countries... this is because Berlin is one of the top destinations in the world for sex tourism and they have so many men looking to pay for sex that they can't keep up with the demand so they're bringing in foreign labour.

Male tourists and businessmen looking for a good time... not exactly what you think of when you think of German tourist brochures, is it?

I can just imagine the brochures...

Traveling to Berlin / Sightseeing in Berlin? Why not hire Berlin's most luxurious escort agency, the premier in adult entertainment in Germany. Luxury companionship is only a credit card away and unlike other countries, legal and generally accepted by the German public.

Sorry if I am getting off topic with the whole travel / tourism topic, but sex tourism is a big thing in the prostitution industry. Adult oriented travel destinations is big business whether you are visiting Southern Germany, Paris, New York, Hong Kong, Tokyo or Beijing...

You will note that such places are both epicentres for fashion and sex workers. I guess we can't really be that surprised.

In an industry where fashion models frequently snort cocaine and shoot heroin I guess we can't be too surprised by anything in the modeling industry.

Business Casual = Confusion

FASHION - Note to self... don't wear a hoodie to work, even if its "Casual Fridays".

The term "Business Casual" can be rather confusing... you can get away with small things. Little bits of casualness. Not too much however. No bikinis for obvious reasons.

Lets say you have a good understanding of your company's policy allowing business casual attire.

And then one day you get pulled her aside by one of the IT staff who then tells you it is inappropriate to wear Bermuda shorts, sleeveless tops and capris. Seriously, the nerd is telling the fashionista what she can and cannot wear... Has the world gone completely upside down???

Each generation seems to have a different idea of what is acceptable in the workplace... and in such a situation you can't help but be offended. Seriously. Capris! Get a life loser!

On one occasion I was actually not allowed to attend a meeting because my attire was deemed 'inappropriate.' People my age are taught to express themselves... but then when we enter the workforce we're supposed to shut up and do what we're told. We're told to follow our own initiative and think for ourselves, and then told to suddenly become brainwashed zombies... maybe our schooling system should be training sheep instead?

I mean let's say we go to a Toronto accountants school and we're taught to keep track of numbers on computers... sounds pretty dull right? So dull they could probably make a computer program that could track numbers and do accounting for us, erasing the need for accountants in the first place.

In which case we shouldn't need to dress like boring accountants, right? If we replace all the boring jobs with computer programs the only jobs left should be creative jobs, which implies workers should be encouraged to be more imaginative in terms of their artistic freedom.

Next: Are flip-flops appropriate business casual attire?

How about Crocs? (I'd argue Crocs are a fashion don't wherever you are!) They belong at home in your backyard, maybe the beach (if you don't care who sees them), or maybe in greenhouses or sunrooms. Any place you would normally wear sandals, but not necessarily want to be seen in them.

Anywho back to the office...

Business casual has become a staple of the office, but some idiotic companies are trying to enforce rules that set at least a minimum standard of dress (and this minimum is sometimes raised to gestapo like levels). These companies are increasingly enforcing more formal attire, despite calling it "business casual". Its become an oxymoron (smart idiot). Especially at meetings or on days when clients may visit the office, it reaches a point where you wonder what exactly is acceptable in terms of clothing (when in doubt, ask the HR rep, that way if someone asks or says your clothes are inappropriate you can pass the buck to the HR rep who said it was okay).

As summer heats up and fashion trends become even more laid back, employers are wrestling with how to adopt dress-code policies that encourage both productivity and professionalism... and I'd argue that if they really want to enforce gestapo black suits in the height of summer they had better have a good air conditioner in the building. Because if the AC is shoddy, don't expect people to wear thick clothing...

Business casual is a largely popularized topic in the dot-com crazed Silicon Valley. The argument has permeated the workplace, with 60% of employers allowing a dress-down day at least once a week, according to a 2006 survey by the Society for Human Resource Management.

And a backlash is brewing: The number of employers allowing casual dress days every day has plunged from 53% in 2002 to a new low of 38%. Eventually this has to reach a tipping point where people rebel against these often idiotic rules.

And what is even sillier is what is acceptable for "blue collar jobs". You know, work men. Construction workers, factory workers, and so forth. The type of people who fix Ottawa roofing, build decks, dig holes to put in pools, you get the idea. What is acceptable there is a t-shirt and blue jeans. Show up in something different and you will be open to ridicule by the manly men.

So this idea of appropriate work attire isn't limited to the office.

The reason for the return to more dressed-up attire is, in part, is because of the confusion generated by business casual standards. Companies will often lean towards the more gestapo-esque clothing rules when in doubt and then it just becomes a slippery slope.

Lets say for example that flip-flops aren't allowed. What about tennis shoes, jeans and shorts? Sleeveless dresses? T-shirts? Younger employees are more likely to push the envelope, which annoys more veteran workers who have long worked in offices where ties and shirts were expected no matter the day of the week. Such people resent younger workers breaking the rules they've become used to over decades being broken. Meanwhile employers resent becoming fashion police and having to solve disputes between generation gaps (and often managers are older themselves and thus err on the side of the older workers).

Are Casual Fridays getting out of hand?

"It started with casual Fridays and got out of hand," says June Webb, a fashion consultant in Alexandria, Virginia. "Now companies are starting to clamp down a little bit. They've found women have a tendency to show off too much skin, and men tend to show up in clothes that are wrinkled and not ironed."

Seriously. They want us to iron our clothes for "casual fridays"? I have never in my life ironed a pair of jeans.

Despite the push towards gestapo fashion, employer policies still run the gamut and often don't bother to write any official rules down, preferring to handle things on a case by case basis. I'd argue this is because it makes it easier for them to fire people on short notice for "inappropriate attire". An useful tool for bosses who want to fire people and are just waiting for an excuse. Show up wearing capris, get fired.

According to marketing firm McGrath/Power in Santa Clara, California they used to allow shorts, T-shirts and baseball caps on Casual Fridays. But now they require a more businesslike attire, with business casual including 'slacks and skirts'. Like its a school uniform at a prep school.

At McGrath/Power there have been situations where employees were asked to take off a baseball cap, leave on a sweater or not wear something again. With the third warning, employees are sent home to change.

"The pendulum has swung," says McGrath/Power CEO Jonathan Bloom. "We went through a too-casual period. … In the aftermath of the dot-com bubble, we tightened things up a little. When we were very casual, the quality of the work wasn't as good."

Bullshit. Nothing to do with the quality of the work. The economy prior to the dot com bubble bursting was skyrocketing. Unemployment was down. Job satisfaction was up. Companies were in the black (the red is the bad one, because that implies you are bleeding money).

Meanwhile in Auburn, New York, the city manager made headlines in April when he banned most city employees from wearing jeans on Fridays, a day that had long been reserved for casual attire. His office did not return calls seeking comment.

In contrast IBM has thrown out dress codes altogether. Once known as a traditional company of button-down shirts, cuff links and pinstriped suits, today it's an anything-goes approach. People just use common sense.

"As society has changed, so has IBM," says Donna Riley, the human resources vice president at IBM. "We do have a Birkenstock crowd in some of our locations. Many years ago, it was a suit and tie for men and skirt, dress and stockings for women. [Today's policy] says we trust our employees to use good judgment."

General Motors, where suits were once expected, now is also much more casual. Perhaps this is because the managers want to feel more relaxed around their blue collar employees. Not everyone gets away with this however. Employees representing GM to customers, suppliers and visitors are expected to dress consistently with the norms and expectations of the meeting or event, officials say. Business casual does not include athletic shoes, jeans, shorts, tank tops or sweatshirts.

Procter & Gamble also allows employees to dress more casually than in previous generations. Ford Motor Company has a casual business dress code, which is more laid back than 15 or 20 years ago.

"We ask them to use good judgment," says Marcey Evans, a Ford spokeswoman.

Cruelty-Free Clothes

Fashion for Vegetarians, Vegans and the Animal Friendly

If vegan fashion is all about living a more eco-conscious lifestyle, then you may be wondering how it can possibly go hand-in-hand with stylish living. Can the two co-exist? Today's vegan designers prove that this is certainly the case, by refusing to sacrifice aesthetics to create an earth-friendly look. If anything, the inclusion of eco-friendly materials adds to the appeal of the fashion.

Sample Site: veganchic.com

Cruelty-free fashions come in the same wide array of styles and current trends you'd find in the mainstream market. From clothing to handbags and shoes and more, there is no shortage of great items to buy. Vegan fashions are made from plant materials, such as hemp, or synthetic fibers, such as rayon. Many of them also include recycled materials such as rubber and plastic. The dyes used are organic. No one will be able to tell the difference between vegan styles and mainstream looks, unless you let them know. Vegan fashions are durable, comfortable, stylish and even biodegradable, though they are also beautifully crafted to withstand many years of use.

The stylish look of Vegan fashions could easily fool those who still are not aware of this trend into thinking you are wearing real leather, suede, or velvet. They offer rich colors and textures and a bold fashion statement without the harm to animals or the earth. Any eco-conscious, animal loving individual will want to check this out and take advantage of the great range of vegan fashions that is quickly taking over the fashion world.

Sample Site: bboheme.com

You won't have to sacrifice looks or quality or spend a fortune to find beautiful, well-made vegan clothing and accessories. Take a stand against animal cruelty and environmental sacrifice by purchasing vegan fashions, and you'll know you are doing your part to promote a green and eco-friendly way of life.

Whether you are a vegan or simply recognize that wearing clothing made of leather or fur is not kind to the animals, you can make the switch to vegan clothing rather easily. Beautiful vegan fashions can be found in more and more retail stores, and of course a great selection can be found online. Many major brands and up and coming labels make vegan fashions these days, some for their own ethical reasons, and others because they recognize the changing trends and the importance of buying "green" products.

Sample Site: veganfashionblog.com

We all talk about going green, but what exactly does that mean? Many people see it as recycling and using organic products. Is it really all that simple? To go completely green means to recognize all of nature, including the other creatures inhabiting the earth. Do they deserve to be abused and mistreated just so someone can look good? No way. If you truly want to live as green as can be, take things up a notch and go for vegan fashions.

If you love vegan food I recommend beautiful-vegan.com.

See Also
The Rise of Eco-Fashion
European EcoFashion