russianelf
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2014
- Messages
- 1,361
- Reaction score
- 747
lmao @ Laura Brown coming to the latest InStyle thread to take offence over light shade at her usage of the word 'boss'
Designer & Fashion Insiders Behavior (PLEASE READ POST #1 BEFORE POSTING)
- Thread starter violet_echoes*~
- Start date
russianelf
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2014
- Messages
- 1,361
- Reaction score
- 747
Diet Prada shaming a brand for releasing a buddhist swastika necklace and getting rightfully dragged in the comments.
Littleathquakes
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2008
- Messages
- 5,667
- Reaction score
- 158
sigh this has been ongoing for years. Z vs S. The directions of the symbol are completely opposite and yet people still can't understand the difference. I mean S is for swastika, it's pretty simple to remember. So if you see the Z orientation, it's the peace symbol.
JPineapple
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2018
- Messages
- 2,701
- Reaction score
- 3,757
Benn98
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2014
- Messages
- 42,531
- Reaction score
- 20,512
^I wonder whether Naomi will say something.
In other news....does it mean I have to stop using his perfumes now, which truth be told is my go-to travel scent!
Women Who Sued John Varvatos for Sex Discrimination Are Fighting the Brand’s Bankruptcy Proceedings
July 17, 2020 - By TFL
When John Varvatos filed for bankruptcy in May, the fashion brand’s largest creditor was not the owner of any of its respective brick-and-mortar store real estate, such as its outpost in East Hampton, New York, its store in Caesar Palace in Las Vegas or its shop in Malibu Country Mart. It similarly was not any of its suppliers that provide the necessary textiles that the brand uses to make its rock-n-roll inspired jackets or distressed denim. No, it was a group of class-action lawsuit claimants, who are collectively seeking $5.2 million of the more than $100 million that Varvatos owes to creditors.
As it turns out, the money is owed to the group of women stems from the class action sex discrimination lawsuit that former John Varvatos employee Tessa Knox filed against the brand in a New York federal court in February 2017 on behalf of herself and similarly-situated female sales associates. Knox and nearly 70 other current and former John Varvatos employees accused the brand of pay discrimination on the basis of gender due to the fact that its clothing allowance significantly favors male employees at the expense of female employees. To be exact, Varvatos had a practice of providing male employees with a $12,000 clothing allowance so they could wear the brand’s apparel while working (in accordance with company policy), while female employees would receive a 50 percent discount to shop at Varvatos’s sister brand, AllSaints, the value of which was capped at $5,000 per year.
In late March, on the heels of a jury trial centering on the gender discrimination claims, Judge Gabriel Gorenstein, a federal magistrate judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, ordered that Varvatos pay over $5.2 million in damages and legal fees to the class of female employees.
Within a couple of months of the jury verdict and subsequent attorney’s fees award, Varvatos had filed for bankruptcy protection without paying the multi-million dollar sum it owed to the plaintiffs. As a result, Knox sought to gain an upper hand in terms of the $5.2 million by asking the Delaware bankruptcy court to essentially downgrade the secured claim held by Varvatos’ existing private equity backer Lion Hendrix Cayman Ltd. (“Lion”). In an inter-bankruptcy complaint filed in June, Knox argued that she and the other class action plaintiffs are entitled to “equitable subordination,” a bankruptcy mechanism that would preserve their right to payment by reordering their claim and that of secured creditor Lion Capital.
Lion, as a secured creditor, has priority over Knox and the other class action plaintiffs, which is a problem, she argued, given that Lion “fully understood that [Varvatos] engaged in intentional and illegal sex discrimination through its [employee] clothing allowance policy.” Because “Lion currently controls the [Varvatos’] Board of Directors, and therefore controls the company,” it “not only encouraged [Varvatos] to continue that discrimination, but facilitated it,” Knox argued.
Against that background and in light of the fact that Varvatos has “disclosed that its proposed sale [to Lion] would all but extinguish [Varvatos’] unsecured creditors,” Knox argued that equitable subordination – or a reordering of the relative priority of claims due to the misconduct of one creditor that causes injury to others – is warranted here since in order to ensure that she and other plaintiffs are paid before Lion acquires Varvatos and thereby, forgives some $76 million in existing debt.
Unfortunately for Knox, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware did not agree. In a decision dated July 10, Bankruptcy Judge Mary F. Walrath dismissed the complaint after asserting in a virtual hearing that the plaintiffs failed to make their case as to Lion’s involvement in Varvatos’ discriminatory clothing allowance policy. Unsatisfied with the outcome, counsel for Knox has since appealed the court’s decision, and in the meantime, Knox has joined a number of other unsecured creditors of Varvatos that are seeking to block the Lion deal by filing a motion on July 11 to “join the objection of the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors” on the basis that “she is entitled to equitable subordination of the asserted liens of the proposed credit bidder, Lion Hendrix Cayman Ltd. as requested in [her previous] adversary proceeding.”
The pool of unsecured creditors is taking issue with Varvatos’ motion for an order approving the sale of its assets to Lion “free and clear of claims, liens, and encumbrances.”
The Fashion Law
In other news....does it mean I have to stop using his perfumes now, which truth be told is my go-to travel scent!
Women Who Sued John Varvatos for Sex Discrimination Are Fighting the Brand’s Bankruptcy Proceedings
July 17, 2020 - By TFL
When John Varvatos filed for bankruptcy in May, the fashion brand’s largest creditor was not the owner of any of its respective brick-and-mortar store real estate, such as its outpost in East Hampton, New York, its store in Caesar Palace in Las Vegas or its shop in Malibu Country Mart. It similarly was not any of its suppliers that provide the necessary textiles that the brand uses to make its rock-n-roll inspired jackets or distressed denim. No, it was a group of class-action lawsuit claimants, who are collectively seeking $5.2 million of the more than $100 million that Varvatos owes to creditors.
As it turns out, the money is owed to the group of women stems from the class action sex discrimination lawsuit that former John Varvatos employee Tessa Knox filed against the brand in a New York federal court in February 2017 on behalf of herself and similarly-situated female sales associates. Knox and nearly 70 other current and former John Varvatos employees accused the brand of pay discrimination on the basis of gender due to the fact that its clothing allowance significantly favors male employees at the expense of female employees. To be exact, Varvatos had a practice of providing male employees with a $12,000 clothing allowance so they could wear the brand’s apparel while working (in accordance with company policy), while female employees would receive a 50 percent discount to shop at Varvatos’s sister brand, AllSaints, the value of which was capped at $5,000 per year.
In late March, on the heels of a jury trial centering on the gender discrimination claims, Judge Gabriel Gorenstein, a federal magistrate judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, ordered that Varvatos pay over $5.2 million in damages and legal fees to the class of female employees.
Within a couple of months of the jury verdict and subsequent attorney’s fees award, Varvatos had filed for bankruptcy protection without paying the multi-million dollar sum it owed to the plaintiffs. As a result, Knox sought to gain an upper hand in terms of the $5.2 million by asking the Delaware bankruptcy court to essentially downgrade the secured claim held by Varvatos’ existing private equity backer Lion Hendrix Cayman Ltd. (“Lion”). In an inter-bankruptcy complaint filed in June, Knox argued that she and the other class action plaintiffs are entitled to “equitable subordination,” a bankruptcy mechanism that would preserve their right to payment by reordering their claim and that of secured creditor Lion Capital.
Lion, as a secured creditor, has priority over Knox and the other class action plaintiffs, which is a problem, she argued, given that Lion “fully understood that [Varvatos] engaged in intentional and illegal sex discrimination through its [employee] clothing allowance policy.” Because “Lion currently controls the [Varvatos’] Board of Directors, and therefore controls the company,” it “not only encouraged [Varvatos] to continue that discrimination, but facilitated it,” Knox argued.
Against that background and in light of the fact that Varvatos has “disclosed that its proposed sale [to Lion] would all but extinguish [Varvatos’] unsecured creditors,” Knox argued that equitable subordination – or a reordering of the relative priority of claims due to the misconduct of one creditor that causes injury to others – is warranted here since in order to ensure that she and other plaintiffs are paid before Lion acquires Varvatos and thereby, forgives some $76 million in existing debt.
Unfortunately for Knox, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware did not agree. In a decision dated July 10, Bankruptcy Judge Mary F. Walrath dismissed the complaint after asserting in a virtual hearing that the plaintiffs failed to make their case as to Lion’s involvement in Varvatos’ discriminatory clothing allowance policy. Unsatisfied with the outcome, counsel for Knox has since appealed the court’s decision, and in the meantime, Knox has joined a number of other unsecured creditors of Varvatos that are seeking to block the Lion deal by filing a motion on July 11 to “join the objection of the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors” on the basis that “she is entitled to equitable subordination of the asserted liens of the proposed credit bidder, Lion Hendrix Cayman Ltd. as requested in [her previous] adversary proceeding.”
The pool of unsecured creditors is taking issue with Varvatos’ motion for an order approving the sale of its assets to Lion “free and clear of claims, liens, and encumbrances.”
The Fashion Law
vayacondios
Member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2020
- Messages
- 14
- Reaction score
- 16
Well said.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2017
- Messages
- 14,345
- Reaction score
- 20,006
Looks like someone's still not over those drunken scandals... To try and ignore the designer that literally made Dior what it is today is incredibly petty and disrespectful if you ask me. Galliano deserves the recognition and his spot in this line-up (you can see that the artist did a portrait of him in the video, but they obviously refused to share it which is also disrespectful to artist himself). Especially considering the fact that they're still earning money off of his designs today.
If anyone should've been excluded from the post, it's MGC cause she literally contributed nothing new or relevant to this brand.
Can't say I agree. I feel for anyone with drug and alcohol problems but telling people you loved Hitler because they would have died in Nazi Germany is not normal, in any drunken high and sober state at all, and all the times I have seen people on days-long benders I have never heard anyone say anything close to the things he did. Racism and anti-semitism to the degree you want people dead is never acceptable, drugs are not an excuse and for us to ever glorify those people again in the limelight makes us complicit with their actions. If you are angered by the George Floyd video but think we should glorify Galliano, you're missing the point completely.
susseinmcswanny
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 7, 2020
- Messages
- 1,750
- Reaction score
- 4,732
If I was put on a pedestal to be made out to be a superstar while being under that much pressure to fuel the life of a multimillion dollar company and pumped full of alcohol and drugs to cope and had past trauma from being bullied for my ethnicity as a child and had a psychotic break I wouldn’t even know what the f*ck would come out of my mouth. It’s over. It’s been over. He ranted while he was out of his mind in 2011. He’s gone to rehab. He’s apologized. He knows what he said is wrong and WHY it’s wrong. He’s been sober for almost 10 years. He doesn’t speak like that. Does not hurt anyone. Does nothing to promote or enable such thoughts or behavior. You can harass him about it for the rest of his life but your opinion does not justify making him out to be a horrible person today.
Last edited:
Lola701
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2014
- Messages
- 10,171
- Reaction score
- 19,035
It reminds me of the time when at Gucci, during the Frida’s tenure, they tried their hardest to erase Tom’s legacy...
I’m a bit conflicted...Because it’s more personal than it is about the 2011 controversy. The fact that Galliano has been very low-key and humble in the past decade has made people accept him more. He is living a very different life now and people are not shocked to know that he works at Margiela.
At the same time, Dior is still living off his legacy. The aura of his work still works for the mystique of the house.
But I don’t think Arnault or even Toledano have moved on. I don’t think they even met since the controversy...And by always trying to erase him, they makes him even more present!
I’m a bit conflicted...Because it’s more personal than it is about the 2011 controversy. The fact that Galliano has been very low-key and humble in the past decade has made people accept him more. He is living a very different life now and people are not shocked to know that he works at Margiela.
At the same time, Dior is still living off his legacy. The aura of his work still works for the mystique of the house.
But I don’t think Arnault or even Toledano have moved on. I don’t think they even met since the controversy...And by always trying to erase him, they makes him even more present!
Sure I believe people can have second chances and can change and I am glad if he is living a peaceful remorseful life, but I don't agree that anyone who ever makes racist comments to that extent should be glorified in the public eye and I don't use drugs, alcohol or fame as excuses. We have seen what happens when people have the attitude that others should die because of their race and act on it - the only difference from them and Galliano is they did it and he talked about how he would love it to happen, multiple times, but everyone thinks he should be held up as a hero and forgiven because he is an incredibly talented artist. He went to rehab and apologised because he was on video. Don't kid yourself that if he wasn't videod he ever would have gone to rehab or apologised to anyone, or ever wanted to change. The only way we get past racism in our society is by not heaping praise and fame on racists - for Dior to hold that behaviour up as acceptable during this time would have been totally tone-deaf and gross.
Unfortunately it seems with celebrities we are just willing to turn a blind eye to that kind of behaviour as long as they bring us good art - certainly how sexual abuse has gone so far in the industry, and absolutely why it is so racist. Galliano was a terrible person to many people, by many accounts in the industry. But hey, drugs and alcohol apparently excuse everything everyone does hey (I for one never wish for genocide on strangers when I am drunk or high, but maybe that is just me!) If he was some untalented nobody no one would want to put him on a pedestal.
Benn98
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2014
- Messages
- 42,531
- Reaction score
- 20,512
Francesco Risso's apology for the Marni flip flop campaign:
The backstory:
Marni faces backlash for racist ‘jungle mood’ campaign
Featuring problematic imagery and equally problematic messaging
29 July 2020
Text Emma Elizabeth Davidson
Marni is facing backlash for its newly-released flip-flop campaign, which features a number of Black models in problematic ensembles alongside a bunch of equally problematic statements.
Unleashed on the world yesterday via Instagram, and spotted soon after by Diet Prada, the images depict models wearing a series of ‘ethnic’ items including woven grass hats, chunky wooden Bayong necklaces, and piles of bangles – none of which, noted DP, form part of the Italian label’s latest collection (go figure).
Elsewhere, in a photograph that has since been deleted from Marni’s IG account, one model is photographed with large chains near to their feet, which, unless you look incredibly closely, resemble shackles. Another has their skin painted with clay patterns.
But just when you think it couldn’t get any worse, it does. Finishing the whole thing off was an email send-out featuring a series of the images finished with statements reading “Jungle mood”, “Barefoot in the jungle”, and “Tribal amulet”(!) which are seemingly intended to convey the flip-flop campaign’s mood and themes, but instead serve to reinforce archaic racist and colonial stereotypes.
Surprisingly, the campaign was lensed by Afro-Braziliian photographer Edgar Azevedo, and art-directed by Giovanni Bianco, who is Brazilian-Italian. As Diet Prada put it in their own IG post: “Was something lost in translation? More context provided by the brand to explain the vision and collaboration with the photographer could have helped in this situation, but needless to say, the damage was done when the marketing team decided on those words.” The product shots of flip flops superimposed over the models don’t exactly help.
In the post’s comments, people were quick to call out the brand, with some asking what percentage of Black people Marni employs, and others questioning how the campaign was signed-off and released. Seemingly, the brand isn’t paying too much attention to the backlash, given an image which features a white, jewel-encrusted flip-flop placed in front of a Black model alongside a caption reading “The adorned White Queen appeared compliant yet sculptural” remained on its own IG. Truly, the fashion industry never ceases to amaze.
Of course, it’s not the first time something like this has happened, with the language used reminiscent of that for the press notes of Valentino’s SS16 show – which was also condemned. Elsewhere, Gucci and Prada both faced backlash over racist products in 2018. In response, the labels set up diversity and inclusion boards, with Prada employees around the world also undergoing racial sensitivity training. With fashion currently facing a reckoning when it comes to dismantling the systemic racism that underpins the industry, it seems Marni could do to follow in their footsteps.
Dazed
The backstory:
Marni faces backlash for racist ‘jungle mood’ campaign
Featuring problematic imagery and equally problematic messaging
29 July 2020
Text Emma Elizabeth Davidson
Marni is facing backlash for its newly-released flip-flop campaign, which features a number of Black models in problematic ensembles alongside a bunch of equally problematic statements.
Unleashed on the world yesterday via Instagram, and spotted soon after by Diet Prada, the images depict models wearing a series of ‘ethnic’ items including woven grass hats, chunky wooden Bayong necklaces, and piles of bangles – none of which, noted DP, form part of the Italian label’s latest collection (go figure).
Elsewhere, in a photograph that has since been deleted from Marni’s IG account, one model is photographed with large chains near to their feet, which, unless you look incredibly closely, resemble shackles. Another has their skin painted with clay patterns.
But just when you think it couldn’t get any worse, it does. Finishing the whole thing off was an email send-out featuring a series of the images finished with statements reading “Jungle mood”, “Barefoot in the jungle”, and “Tribal amulet”(!) which are seemingly intended to convey the flip-flop campaign’s mood and themes, but instead serve to reinforce archaic racist and colonial stereotypes.
Surprisingly, the campaign was lensed by Afro-Braziliian photographer Edgar Azevedo, and art-directed by Giovanni Bianco, who is Brazilian-Italian. As Diet Prada put it in their own IG post: “Was something lost in translation? More context provided by the brand to explain the vision and collaboration with the photographer could have helped in this situation, but needless to say, the damage was done when the marketing team decided on those words.” The product shots of flip flops superimposed over the models don’t exactly help.
In the post’s comments, people were quick to call out the brand, with some asking what percentage of Black people Marni employs, and others questioning how the campaign was signed-off and released. Seemingly, the brand isn’t paying too much attention to the backlash, given an image which features a white, jewel-encrusted flip-flop placed in front of a Black model alongside a caption reading “The adorned White Queen appeared compliant yet sculptural” remained on its own IG. Truly, the fashion industry never ceases to amaze.
Of course, it’s not the first time something like this has happened, with the language used reminiscent of that for the press notes of Valentino’s SS16 show – which was also condemned. Elsewhere, Gucci and Prada both faced backlash over racist products in 2018. In response, the labels set up diversity and inclusion boards, with Prada employees around the world also undergoing racial sensitivity training. With fashion currently facing a reckoning when it comes to dismantling the systemic racism that underpins the industry, it seems Marni could do to follow in their footsteps.
Dazed
susseinmcswanny
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 7, 2020
- Messages
- 1,750
- Reaction score
- 4,732
Why does everyone ignore the fact that he was a person that was having a psychotic break. He was legit not sane. Delusional. It's not like he went one minute sober clearheaded hunky-dory to having a drink and spewing a bunch of hate. He was drunk and high every day for years. Seriously does anyone not know the behavior of a hardcore addict? IT IS CRAZY. They aren't living in reality. They will do and say unpredictably WHATEVER when provoked. It was for the best he was fired from Dior. If he wasn't caught on camera, confronted, and held accountable, he'd probably be dead by now.
No one is turning a blind eye to anything regarding John Galliano. I, for one, acknowledge the situation and condemn his past racist behavior. However, I don't judge the entirety of his potential as a human being by his downward spiral during his tenure at Dior. If I selectively judged him by his hateful words, yeah I would check the box of disgusting human being and want nothing to do with him. I would be suspicious and wonder what evil he is scheming behind the scenes if he was kept as a glorified icon at Dior. His situation is much more complex than being racist. I truly have empathy for him because addiction is a demon. Hurt people hurt people. His growth as a person to this day is not the ideation of a racist icon. If anything, for me, his story has the potential to give hope to people with the message that if you are at absolute rock bottom, you can and will get better. He is now creating some of the most interesting, thought provoking clothing of the 21st century, out of the public eye for that matter. He currently spreads nothing but love, inclusivity, and creativity. He is an inspiration to me
Benn98
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2014
- Messages
- 42,531
- Reaction score
- 20,512
“You doooooo”
I swear I will start using that, complete with a condescending frown, lol.
It sounds to me as if she was more amazed that the waiter didn't know vs the fact that they wouldn't have any avo.
Benn98
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2014
- Messages
- 42,531
- Reaction score
- 20,512
REESE WITHERSPOON’S FASHION LINE DRAPER JAMES RECEIVED PPP LOAN AMIDST DRESS GIVEAWAY CONTROVERSY
written by Freya Drohan August 3, 2020
Just as a Draper James dress giveaway bonanza was hitting the headlines for all the wrong reasons, the label owned by Reese Witherspoon secured a PPP loan in the region of $350,000 to $1 million.
Back in April, the Southern-inspired fashion line wanted to thank school teachers for their efforts educating kids remotely. A social media call out seemed to suggest that the brand would be giving away free dresses to every teacher in the country (an estimated three million people) “while supplies last.” The viral interest quickly crashed the site and left Draper James with egg on their face when it was revealed they only ever intended to gift 250 dresses.
When thousands of unlucky entrants, who had to share their photo IDs and personal details in order to enter, started to instead receive discount codes and promotional material from Draper James, they took to social media to complain about both the actress and the brand’s “exploitive” marketing intentions.
Page Six now reveals that the same week as the highly-publicized snafu, Draper James received a PPP loan from the government. The company, which was founded in 2013 and is headquartered in New York, employed 44 people before the pandemic. The actress’ personal net worth is said to be in the region of $240 million.
It’s unknown whether there were any layoffs at the company, and a rep declined to comment to Page Six about the loan.
Witherspoon’s brand is not the only notable celebrity-backed venture to have received a PPP loan. Companies and restaurants helmed by Kanye West, Khloe Kardashian, Tom Brady, and Tim McGraw also secured government financing.
Last week, controversial influencer and multimillionaire Arielle Charnas was revealed to have also received funds to inject into her brand Something Navy.
Fashionweekdaily
written by Freya Drohan August 3, 2020
Just as a Draper James dress giveaway bonanza was hitting the headlines for all the wrong reasons, the label owned by Reese Witherspoon secured a PPP loan in the region of $350,000 to $1 million.
Back in April, the Southern-inspired fashion line wanted to thank school teachers for their efforts educating kids remotely. A social media call out seemed to suggest that the brand would be giving away free dresses to every teacher in the country (an estimated three million people) “while supplies last.” The viral interest quickly crashed the site and left Draper James with egg on their face when it was revealed they only ever intended to gift 250 dresses.
When thousands of unlucky entrants, who had to share their photo IDs and personal details in order to enter, started to instead receive discount codes and promotional material from Draper James, they took to social media to complain about both the actress and the brand’s “exploitive” marketing intentions.
Page Six now reveals that the same week as the highly-publicized snafu, Draper James received a PPP loan from the government. The company, which was founded in 2013 and is headquartered in New York, employed 44 people before the pandemic. The actress’ personal net worth is said to be in the region of $240 million.
It’s unknown whether there were any layoffs at the company, and a rep declined to comment to Page Six about the loan.
Witherspoon’s brand is not the only notable celebrity-backed venture to have received a PPP loan. Companies and restaurants helmed by Kanye West, Khloe Kardashian, Tom Brady, and Tim McGraw also secured government financing.
Last week, controversial influencer and multimillionaire Arielle Charnas was revealed to have also received funds to inject into her brand Something Navy.
Fashionweekdaily
Similar Threads
- Locked
- Locked
Users who are viewing this thread
New Posts
-
-
F/W 2024.25 Campaign Wishlist, Model Casting Discussion, Guesses & Reactions (3 Viewers)- Latest: MModa
-
-
US Harper's Bazaar May 2024 : Anok Yai & Christy Turlington Burns by Ethan James Green (3 Viewers)
- Latest: Ivancica
