Pointing the Finger a.k.a. No Accountability [Pre-J.10]

The Dark Side of Modeling

With its estimated annual revenue of $1.5 billion in the US and the global fashion industry valued at over $2.5 trillion, the industry offers significant financial potential.

Race- Absence and Aggression

Here is a case beginning to end-

The Fashion Institute of Technology’s MFA Fashion show, which featured works designed by 10 alumni of the school’s inaugural class to receive a Master of Fine Arts in Fashion Design. The school highlighted a collection by alumnus Junkai Huang. The school’s production included models wearing prosthetic ears and lips and bushy eyebrows. 

One model, Amy LeFevre, refused to wear the items, calling them racist. She walked down the runway without them. Diet Prada, a fashion industry watchdog, said “It shouldn’t be down to the models to have to refuse wearing blatantly racist accessories on the runway.”

 The Fashion Institute of Technology has apologized and placed two academic officials on leave. Huang denied that his collection was racist, telling CNN that he was “sad and shocked” by the allegation. “The saddest part is I am not a racist, and as an Asian person I had bad experiences here too,” he said. Huang added. “They are not ‘ugly features’ as noted in previous media coverages.”

Huang was one of the alumni designers whose work was featured in the show. His collection, like his thesis, centered on his concepts of “Unique Curves,” which explored the sense of beauty in various objects that deviate from conventional standards. His concept was expressed in his garments through the addition of fabrics and texture that built volume around key body parts. He also sketched accessories to accompany the designs that elaborated upon aspects of the human body including the ear, lips and hands. He intended to handmake these accessories, which were an integral part of his vision.

By the time of the fashion show, Huang, for reasons unknown, hadn’t made the accessories. Five days before the show, he asked his former professor, Prof. Farmer, and the producer of the show, Richard Thornn, for advice about possible alternatives to the intended handmade accessories. Farmer emailed Huang a list of Amazon websites containing items with some resemblance to the ones Huang had sketched. These included clown ears, large and allegedly therapeutic red plastic lips and busy “Groucho Marx”-style eyebrows, among others. Huang ordered these items from Amazon and they arrived in time to be used in the fittings for the show, the claim said.

Joyce F. Brown, president of FIT wrote, “For that, we apologize – to those who participated in the show, to students, and to anybody who has been offended by what they saw,” she wrote. “Let me be clear: no person should be made to feel uncomfortable – particularly about race – in service of their work, job, livelihood, or course of study.” Three days later she added, “The styling and accessorizing used in the show were provided to him rather than chosen at his discretion,” she explained. “To us, this indicates that those in charge of and responsible for overseeing the show failed to recognize or anticipate the racist references and cultural insensitivities that were obvious to almost everybody else. That’s inexcusable and irresponsible — but also why we are commissioning an independent investigation.”

“Racism in any form is antithetical to the mission of FIT and to my personal values,” Mary Davis, dean of the School of Graduate Studies said. “Providing an inclusive, supportive environment in which all students can learn, be creative and thrive is essential to all education. I have always taken full responsibility for those matters that are my responsibility, however, I should not be held accountable or blamed for not stopping activity that I did not know existed.” Davis’ lawyer, Marjorie Berman added:  “FITs actions in putting Dr. Davis on administrative leave before an investigation has been conducted is premature and unnecessarily damaging to the stellar reputation Dr. Davis enjoys in the academic and fashion communities. We look forward to the facts surrounding the fashion show being fully revealed so that Dr. Davis can clear her good name.”

Mary Davis, who was dismissed from her position last November, filed a complaint against the college and Joyce F. Brown, its president. in the Supreme Court of the State of New York County on Feb. 19 over what she claims are false statements over her leadership failures arising out of a fashion show that FIT sponsored on Feb. 7, 2020, that featured work by alumni of FIT’s master of fine arts in fashion design program. Davis is seeking an amount to be determined at trial, but no less that $10 million.

In the complaint, Davis claims “malicious, false and defamatory statements” were made by Brown. “Dr. Brown made these false statements to deflect widespread criticism about her leadership failures, in particular, those arising out of a fashion show that FIT sponsored on Feb. 7, 2020

The court papers noted that Davis had no advance knowledge of the accessories that were used in the designer’s presentation and had no control over any design aspects of the show, including the accessories featured.

“Dr. Davis had no knowledge of these events and it wasn’t within her purview, nor was it her responsibility academically or professionally, as an academic dean, to oversee the content or administrative aspects of this professional, managed alumni show,” according to the claim. “Even if the fashion show had included the works of current FIT students, FIT’s practice precludes academic deans from evaluating, let alone approving, or censoring, any student’s creative work or interfering with the in-class work of professors,” the claim said. “This conforms to American Association of University Professors principles and is standard practice for deans of graduate schools. Further, the accessories designed by Mr. Huang and included in his final project for graduation looked nothing like the accessories he finally used in the show,” the claim said.

“Both Dr. Davis and Dr. Brown first saw the accessories during the fashion show (in fact they were seated only a few feet apart from each other), where Dr. Brown applauded them enthusiastically,” the complaint said. Following the show, Brown and FIT continued to praise the show extensively in public and even produced and distributed a promotional video featuring the accessories in question. “That video lauded the show as demonstrating FIT’s values of ‘diversity and inclusion,'” the court papers claimed.

“The criticism amplified the long simmering complaints of systemic racism at FIT under Dr. Brown’s leadership. In response to this stinging criticism, Dr. Brown invented a story that shifted attention from her own culpability on Dr. Davis,” according to the claim.

The complaint said Brown “publicly claimed, falsely suggested, and created the impression that and/or implied that Dr. Davis was the person responsible for allowing the inclusion of ‘obviously’ racist accessories in the show.” It said that Brown knew the statement was false when she stated it because she already knew that Davis “was neither responsible for selecting or approving the accessories nor had any interaction with the model.”

The complaint said that “these lies and false innuendoes destroyed the personal and professional reputation” of Davis, who was initially put on a paid administrative leave of absence and then fired on Nov. 10, 2020, ending her four-decade career. “It is highly unlikely that Dr. Davis, who is 61 years old and now widely and publicly labeled as a racist, will ever secure another job in her profession,” the complaint said. 

The Fashion Institute of Technology had no comment in response to a complaint. According to an FIT spokesman, “FIT does not comment upon matters in litigation except to say that we look forward to presenting our case to the court and seeking the suit’s dismissal at the earliest possible junction.”

A year later, a Manhattan judge tossed a lawsuit by an ex-dean of the Fashion Institution of Technology who claimed that she was made a scapegoat in a school scandal involving allegations of racism. Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Lynn Kotler ruled that the design and fashion school didn’t defame ousted dean Dr. Mary Davis when it addressed the debacle in a letter to students. Kotler said that Brown’s wording in the letter clearly only expressed her opinion which doesn’t rise to the level of defamation. And the only statements made as facts in the letter — that the school was opening an investigation and that Davis had been placed on leave — weren’t false and therefore cannot be considered defamation.

Sources: