McQueen, A Bag, & The Humane Myth

Alexander McQueen’s nineteenth-century aristocracy inspired Fall 09 collection is handsome, no doubt. Even the models’ makeup made them appear to be walking out of old, sepia photographs. While the garments were technically gorgeous -slender suits, jackets and coats with utilitarian embellishments, and just enough decoration – the sheer amount of fur, leather, and wool used to make them puts Alex’s lack of accountability and textile resourcefulness in the same century he is trying to depict. Can you image how amazing this collection would be if it were made from organics, recycled fabrics, and animal-free materials, but looked the same? It would be visionary. Sadly, we are almost a decade into the 21st century and we still have designers like McQueen who can’t seem to combine their amazing talent with any vision for a sustainable civilization or future where we don’t enslave and torture animals for textiles. Can someone get this man an eco-fabrics directory?

“Humane” meat and dairyHumaneMyth.org aims to take on the greenwashing behind many of the producers who want you to think they are killing with kindness.

http://tommcmahon.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/cowknife.jpg

Humane myth. An idea being propagated by the animal-using industry and some animal protection organizations that it is possible to use and kill animals in a manner that can be fairly described as respectful or compassionate or humane.”


Bourgeois Boheme’s Callum bag is the perfect courier. Faux leather, canvass, and handsome striped lining!

BoBo Callum - Black

FEED 100 & Paradoxes

//media.wholefoodsmarket.com/pr/wf/national/photo/pouch-2.jpg” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.

1. The newest FEED bag, the FEED 100 bag is available now exclusively at Whole Foods Market nation-wide! Each FEED 100 bag will provide 100 school meals to hungry children in Rwanda through the UN World Food Program (www.wfp.org). Help them reach their goal of provide all the WFP school meals in Rwanda for 2008 and buy your FEED 100 bag!

.
.
2. I’ve often wondered why certain unethical products and practices persist in consumer culture. One theory is that there is a paradox pertaining to accountability. The consumer rationalizes, “If this were unethical, they wouldn’t be selling it“, and at the same time the producer justifies, “if making this were unethical, there wouldn’t be a demand for it. Something as simple as ordering foie gras at a restaurant presents this cultural paradox. The restaurant continues to sell foie gras because people are still demanding it – and people are still choosing foie gras from the menu because the ostensibly virtuous authority of the producer is invoked, and the submissive consumer believes that if it really were that bad, it wouldn’t be on the menu in the first place. The producer makes their money, and the consumer – well, consumes.

One explanation for this phenomenon is that the consumer has been trained to grant authority and power to
retailers and corporations – and with that, many people believe these authorities aim to ‘do the right thing‘. On the other hand, the producer believes that, even up against the amazing influence of advertising, the consumer will make educated purchasing decisions.
Whether this is a relationship of convenience (profit & hedonism) or an oversight of economic ethics, the outcome typically results in the perpetuation of destructive things.
.
• I would love to hear your thoughts on this phenomenon – is there an actual term for this?