The sad post-mortem recognition as a feminist icon
The passing of Sinéad O’Connor, uncompromising woman and beautiful soul, left us speechless. Not to mention celebrities’ tributes posted on the web.
Modern society, which is basically (and sadly) a big market, is not the place for uncompromising women. A rebellious attitude does not play well with patriarchy and market requests. What sells, marketing, and who sells more – are the only things that count in a money-driven society. In this context, even the female aesthetic is strictly linked to what sells. In fact, there are specific norms, rules or standards to which every woman needs to conform in order to be accepted.
Inimitable talent and uncompromising style
Around the end of the 80s, we saw a face of rare beauty with a bald head and a voice of unique intensity, and we fell in love with her. When interviewed, Irish singer Sinéad O’Connor revealed that the music industry expected her to conform to a certain image, urging her to have long hair and wear revealing clothes. Instead, she showed up bald and in combat boots.
Her shaved head became a trademark, a symbol of protest against traditional views of femininity. Although she tried to hide her beauty, the result was exactly the opposite. Indeed, very few women can cut their hair that way and still look so very beautiful!
Conformism & contemporary feminism
If a woman wants to be considered beautiful or accepted as an artist, or whatever she wants to do in her life, the standards are long hair and tight-fitting clothes. So we have some problems understanding the contemporary idea of feminism. For instance, look at all the celebrities who call themselves feminists; celebrated by the mainstream culture, they look as the system wants them to be, calling it freedom of expression. Is that real feminism? We don’t think so. For sure, hitting the number one charts thanks to an immense voice and a clean face and piercing eyes, was different. So, follow what the system wants, conform if you feel ok, but don’t call it feminism.
We have always searched for news from her social media accounts because we appreciated her outspoken personality, anti-establishment position and political activism. Most celebrities, though having platforms, do not say a word on crucial matters. In fact, she was so brave to speak in support of child abuse, human rights, women’s rights, and against wars and racism. Most importantly, being a victim of abuse, she showed her vulnerability by disclosing her struggles with mental health and fibromyalgia. But she got hate and disregard in return.
On July 26, the uncompromising Sinéad O’Connor was found dead. And, all of a sudden, she becomes a feminist icon, understood only after her death. Insulted when alive, celebrated after death!
One comment really made sense:
“You praise her now ONLY because it is too late. You hadn’t the guts to support her when she was alive and she was looking for you.”
Do you know there’s a lot we can learn from Depeche Mode? We went to see them live on July 14, Memento Mori World Tour. It was amazing! The sound was perfect, so all the fans could really enjoy each song. And it seems unbelievable we started listening to their music in the ’80s when we were at school, and we never stopped. Because they always made great music. That electro-dark, refined goth, intense and melancholic. Inspired to life and which describes humans’ experiences with unique melodies.
The tribute to Andrew Fletcher, the band member who died in May 2022, was particularly moving. However, the whole concert was extraordinary, soulful, song by song. We loved it!
By the way, the Milano concert was sold-out. And the day before it, the band released two more Milano dates for 2024, which probably are sold out, too. So, there’s something we can learn from them.
“We’ve been that band that nobody understood. Then we’ve been the band that everybody tried to imitate, and suddenly we were the band that everybody says, ‘oh we were influenced by.'”
Dave Gahan
What can we learn from Depeche Mode?
“It’s a competitive world” but Depeche Mode became an iconic synth-pop band. So, how did they do it? First, passion: they started doing what they liked, the music they enjoyed and kept on with that. Even if people didn’t believe they would survive the first years or criticised them. The most important lesson is about creativity, consistency, and style. Specifically, the band built a very strong identity, precise captivating sound and image, from clothes to haircuts–always recognisable. In fact, they have never changed to fit the current trends. Therefore, another lesson is the ability to evolve, as they did over forty years while being true to themselves.
Over time they engaged with a specific audience who loved – and still loves – their sound. Not with everyone. No tricks to get other genres involved. Their music is for those who resonate with it. No marketing tricks, no fluff. Just timeless music and style.
Indeed, there’s a lot we learn from Depeche Mode. They did things their way. So, find the place where you feel at peace.
Are we ready for cultural change? The real one, we mean. When it comes to sustainability, do we believe in all the marketing bullshit that flooded communication lately? Or are we open to change for real? Ready to pick this opportunity up and make something better beyond the facades?
People are bombarded with deceiving information: “We are sustainable because we recycle garments!” “We use milk, coconut or whatever fibres.” “Hey, we have a conscious section in our store!” “There’s a sustainable selection on our e-shop.” “And we are the ones who do it best because we plant trees!”
Forget all that. Even the ‘plant a tree’ claim is proven misleading. Indeed, all these messages have the sole purpose of making people overconsume. As a matter of fact, not a single company has changed their overproduction pattern.
On the one hand, this is marketing, what brands need to say in order to show a clean face. But, on the other, we can find alternative reports and explorations that dig the truth out. Are we open to reading those reports? Understand how things really are? And, therefore, start questioning?
Of course, sustainability is a path to pursue with conviction and self-commitment, despite all the difficulties, misleading messages, and smoke and mirrors.
But is the effort worth it? Or, as many people with whom we exchange thoughts tell us, sustainability is just one of those beautiful utopias. To sell,one must focus only on increasing sales. That is what companies have to do. And people, for their part, have to buy whatever product.
So, in the context of trade, specifically in the fashion field, is sustainability a utopia or is it feasible? What’s your viewpoint on this?
Are you open to cultural change? We would love to hear your thoughts. Drop us an email, WhatsApp, or comment here below!
Emilia Romagna: a region devastated by heavy rain and flooding
Climate change, between natural disasters and man-made activities, causes massive devastation.
In 36 hours, 50 centimetres of rain fell in Emilia Romagna. In other words, the rainfall the region usually sees throughout half a year. The heavy rains and consequent flooding have devastated a large part of the area. 14 rivers had broken their banks. Ten people died and more than 10,000 had to be evacuated. Some rescued from roofs by helicopters.
In the end, extreme weather events are the result of human actions on the planet. Without any ethical consideration, man acts like the master of nature instead like a part of it. Indeed money is the only concern. Still, humans want to dominate nature, disposing of it in endless exploitation.
“We have traded nature for the economy, but in the end, we all lost. A healthy economy is not possible without healthy ecosystems. Enough with the merchants of doubts: it’s time to act.”
Mario Tozzi
The merchants of doubts are climate change deniers. We shouldn’t even waste time listening to them. Since the 70s, scientists and economists knew what was about to happen. Capitalism is an economic model that brings destruction. Now this destruction is in front of us.
“Here, natural events become catastrophic due to a worsening factor: the concrete with which we have covered the entire territory. If you take away space from a river, sooner or later, it takes it back.” – declared Mario Tozzi.
Concrete monsters, mastodontic shopping malls, intensive farming and, on top of this, fossil fuels are all part of an exploitative system that failed. In fact, climate change and natural disasters are undeniable proof of human activity over nature.
“If we squander our fossil fuels, we threaten civilisation; but if we squander the capital represented by living nature around us, we threaten life itself.” E.F. Schumacher
We must leave this pattern behind and take action now.
‘Who wore who’ is the question we try to avoid these days. Specifically, the Met Gala raises significant doubts as we can’t see glamour or elegance. Indeed, this annual gathering of celebrities organised by Vogue looks more like a circus than a glamourous event, leaving little room for true sophistication.
The Met Gala is a fundraising event for the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s Costume Institute in New York City, which marks the opening of the Institute’s annual fashion exhibition. Known as the “fashion’s biggest night,” it aims to represent the fashion universe.
We see two main issues: First, people expect to witness a representation of fashion, style, and glamour. Just, we haven’t seen any of that. Although we can pick out a few nice outfits every year choosing the best-dressed, the whole thing is gross, excessive. And it feels sad to see fashion depicted like that. Moreover, we are surprised because even the actors that usually have an elegant figure, lose it at the gala.
Second, brands pay celebrities to wear their clothes because they influence the masses to buy their products. However, this perpetuates a toxic culture, pushing people to compare themselves to an unattainable lifestyle. How do celebrities choose one brand over another? Simple: whoever writes the highest figure cheque; that’s the one they pick. Forget any style choice—it’s all about the money. Most importantly, the “celebrity cost” is absorbed in the retail price of clothing, shoes, and handbags. In the end, it’s the consumers who pay to sustain the extravagant lifestyles of their idols—idols who, ironically, could afford luxury even without these brand endorsements.
In short, celebrities pay to attend the gala while getting paid by brands to wear their clothes. It’s a full-blown celebrities’ circus!
But the real question is: why are people supporting this? That’s the point! Who wore who? Honestly, who really cares!”