The student news site of Bernards High School

The Crimson

The student news site of Bernards High School

The Crimson

The student news site of Bernards High School

The Crimson

Designers refuse to dress the Trump family

Designers refuse to dress the Trump family

A week after Donald Trump became America’s new president elect, one of the most common presidential designers, Sophie Theallet, announced that she will be refusing to dress anyone in the Trump family.

The designer took to twitter to announce this stance by posting a formally addressed letter. It said, “As an independent fashion brand, we consider our voice an expression of our artistic and philosophical ideas. The Sophie Theallet brand stands against all discrimination and prejudice. Our runway shows, ad campaigns, and celebrity dressing have always been a celebration of diversity and a reflection of the world we live in.”

“I am well aware it is not wise to get involved in politics,” Theallet continued, “That said, as a family-owned company, our bottom line is not just about money. We value our artistic freedom and always humbly seek to contribute to a more humane, conscious and ethical way to create in this world.”

While Sophie Theallet says that she “stands against all discrimination and prejudice,” I believe that by refusing to dress the Trump family she is doing the same exact thing herself. Aaron and Melissa Klein are a Christian couple and the owners of Sweet Cakes By Melissa who were ordered to pay $135,000 in damages to a lesbian couple after they refused to bake them a wedding cake in 2013. Mrs. Klein reported that her five children were subjected to death threats by students and adults for their parent’s discrimination. Both situations are unfair and showing discrimination, but only one is illegal. This is essentially the same scenario. Discrimination is discrimination.

However, when a brand dresses a public figure, especially one involved in politics, they are making a statement to the public that they approve them as a brand representative. Another argument to support the designer’s choices is that sexuality is a protected entity, while political views are not. But that brings us to question why? Why is sexuality protected but political views are not? No one should be refused service for any personal identity reasons.

Brands as well as people have every right to publicly disagree with any politician and their morals, but refusing to dress the Trump family is by definition unfair discrimination and quite frankly- immature. Obviously, the baker and the designer’s situations are very different. But it comes down to the first amendment which prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion or personal beliefs.

I consider both situations to be groups practicing discrimination based upon their beliefs and morality. Jack Topping, a senior, said that “They would have no problem dressing the Trump family if he wasn’t in the spotlight as president elect.”

Another famous designer refusing to dress the Trump family is Tom Ford. Tom Ford announced his stance on the View back in December when he said that his clothing was “too expensive” for the first lady, despite having dressed Michelle in the past. He also said that she wasn’t necessarily “his image”, showing more disrespect towards the president elect and his family.

While both sides of the argument have valid points, I believe it comes down to discrimination and simply having respect for your president.

Leave a Comment
More to Discover

Comments (0)

All The Crimson Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *