By Zoé Bocquillon
In light of Kim Kardashian’s latest SKIMS campaign, the question of celebrity hypocrisy on climate change resurfaces. In the ad for a new built-in nipple bra, the American fashion mogul explains “The ice sheets are sinking. And I’m not a scientist. But I do believe everyone can use their skill set to do their part.” and “That’s why I’m introducing a brand new bra with a built-in nipple, so no matter how hot it is, you’ll always look cold,” she says, pointing to a diagram.
The Black Mirror-like ad has been condemned as nothing more than pure performativity. An obvious comment reminds us of the cyclical hypocrisy: the reason sea levels are rising is due to the fast fashion industry of which SKIMS is not exempt despite its high prices. To deflect this stunt, the brand added a charitable aspect to their product: “In addition to our investment in advancing carbon removal, SKIMS is proud to donate 10% of sales from our SKIMS Ultimate Nipple Bra, as a one-time donation, to 1% For the Planet…”. However, SKIMS is a billion-dollar company, estimated to make 750 million in sales this year alone. It has been accused of greenwashing countless times, the last one being recyclable packaging that was in fact, plastic. The brand also largely uses virgin polyester, a synthetic material that is non-biodegradable and needs on average 342 million barrels of oils every year to be produced. For these reasons, the trademark has the lowest possible score on Good on You, a comprehensive system that rates clothing companies’ ethics and sustainability.
The chain also has evidence of unethical production, and the influencer has never publicly disclaimed that her garment workers had fair wages, and a human rights report details that garment workers in Myanmar were forced to work overtime without pay. This violation and lack of transparency highlights the internal and external contradictions between the brand’s advocacy and its actions. It is clear that the image of the brand and its consumption trumps everything else including a commitment to sustainable practices.
The general public is tired and angry of celebrities exhibiting their lavish lifestyle and unsustainable practices in their private lives while superficially endorsing certain ideas that affect most people’s everyday lives and have dire consequences. This issue points to a structural inequality that we have accepted as a given, that of a fast-paced consumerist culture that privileges a very small portion of us to the detriment of the majority of us. Public perception of climate change has been tremendously damaged by celebrities’ tone-deaf attempts to lecture the public and simultaneously developing their climate-saviour brand. People are no longer as easily fooled. As one social media user bluntly puts it: “Am I the only one who feels this is dystopian as fuck? Climate change is literally threatening to wipe out our very existence and biodiversity as a whole and yet it’s being used to market nipples? ”.
I suggest that SKIMS and celebrity-owned corporations alike, collectively align to use their privilege and financial means to create tangible sustainability goals and products that limit their damage to the environment. They have the means, the time, and the resources. This also entails using recyclable textiles to limit water waste as well as textile waste in reducing production pollution. If you find yourself looking for sustainable and stylish underwear or leisurewear here in the UK then look no further. Here is a non exhaustive list: Organic basics, Brighton lace, Pantee, Peachaus. My personal favourite for sensitive skin is Juliemay Lingerie.
