Revolver must be doing something right because the entire woke communist regime and cancel culture apparatus is coming after us, night and day.
Join the Revolver family and our fight to save America with a $49 per year ad-free subscription. And if you want to give extra during this critical time, you can make a one-time or recurring monthly donation — whether it’s $1 or $1,000, every bit goes towards the battle to save our great nation. Or, give a friend or loved one a Revolver annual subscription simply by checking the “Gift” option.
This is part one of a series. PART TWO: How Fashion Destroyed America: Coco Chanel’s Secret Nazi Double Life
There is much debate about what killed fashion. Publications like the New York Times will point to COVID and claim that it’s a supply and demand issue — too many urban introverts working from home in sweatpants and a t-shirt. No need to get gussied up when you’re afraid to leave your apartment. And sure, some of that may be true, but I’m looking for something a bit deeper. I want to talk about what killed the essence of fashion — the very soul of creativity and expression once shared by both designer and customer.
I’m reminded of an à propos quote from legendary designer John Galliano, who once said, “The joy of dressing is an art.”
Mr. Galliano was right.
You won’t often see fashion mentioned in the same circles as painting, sculpture, or music. But fashion is actually one of the rawest expressions of true art because fashion is alive, every day.
Francis Bacon, an English philosopher shared a similar belief when he said, “Fashion is only the attempt to realize art in living forms and social intercourse.”
Back in the day, when elegant style was part of everyday life in America, women looked like picturesque statues adorned with luxurious textiles, crystals, beads, and other divine trinkets. We can say the same for men; because fashionable, debonair gentlemen used to be a sight to behold.
During this era, flying on a plane or going to a baseball game was considered a special event and people dressed accordingly.
Americans took pride in how they looked and behaved gracefully in public.
Back in those days, being feminine meant having a decorum of modesty with a touch of romance and mystery. Women even celebrated being delicate, fragile creatures.
So, what happened to the elegance and glamour that once dripped off a woman’s body like warm, melted chocolate?
It’s easy to blame social pariahs like the Kardashians and Cardi B and their entire repugnant genre for introducing tackiness and vulgarity and completely butchering what it means to be feminine. And you wouldn’t be entirely wrong, but that’s far too easy of an answer and doesn’t reveal what really happened with the fashion industry.
Because, believe it or not, the trashy Kardashians and their ilk are just a byproduct of a much bigger “fashion” campaign to change societal norms that began in the 1920s and continues to this very day.
The first modern fashion boom took place in the 1920s. The 20s were the glitzy and glamorous era of The Great Gatsby and Coco Chanel. That’s when Queen Coco took her seat upon the fashion throne and never looked back. It was Coco Chanel who invented the timeless and classic “little black dress,” and many other treasured fashion trends that we still wear today.
But she was also the driving force behind the female liberation movement; a feminist movement that saw fashion as a way women could display independence in a male-dominated world.
Coco was a staunch supporter of casual dressing and trousers for women, which were both big no-no’s at the time.
But the biggest and boldest female transformation from “feminine flower” to “pants-wearing butch” came twenty years later in the 1940s, thanks to a legendary actress by the name of Katharine Hepburn.
Katharine barreled into Hollywood like a bull charging through a china shop. Only she wasn’t knocking over teacups and saucers; she was demolishing feminine norms.
Katharine was a gruff, no-nonsense “woman’s man.” She wanted to run with the big boys, and infiltrate their private club. She believed fashion was being used to demean women, and she was determined to flip the script.
Katharine believed men had the upper hand because they wore suits and pants, while women remained submissive in their frilly, lace dresses. Pants would become Katharine’s weapon of choice in the war to conquer and dominate the male world.
She once famously said, “I never realized until lately that women were supposed to be the inferior sex.”
It’s safe to say that Katharine was a devout and angry feminist.
The relationship Katharine had with her brother helped shape who she was and how she conducted herself. When Katharine was only 13-years-old, she discovered her brother Tom’s body after he hung himself.
Following this horrific tragedy, Katharine took on her brother’s birthday as her own.
I believe she wanted to take on his “persona” as well, and that’s why she became fixated on dressing like a man. I think she wanted to become her brother Tom, and her “trouser” crusade was more about him than it was about “female liberation.”
In her autobiography, Katharine said this about the death of her brother: “I wanted to be independent, to separate myself from others and never again care so much about another person, so I would never feel the pain I felt when Tom left me.”
I believe had Katharine Hepburn not become a famous Hollywood actress, she would have been a typical closet-dwelling lesbian as she struggled to cope with the death of her brother. But as fate would have it, Katharine was in a position of tremendous cultural power, and could change the trajectory of an entire nation with a pair of pants.
When Hepburn signed with major film studio RKO Pictures in the 30s, sequins, rhinestones, and feathers were the name of the game, and the studio brass was hell-bent on rebranding Katharine’s masculine and tough image.
But the big guys quickly realized they were fighting a losing battle. Katharine’s “I’m going to do whatever the f*** I want” attitude won out. In addition, Katharine also had the support of the post-suffrage women — the same group Coco Chanel supported twenty years earlier. In their eyes, Katharine and her trousers represented modernity and independence.
In her early days at RKO, Katharine wore dresses in her films. In those days, women could be arrested for wearing pants in public and charged with “masquerading as men.”
Too bad we can’t reinstate those laws today.
But dresses or not, she was plotting to make her move.
And Katharine made that move while the country was preoccupied with World War II.
During that time, she and her costume designers came up with the famous androgynous look that would become her signature and the embodiment of American style… a style we still see today in many forms.
Actors Cary Grant and Jimmy Stewart even wore skirts to show their allegiance to Katharine’s fight for women’s “independence” from men.
Katharine the Conqueror had won the battle.
In 1981 Katharine Hepburn famously told Barbara Walters the following: “I’ve just done what I damn well wanted to and I made enough money to support myself, and I ain’t afraid of being alone.”
Modern women still follow that same philosophy today—pushing away men to prove how independent and strong they are. But what these women fail to realize is that Katharine was actually a terrified woman who was running from her demons, straight into the arms of about twelve different men and three women during her adult life.
Ironic, isn’t it?
Of course, the fashion war didn’t stop with Katharine’s battle. Things were just getting started.
Hepburn’s androgynous look was popular throughout the 40s, but by the 50s, famed French designer Christian Dior introduced the world to the legendary pencil skirt—a look that former First Lady Jackie Kennedy made popular.
Femininity was back… but not for long.
During the 1940s and 1950s fashion made some of its boldest moves. Many call this era one of the most transformative times for fashion.
Skirts got shorter and denim took center stage, and for the first time people began creating their own personal style. Ready-to-wear clothing was available everywhere, and Hollywood fashion trends became more powerful than ever.
But even though times were changing, traditional values and style still ruled in the 1950s.
And one thing the 50s was known for was a perfectly put-together housewife.
The 1950s homemaker always looked smart and put together in her stylish house dress. The 50s house dress was standard daytime attire for happy housewives.
These dresses complimented a woman’s slim figure and small waist, and they came with a matching apron so she could take care of her home in style.
The house dress was a simpler version of a “going out” dress. Made of cotton, they were easy to wash, and could be quickly dressed up with gloves, jewelry and a kitten heel for when our happy homemaker left the house.
The 1950s housewife always wanted to look her best in case she ran into somebody she knew while running errands. After all, she was a direct reflection of her husband, and she’d never think of embarrassing him.
But all of that wholesomeness was about to change, thanks to yet another Hollywood icon who would shake things up and reframe what it meant to be an “all American family.”
The infamous “Rebel Without a Cause,” James Dean splashed onto the scene and upended societal norms through fashion.
His signature style, made up of jeans, boots, and a leather jacket took the country by storm.
Soon, young people everywhere wanted to look like a rebel too. In no time, teens were rejecting “traditional ways” and rebelling against normalcy with this “sloppy” new look.
Teenagers used fashion to carve out their own independence and reject the traditional values taught by their parents.
James Dean became a trendsetter and influencer and even encouraged teens to wear shabby-looking jeans and biker boots.
Now, instead of dressing up and looking their best as a show of respect for their family, teenagers embraced a “dressed down” look, which infuriated parents. It wasn’t just the frumpy style that upset them. It was what it represented—the rejection of values, decency, and respect for the family.
Of course, by today’s standards this photo of “rebellious teens” looks pretty tame. But in 1950, this was controversial.
Once again, fashion was steering Americans away from traditional values and gender roles.
Many people embraced these changes as progress. However, looking back now, 167 genders later, maybe it wasn’t.
In any case, the rebellion led by James Dean would look like child’s play compared to what was coming next.
Bigger and more dangerous changes came in the 1960s, when a godless “modern” designer by the name of Pierre Cardin began a campaign to destroy Christian tradition and moral standards.
This is when all hell and immorality broke loose.
Cardin was born in Italy and became a naturalized French citizen. Ultimately, he would use fashion to lead a personal crusade against Christianity and traditional values through chaotic, ugly, and vulgar designs.
Cardin was obsessed with gaudy, ridiculous-looking “futuristic” styles. He created these ugly looks to make certain his clothes wouldn’t be linked to past traditions.
In addition, he was obsessed with androgynous looks, and relentlessly pushed to further blur the lines between men and women.
The Imaginative Conservative did a great writeup on Cardin’s quest to destroy traditional Christian values through fashion:
Cardin’s lifestyle and work reflected scorn for Christian morals. Like all designers of the period, he introduced risqué fashions like the mini-skirt, swimsuits, and his “mod chic” creations.
His personal life followed the chaotic immorality of the Sexual Revolution. In the sixties, he maintained an affair with actress Jeanne Moreau. Afterward, he adopted a long homosexual relationship with fellow French fashion designer Andre Oliver, who died in 1993.
In 2001, he bought and partially restored the ruins of the castle of La Coste in France that was once inhabited by the Marquis de Sade. The former owner had such perverse sexual preferences and erotic writings that it gave rise to the term “sadism.” To this day, French courts ban many of his literary works. Buying this former castle is the equivalent of buying Jeffrey Epstein’s island. Nevertheless, he used the site to hold avant-garde music and dance festivals.
Cardin not only changed the way people dressed but also how they believed and behaved. He was truly a powerful force for evil and godless modernity.
So powerful, in fact, that the situation we find ourselves in today is partially because of the crusade Cardin unleashed on the fashion world.
This was to be by far the biggest and most destructive fashion wave yet to sweep the nation.
What started out as a living art form had twisted itself into something hideous and perverted. Fashion became less about creativity and beauty, and more about personal vendettas, godless crusades, and political posturing, among other unsavory things.
Over the decades, fashion has gone from a river of flowing creative expression, to a rusty assembly line stamping out uninspired and predictably woke concepts.
Overall, fashion is no longer about pushing the limits of creativity or framing an elegant and slender woman’s body like a piece of art. It exists to churn out Regime-approved political and social statements—and if that means creating ugly size 22 clothes, so be it.
There’s no exclusivity anymore. Everyone must be allowed to partake in fashion regardless of size. Soon, you’ll see a 4XL Chanel suit—mark my words.
Now, I’m not suggesting fat people should go without clothes, but elevating obese women to hero status and bringing them into the “designer world” gives their obesity a false sense of acceptance and glorifies poor health.
Today, the fashion industry is a slave to overweight frumpy progressive women who spent their high school years lurking in the shadows, constantly outshined and shunned by the “beautiful girls”—the girls who actually put in the effort to look stunning in designer clothes.
However, now, we’re supposed to believe that morbid obesity is beautiful.
We’re told these morbidly obese women deserve a seat at the fashion table because they’re brave for overeating and abusing their bodies.
This is the new crusade fashion is undertaking — worshiping grossly unhealthy women who are one chicken nugget away from cardiac arrest.
This is from the Sports Illustrated’s famous Swimsuit Issue:
Cosmo says this is healthy:
For most women, fashion is a fantasy and an escape from their humdrum lives. They dream to one day look like that stunning Victoria’s Secret Angel strutting down the catwalk with her 5-mile-long legs and perfectly flat stomach. And when they put on that new negligee, for a moment they feel like her.
But the catwalk image of perfectly rounded boobs and jaw-dropping beauty has been replaced by an emotional eater with back fat and stretch marks—the exact look so many women are determined to avoid.
But we’re told by the fashion industry that women want to see that.
I don’t want to see someone who looks like a random lady at Target on the runway. I’d rather see the hot girl.
Today’s modern progressive women encourage fat girls to wear their sadness, loss of control, and insecurities like a badge of honor. That way they can force innocent bystanders like me and you to pretend these women look “beautiful” and “stunning,” when they clearly don’t.
It’s yet another left-wing control mechanism.
Instead of lying to these poor girls, and telling them they look gorgeous, how about getting them into a program that can set them free and add decades to their lives?
@hayleythebignoodle Don’t look at the one sleeve that’s down I was playing with cats in between takes lol #ssbbw #plussize #thiccc #thicktok #biggirl #cute #thick #ginger ♬ оригинальный звук – Чо
At one time, women would happily go on the cabbage soup diet for a week just to fit into their size 4 designer dress. It was a rite of passage—a “war” story you shared with your girlfriends, and everyone understood the sacrifice.
Today, that same dress is available in a size 24.
You don’t have to work for it anymore, so go ahead and eat that pint of ice cream and two sleeves of Oreos. Who cares?
There’s no skimping and sacrifice—no more crash diets, or putting money away each week for that special Isaac Mizrahi dress you saw at Saks.
Now, you can just waddle to Target and pick one up in a 4XL for $19.99 because Isaac cut a deal with the big box store to peddle his “brand” to the unwashed masses.
And instead of looking to Audrey Hepburn or Princess Di as fashion icons to emulate, people are turning to Harry Styles.
As you can clearly see, the gender lines that started blurring in the 1920s are almost invisible today. That’s the power of fashion. Sure, it took almost a century, but by golly, they did it.
And now, the magic is gone, replaced with a frumpy and tacky modern version of fashion that is just as easy to come by as any other forgetful thing.
Think about this: how many Gucci purses do you see every day? Probably quite a few. Most of them are fake. After all, it’s hard to believe that a girl who’s counting pennies to pay for her macchiato can afford a $2,300 dollar handbag.
Fashion died so we can pretend to be Kim Kardashian for a day.
It’s shameful how fashion has been used as a weapon against society and a crutch for unworthy women, when all it ever wanted to be was art.
I will leave you with a quote from British fashion designer Vivienne Westwood: “Fashion is very important. It is life-enhancing and, like everything that gives pleasure, it is worth doing well.”
Sadly, we haven’t done well, thanks to politics, unholiness, and a burning desire to transform society into something wicked.
Everything liberals touch turns into a battle to steal souls and crush tradition, and fashion has been one of their most powerful weapons in this war.