URBAN OUTFITTERS IS AT IT AGAIN!?

Hello! If you cast your mind back to May time, I wrote a post (see here) about some of the products that Urban Outfitters has had to pull from their shelves due to complaints, although the products shouldn't have really been allowed to be put there in the first place. Guess what? They're at it again. Seriously UO?!

Their 'Vintage Blooded' Sweatshirt might seem a bit worn and almost acid washed, but people were offended at the reference to the Kent State massacre where four students were killed and nine others were injured. Just slightly insensitive...

However, it has come to my attention that perhaps Urban Outfitters aren't the only ones making these mistakes... Zara, I'm looking at you.

Zara have pulled these toddler pyjamas with a star that resembles the Star of David sewn on the front as many shoppers were seeing a resemblance to the Nazi Concentration Camp uniforms. How did no one see this similarity?! Who OK-ed this!?

The thing is, lots of clothing stores actually have to withdraw quite a few items of clothing: Asda and Tesco withdrew Halloween outfits last year after they were accused of disgracing those with mental health issues. Asda also had to withdraw wearable England flags which resembled the style of Ku Klux Klan outfits. Fenwicks stopped stocking BOY London after there were complaints of their Eagle Logo and Next baby grows got pulled after drawings of penises were found on them. Penises. On baby grows. 

Some of these are perhaps due to some sensitive people who see these products but once you see what's wrong with it you kind of can't help but thinking it's slightly wrong and shouldn't have been allowed. Clearly enough people are noticing this and complaining which leads these brands to having to remove certain products so why do they not think more about the effect it will have on their business and the way that those who buy it might take it? It's just incredibly careless of the companies but I really thought that Urban Outfitters might have stopped slipping up with their stock after so many times! (Click here to see their 13 biggest slip ups)

What do you think about these controversial designs?

Fashionable Disorder

Fashion is something that has changed ever since Adam and Eve were shocked by their nudity right back when. For example, Crocs and Uggs were once a thing, right? I'm also under the impression we will one day look back at our library of Facebook pictures, cringe and claim we had no idea what we were thinking when we wore that. So fashion changes, but a while ago Twitter was hit with images of Urban Outfitters latest trend alongside their infamous 'Eat Less' Tshirt, a positively negative reaction towards this 'statement piece', I'm sure you will all agree.

photo taken from living.msn.com


Urban Outfitters pulled their 'Eat Less' Tshirt back in 2010 and have since pulled other items such as shot glasses and flasks in the style of prescription medicine bottles and 'Syringe Shot Shooters', complete with embarrassing apologies across social media sites. 

photo taken from Telegraph.co.uk

Perhaps showing they haven't quite learnt their lesson, this newest trend shows a tshirt black printed with the word 'depression' over and over - because depression is like, so cool. This has also been pulled, for a second time I might add, though the store claimed they were supporting an independant label under the name 'Depression.' How humble of you, UO. The question is, who chooses these pieces? Designs them? Buys them, even? And why do they keep appearing on the shelves when they will inevitably have to clear them again just weeks later? It goes without saying that mental illness needs to stop being glamourised by the media and the idea of it being a fashion item is only more disgusting. 

UO has had a history with displaying offensive content on their website including slogans aimed at the Irish's love for drinking, their colour choice of 'Obama/Black' and pictures of Hailey Clauston in compromising positions, who was 15 at the time. Whoops. There are countless articles on their top most offensive and controversial pieces of clothing that they recieve endless complaints about and have to remove from their stores. I just don't understand why they're stocked in the first place and who thinks it's a good idea to produce these products.

photo taken from living.msn.com


However, there is one thing I have to say I admire Urban Outfitters for displaying on their site; two female models kissing because God forbid they would use a heterosexual couple to display their garments to the world. Inevitably, this also recieved complaints but I think that it's a movement in the right direction. If they're wanting to be controversial and create a frenzy over something, I think that's the right thing to choose. In a world where it's becoming more and more expected, why not? So I respect that, more companies should do that. Well, that and the sheer audacity to excessively overcharge their customers.