Written by Emily Johnson
Urban Outfitters, over time, has portrayed to young people that they are an edgy, current brand. To many, UO appears to be a “hipster” style of company with liberal values, high-end clothing and prestige. However, they and their heavily conservative CEO, Richard Payne, often break the boundaries of respectable choices and political correctness, much to the surprise of their two largest age demographics, the 18-24 range and the under 18 range.
Even I as a freshman and sophomore in high school assumed they were an admirable store to be a consumer with. One of the company’s most recent controversies occurred in February of this year, surrounding a striped tapestry branded with a pink triangle.
Immediately, the Anti-Defamation League—a group whose aim is to put a stop to anti-Semitism—leaped upon the fact that it resembled the striped garments worn by concentration camp victims during the Holocaust, and—even more specifically—with the pink triangle, then used to identify any prisoners who identified as gay.
UO’s typical reaction to their many scandals is insuring they did not intend to incite anger from their customers or portray what was accused. What makes their apologies so unbelievable is that they continue to release racist, offensive products to the public. In April 2012, a shirt became available on the UO website which depicted a Star of David, appearing very similar to the patches Jewish people were forced to wear during the Second World War. In addition to these offensive garments, Urban Outfitters has glorified eating disorders and depression. In the summer of 2010, a V-neck t-shirt branded with the words “Eat less” released in stores and online, much to the disgust of many customers.
Although the shirt disappeared from the store’s website, it can still be found in some retailers in New York. Indie, eco-friendly clothing brand Artisan Tees have created nearly identical shirts which say “Eat more” in protest of UO. 2014 marked another year of controversy for Urban Outfitters when they tried to sell white crop tops covered in the word “depression” in various sizes. They clearly had decided it was okay to profit upon mental illness and glorify it just as society continues to do.
Enough people were angered to where a Change.org petition to stop the shirt’s production was created. While being completely insensitive to the public, UO also teaches its employees that they encourage racism in the workplace.
In 2014, a flyer advertising an employee holiday party leaked on the internet, showing that the theme was—basically—to dress in the most racist way possible; the flyer even goes as far as to mention garments such as harem pants as appropriate attire for the evening. By allowing an event such as this to occur, Urban Outfitters has proven their disrespect for any non-Eurocentric culture. In fact, these racist behaviors have also trickled into their products, the largest example in a 2003 Monopoly knockoff entitled “Ghettopoly.” Instead of gaining properties as the goal of the game, players traveled through the Bronx and Harlem trying to get entire neighborhoods addicted to drugs.
African-American consumers became outraged at the clear abuse and stereotyping of their culture; the game’s creator, David Chang, attempted to make light of the situation by saying the purposeful stereotyping was to bring people together in laughter. If you want designer clothing but do not want to support a company such as UO, consider J. Crew or Nordstrom, who both support fair labor, equal rights and a true liberal environment. I know I would not support a company whose CEO donated $13,000 to Rick Santorum’s presidential campaign. (Another tidbit to note: Urban Outfitters owns both Anthropologie and Free People)