Pursuant to vast dissent Adidas have just announced Monday evening that they are now pulling their shackle shoe off the market. But why?
It seems Adidas has caused some degree of furore with their newest fashion must have. Confused. Don’t be, go look for some shackles and read along…
dailymail.co.uk: Adidas has sparked outrage and been accused of ‘promoting slavery’ by creating a new pair of trainers which have bright orange ‘shackles’ that fit around the wearer’s ankles.
The clothing giant is under fire for its August scheduled release of the JS Roundhouse Mids, which many have compared to the devices worn by black slaves in 19th Century America.
The seemingly innocent promotional material, uploaded to Facebook earlier this month, asks: ‘Got a sneaker game so hot you lock your kicks to your ankles?’
Bright orange shackles? Is that to suggest being a slave is somehow trendy these days? Cause if it is I might be inspired to give it a go? Assuming I get to have my liberty when I feel like it.
What though is interesting about the shoe is why it is stirring up so much outrage. Although it’s design herald to a contentious part of America’s history and probably most Western nations at some point or another why are people so up in arms with what is for pure and simple reasons just a design? A ghastly design granted (which is probably why it will sell like hot potatoes) but a design nevertheless. Surely people don’t legitimately believe Adidas is endorsing slavery? If anything just degrees of controversy which can only make Adidas brim from ear to ear.
Then there’s this: Dr Boyce Watkins, Professor at Syracuse University said he accepted some people would accuse him of overreacting.
But he added: ‘There is always a group of negroes who are more than happy to resubmit themselves to slavery.
Resubmit to slavery? Has the shoe being put out of context? Or is this just a chance for neurotic types to flew over the cuckoo’s nest?
But here’s where it get’s real gritty and semi intellectual:
I’m offended by these shoes as there is nothing funny about the prison industrial complex, which is the most genocidal thing to happen to the black family since slavery itself.’
Others have likened the shoes’ orange ‘bracelets’ to the shackles worn by prisoners across the America, or said the firm is ‘promoting slavery’.
Facebook user Kay Tee agreed, and said: ‘It’s offensive and inappropriate in many ways. Not to mention ugly.
‘Regardless if the company was saying the shoes are so hot you have to chain them to you, or they were capitalising on the whole prison style popularity.
‘But corporate business has a social responsibility above all to consider these perceptions before releasing a product like this.
‘How would a Jewish person feel if they decided to have a shoe with a swastika on it and tried to claim it was OK in the name of fashion?
Swastika? Are we not taking the line of thought a bit too far? Why not the symbol of Jesus who might annoy atheists? Or whatever else it is that is perceived distasteful. Then again isn’t ones sense of fashion a personal involvement. Are we to now snatch people off the street and beat them up viciously if they choose to dress in a way that offends us. That I imagine would also go to manufacturers. Nothing after all is more effective than telling the manufacturer that their product is non gratis than us staying away in droves. Of course you can bet everyone up and down the street is going to be buying these hawt bixches. Of course between you and me, they are damn ugly, but then again I’m not necessarily that damn fashion forward.