First Nike came out with the name: “Black and Tan” for their sneaker earlier this year, right on the heel of the St Patricks day holiday.
So named after Guinness Beer, but not everyone was in favour of such a name, least of all, not the Irish, who liken the imagery of Black and Tan to reference British forces accused of mistreating Irish citizens in the 1920s.
So basically it would been like calling them Taliban Sneakers <<< Pause! Are we giving Jeremy Scott ideas?
The Adidas Shackle Sneakers that have caused so much dissention. With Jeremy Scott first denying them, then refusing to comment further, and Adidas maintaining that they do not mean to offend anyone, and “Fashion is art, and art is expression” (Except when it hurts people, no?)
Fast forward to a couple of hours ago, on our time-line and the main story?
Jeremy Scott’s ADIDAS Shackle sneakers.
The tagline? “Got a sneaker game so hot you lock your kicks to your ankles”
#SneakerShame, or just another designer expressing themselves, to much brewhahaha?
Are we giving this shoe, because essentially that is what it is, too much power, as previously disenfranchised, previously oppressed groups?
The racist undertone in the tagline, is not much a surprise, because it is assumed that only black people are the ones who’d care for this tasteless shoe, but we can confidently state that Black people are not the only people that love, and wear sneakers.
What makes it (the tagline) more condescending, is the idea that perhaps this is the only part of the overall sneaker culture demographic, that is enslaved? I mean, there are plenty of black people out there that would forego rent, and car payments, just to make sure that their hair looks good, or that they have the new pair of Nike Air Yeezy‘s, but isn’t this taking it a little too far?
Let’s discuss…
