Known for it’s fashion-forward pieces and trendy clothing, Zara released a “non-gender” specific collection this past weekend.
Contain your excitement; it’s nothing special.
The entire line lacks uniqueness and actually comprises itself of numerous unfitted, neutral colors. These can often be described as “basics,” which usually includes white shirts, color block clothing and other pieces you might wear with statement pieces.
In the fashion market, there’s a still largely divided mindset between men and women clothing based on textures, colors, fits and more. While the idea of a “genderless” line might be perceived as a step towards the future, will it actually become anything more than plain clothing?
For the girls who refuse to shop in men’s sections and male-dominated clothing line, can I please ask why? I find myself debating on buying a XS men’s KITH bomber jacket, small sized clothing at Supreme and peering into the men’s section of Urban Outfitters before glancing in the women’s department. You can imagine my excitement with Ronnie Fieg decided to release a women’s sneaker store and clothing line because it meant I could keep one of my favorite brands and wear it in a more fitted style.
After all, he stated the reasoning behind the new venture was because he constantly sold out of smaller sizes and witnessed women sporting the men’s KITH brand.
The appeal of a non-gender collection doesn’t appeal any different from deciding to wear men’s clothing as long as the brand and quality remain constant.
Zara did not keep it’s identity with this collection. It’s a mere play at publicity and potentially fashion-forward thinking without the thought behind the design of clothing released. Rather than sharing loose essentials for women and somewhat fitted pieces for men, why not officially go outside the box and create eye-catching pieces rather than non-branded (but really it’s branded Zara) clothing.