Honey, Who Shrunk the Fashion Police?

Fashion bullying is fiercer than ever, according to an article in yesterday's Journal. Those who have studied the problem attribute the increase to a growing number of designers specifically targeting their collections at children:

Over the past three years, numerous designers have targeted the lucrative children's and teens' markets. Little Marc, the kids' clothing label by New York designer Marc Jacobs, expanded its line this winter and dropped its price, making it more accessible to a greater number of shoppers. The French luxury label Chloé, Milan-based Missoni and Italian designer Alberta Ferretti are launching new kids' labels for spring or summer next year. Other designer kids' lines include Dolce & Gabbana, Armani and Burberry, while Michael Kors, Coach, Dooney & Bourke and Dior have been targeting teens or kids with accessories.

The writer, Vanessa O'Connell, goes on to quote a number of psychologists, school counselors and teenagers who affirm that school bullying related to their fashion choices has increased, and there's a lot of pressure for kids to wear the right clothes and the "coolest labels":

"The better brands you wear, the more popular you are," says Becky Gilker, a 13-year-old eighth-grader from Sherwood Park in the Canadian province of Alberta. "If you don't wear those things you get criticized." In many schools, the most expensive designer goods, such as those by Chanel or Louis Vuitton, have the highest social ranking among girls. But popular teen brands such as American Eagle, Abercrombie & Fitch and Aeropostale are also important.

Although I agree with the premise of O'Connell's argument, fashion bullying is not a new phenomenon, and she doesn't present convincing evidence, at least to me, that it is any worse than it has been previously. She cites one survey that says more than one-third of students felt they were made fun of because of the clothes they wore. But then again, this is only a survey of 1,000 Midwestern school students in five schools, and there is no context given to previous surveys. How much has this percentage of kids bullied increased or decreased from previous years? She doesn't say.

If the existence of luxury labels means more bullying, then has the amount high-end children's products bought actually increased? Who knows. O'Connell doesn't include this number in her story either.

I have a similar problem with this piece from Marketplace, which says that the average age for luxury consumers is getting younger. So, exactly how young is she? How does this compare to five years ago? And further, is this a phenomenon that's limited to more affluent areas or actually a more nationwide trend? I have a feeling it's a pretty limited market we're talking about here.

The Marketplace story says 15% of teen purchases are designer goods and that number continues to climb… so what was it five years ago? What is a designer good? And who is included in the survey sample? And by the way, what makes up the other 85% of teen purchases? Again, no definite answers, only very sketchy survey results.

The other thing that bothers me about both of these pieces is that neither of them bothered to call the designers who are targeting younger audiences. I have no doubt these lines exist. But why not ask Marc Jacobs why he created a children's line? Why not ask how much money he's actually making from that line? The same logic follows for Missoni, 7 for All Mankind and others mentioned. Just because they are making these lines, doesn't mean that kids (or actually, their parents) are buying them, or that they are a substantial part of the designer's overall business.

If they aren't that substantial, is it really fair to make a generalization that the increase in designer children's clothes necessarily has a direct correlation to bullying?

Haven't kids always been this way? Let me make some comparisons to things that were cool when I was in middle school. Isn't 7 for All Mankind the latest version of Guess? Isn't American Eagle a hipper GapKids? What about Keds being the '80s precursor to Uggs? (All right, maybe that's a stretch!)

Without more convincing evidence, I'm not sure there's any need for this article. It's not newsworthy, and frankly, not much has changed. Fashion bullying isn't a new phenomenon—the only thing that's changed over time is which brands are cool.