The Business of Fashion Podcast

Episode: Does Fashion Still Know What Women Want?

Date: October 22, 2025

Host: Sheena Butler-Young
Guests: Diana Pearl and Kathleen (Kat) Chen, BoF correspondents

Overview

This episode investigates whether the fashion industry still truly understands and centers the needs, desires, and realities of women, especially after a controversial fashion month where runway spectacle seemed disconnected—or even antagonistic—to real women's lives. The conversation examines the tension between artistic fantasy and wearable function, designers' intent versus audience perception, the persistent underrepresentation of women in creative roles, and actionable ways fashion might better serve and represent women.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Context: Recent Runway Controversies ([00:07]–[02:54])

• Sheena Butler-Young (Host): Opens by describing a polarizing fashion month: designer debuts paired with dramatic, often bizarre runway choices—straightjacket-like dresses at Alaïa, mouthpieces at Margiela, and bodysuits printed with male torsos at Jean Paul Gaultier. Raises the fundamental question: do these designers "actually understand or even care how women dress in their real lives?"
• Diana Pearl: Observes that some runway looks felt "almost a little bit disrespectful to women," as if "fashion is a form of torture" ([01:24]). She highlights garments that immobilize or erase women, stating, "It felt either like it was erasing the woman or immobilizing them…it's clothes for women, and I think when it feels like the designers aren't respecting women in their designs, that really strikes a chord" ([02:33]).

2. Fashion Messaging, Critic Reception, and Economic Context ([02:54]–[06:52])

• Kathleen Chen: Suggests the reaction is magnified by the confluence of commercial pressures (many brands are struggling) and creative stagnation. Consumers have not felt "a sense of excitement." The resulting collections are seen as out of touch at precisely the moment when brands need to connect most.

  "Designers had a commercial incentive to be more resonant with consumers, and then creating these collections that didn't hit at that level...made these collections so much more perceptible to be criticized." ([03:42])

• Critics like Vanessa Friedman (NYT), Elizabeth Paton (FT), and Amy O’Dell (Back Row Substack) led the charge in calling out what felt like anti-woman sentiment in recent collections ([05:07]), alongside amplified grassroots discussion on TikTok and Instagram ([05:54]).
• The panel clarifies: "Does fashion hate women? No…But it's very easy to villainize fashion as an institution" for its historical and structural issues ([06:18]).

3. Body Diversity and the Political & Social Backdrop ([06:52]–[08:43])

• Host: Notes recent societal debates around body positivity and the "Ozempic effect," suggesting a return to narrower standards of beauty.
• Diana Pearl: Observes that this intensifies the perception of disrespect: "It just adds insult to injury…a parade of models that just have such an unattainable standard set for their body" ([07:16]).
• Kat Chen: Points out quantitative evidence: "The lack of body diversity is a lot more alarming…number of plus-size or body diversity on the runway basically just falling, you know, straight down from 2023 to 2025" ([07:49]).

4. Representation in Fashion Leadership ([08:43]–[11:44])

• The conversation shifts to the persistent underrepresentation of women as creative directors. Despite women being the majority of fashion consumers, very few top houses are led by women ([08:43]).

  "Of the...14 debuts this season, only two came from women. And…I don't think it would solve every problem to have women designers...but it just primes people to be a little more on the lookout for sexism." – Diana Pearl ([09:20])

• The perception of a design is "very much colored by who presents it" ([10:27]). Intent and authorship both matter, as does the historic tendency to label female designers as "boring" when they create wearable collections, in contrast to their male peers ([11:44]).

  "Women have to always break through this perception of being frivolous...There are so few female designers that have been able to achieve that kind of acclaim. And the more I think about that, the more I'm just like, that's kind of fucked up, right?" – Kat Chen ([13:10–13:52])

5. Fantasy vs. Function: The Wearability Debate ([11:44]–[15:45])

• The group explores why women designers are criticized for commercial or wearable clothes, while male designers are often celebrated for spectacle and risk-taking.
• Diana Pearl: "It's a fine balance between fantasy and function…Fashion is a functional object, especially for the women wearing it. A male designer and a woman designer designing women's wear…they obviously approach it from like two different life experiences" ([12:04]).
• The panel agrees that the split in criticism mirrors wider societal patterns where women face disproportional scrutiny ([13:16]).

6. Commerciality, Social Media & The Power of Spectacle ([15:17]–[18:19])

• Some runway spectacle is now designed to go viral on TikTok or Instagram, but the balance is tricky: "What is the right formula of spectacle on a runway versus commerciality?" ([15:18])
• Good examples: Matthew Blazy’s Chanel debut and New York-based brands like Khaite—shows with theatrical settings, but fundamentally wearable clothes ([15:45]).
• For emerging brands, direct engagement with customers can trump viral spectacle.

7. Practical Advice: How Should Brands Respond? ("Lightning Round") ([22:11]–[29:06])

Q1: What two structural changes would you make to center women’s lives?

• Diana Pearl: “Hiring more women is always a good place to start,” especially given the discrepancy between female fashion school graduates and those reaching the top ([23:03]). Second: “Listening to women…doing focus groups, talking to your consumer, listening to feedback.”
• Kat Chen: Prioritize improvements within the company—hiring, benefits, mentorship. She also raises the issue of how media and culture have treated "girl bosses," noting internalized sexism is another topic worth confronting in the industry ([24:03]).

Q2: If you were consulting a creative director, what would your 90-day plan be to prove they understand what women want to buy?

• Diana Pearl: Talk to as many representative, diverse women customers as possible: “Every day call up one of their, like, top clients and have an hour long conversation with them…” ([26:19]). Details matter: Does the bag fit a laptop? Can a phone fit in the pocket?
• Kat Chen: Data-driven approach: “Go to the data team…create a profile of our customer or two…give her a name, give her a job, and then create a set of products for her. Really just imagine that customer” ([27:48]).

Memorable Moment:

"Women aren't a monolith...that's why it's really about listening to a larger number of people, like thinking about, okay, what's this woman's lifestyle like? Not all women are the same." – Diana Pearl ([28:42])

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments with Timestamps

• "It felt either like it was erasing the woman or immobilizing them…almost like, in some ways, fashion is a form of torture." – Diana Pearl ([02:30])
• "Designers had a commercial incentive to be more resonant with consumers, and then creating these collections that didn't hit at that level...made these collections so much more perceptible to be criticized." – Kat Chen ([03:42])
• "The lack of body diversity is a lot more alarming to me than this connection between…conceptually hideous things on the Runway." – Kat Chen ([07:49])
• "The perception of design is very much colored by who presents it." – Robert Williams, referenced by Sheena ([10:27])
• "Women have to always break through this perception of being frivolous...there are so few female designers that have been able to achieve that kind of acclaim. The more that I think about that, the more I'm just like, that's kind of fucked up, right?" – Kat Chen ([13:10–13:52])
• "Talk to your consumer…listening to the customer and respecting their opinion, what they say, understanding what their practical needs are, and how that fits in with the larger dream and creating that fantasy." – Diana Pearl ([23:03])
• "Women aren't a monolith…Not all women want the same thing. So it's really important to, to remember that as well." – Diana Pearl ([28:42])

Timestamps for Key Segments

• [00:07] Episode opening and framing of the fashion month controversy
• [01:24] Runway spectacle versus real women's needs
• [05:07] Origins of anti-woman criticism in fashion commentary
• [07:16] Body positivity, the “Ozempic effect,” and shrinking diversity
• [08:43] Gender imbalance in creative leadership
• [12:04] Wearability and fantasy: the “boring” label for women designers
• [15:17] The necessity (and risks) of spectacle for social media
• [22:11] Lightning round: structural changes and practical advice for fashion brands

Conclusion

The hosts and guests agree that meaningful fashion for women requires representation, genuine engagement, and responsiveness—not just with headline-grabbing designs, but through ongoing structural change and humility in listening. The fashion industry’s path forward, especially amid changing social norms and commercial pressures, demands nuanced solutions—not spectacle for spectacle's sake, but a renewed focus on the women who actually wear (and buy) the clothes.