Last week my Instagram DM inbox was inundated with comments, notes, and links to the now-infamous article published by The Cut, titled, “First-world problems, I know”. Without reading a word of it, I could surmise exactly what it said, and upon reading it, I wasn’t wrong; I was just unprepared for how bad – no, how ridiculously awful – the article was.
In a nutshell, the article eliminated all real-world context and consequences while focusing on a group of “wealthy” NYC women who belong to some counterfeit-bag-loving sub-Reddit group and spend fairly offensive amounts of money on (among other things, I assume) fake Hermès bags. Many in the article appeared overjoyed at the ability to purchase a number (a veritable collection!) of these counterfeit bags, and then parade them around as proudly as if they were carrying the real thing.
Fauré Le Page.
RepLadies and Their Counterfeit Birkins
What struck me first about the article was, whatever the profile of these individual women, every quote – “[it’s not] real money”; “we all want the best” “[Buying authentic bags is] just a snobbery thing”; the counterfeit bags “tend to be better made”; and so on – clearly were made to highlight that these women are divorced from reality.
There was a lot of talk about the financial lives of these “RepLadies” but for all the grand statements – “a $10 million dollar house in the Hamptons”; “a household income she says caps around $3 million a year”; “the community seems to be largely made up of wealthy women”; etc. – there is no way of knowing whether any of that is true, beyond the fact that they clearly do have some disposable income (or frightening credit debt). People from a variety of backgrounds do buy fakes; this behavior is not limited to people of any particular socio-economic background. My point, however, is that there is financially comfortable, which these ladies probably are, and truly wealthy, which they do not seem to be. There are a few things I know about truly wealthy people.
First, people with true wealth do not have quite so much time: social approval is not based on what bag one is carrying; if you aren’t currently active in work, the esteem comes from the foundation or charity or event you are running, or whatever other projects/book/career you are working on. Second, the mindset of personally achieving real wealth generally tends to appreciate the work and time it takes to create, grow and build something and the values that undergird the importance of the genuine. However, others, who may be either spoiled, who did not achieve for themselves, or for other reasons, seem to have that perpetual insecurity that feeds the need for both immediate gratification and the physical manifestation of “success” regardless of whether or not it is real, in order to “prove” their worth to themselves.
The Justification Of Illegal Behavior
Finally, as much and as often as possible, throughout the article, there was a lot of justifying the purchases as though these people are still trying to convince themselves that this sort of behavior is ok (because they’re certainly not convincing me). The thorough denial of the hard realities of the black market counterfeit industry, completely ignoring the myriad of legal, ethical, and moral problems of counterfeit products and the real-life consequences and harms caused by support for it, along with their vehement protests that this is all justified (“a way of subverting the system”; “the reps [are] indistinguishable from the authentics” [snort]; “wealthy people just have more interesting things to do with their money”; and most delusionally: “What is even considered authentic?”) comes across, more than anything, as just sad, as the article itself best says:
“For this cadre of rep obsessives, status isn’t a massive collection of real luxury bags; it’s the ability to find a fake so perfect it feels more theirs than the real thing.” (Chef’s Kiss perfection!)
The article glorifies a moment in new thought: the justification of blatantly illegal behavior – with actual consequences on truly marginalized communities, by the way – and wanting the mere superficial appearance of the fake while failing to appreciate the virtues of the genuine, while hoping that everyone else accepts their reality regardless of the harms caused. The clearly psychological aspects of this kind of behavior truly suggest narcissism (check out the textbook definition in Psychology Today). In short, the article presents a clown-world parade of disaster people who will probably spend their entire lives justifying what they know in their hearts is wrong. The frightening part is: if they can justify this kind of behavior, is there a limit? What is one’s personal regard for honesty when one has proven that they can throw off something seemingly regarded as a ‘yoke’ of truth when it’s for personal glory? If counterfeit bags are ok, what else, then – how about counterfeit medicine? How about selling the bags to an unsuspecting buyer? The article doesn’t venture into that territory – though it veers terrifyingly close – and if you were to ask any of these ladies yourself, I doubt you’d get a satisfying answer.
I am well aware of how controversial this topic is – even in our (usually!) agreeable Hermès community, that this sort of behavior is ok UK and European Union got heated and eventually shut down – and of course, one could note how many ills are suffered at the hands of modern commercial industry.
However, if one actually took the time and effort to research the many and varied efforts that Hermès puts across all aspects of its Corporate Social Responsibility, including everything from ecodesign, employee wellbeing and waste reduction, to ethics, responsibility among its communities and diversity and inclusion – remember, this is a corporation that paid all employees at 100% of their salary and benefits throughout all of COVID and did so without taking financial support from the government, sustaining its entire community on its own without employee reduction, which was incredibly rare and should be lauded and supported. I have previously examined the thoroughly impressive corporate responsibility Hermès has taken over the years, but even if one was to look beyond Hermès, to other businesses, even looking at fashion in general; perhaps not all fashion businesses are as ethical as Hermès, what then? I suppose if you move the camera far back enough we are all going to be hypocrites, eventually, but even so, that is really not the point. Fakes are immoral, unethical, and illegal, serving no empirical benefit to anyone. Since I’m here and ranting, let’s examine how:
Moral (right vs wrong)
This doesn’t need very much explanation. Obviously, the production and sale of fake products are clearly wrong; not just because it violates Intellectual Property protections, but because the kinds of people who would produce fake products would also have nefarious business practices, including child labor; very-low-wage (if any!) labor; zero worker protections; faulty products; terrorism funding; drug funding; illegal and cartel funding: the production and sale of replicas certainly contributes to these things. There are far-reaching consequences to the counterfeit market. Further, what sort of person leads this sort of life: how do they teach their children values, and what is the right way to live? How can they psychologically separate right from wrong? Where, indeed, is the limit, and how can it be anything other than arbitrary?
Ethical (rules and behaviors)
Your Favorite Brands Categorial Imperative, which, is still a foundation of a functioning society: if no one respected any ownership rights (trademark or otherwise), how far would we get? Just because something is expensive, or elusive, there is no right to duplicate it, because (in this case, the design) denotes a level of expected quality and is representative of a network of production affecting the lives of thousands of conceptualists, designers, artisans, transporters, textile manufacturers, etc. – all of whom are supported by the commerce created legally.
Legal (the law)
We operate by laws and rules, and Fauré Le Page, the production and sale of counterfeit goods are illegal under the Lanham Act. Federal Law, 18 USC 2320(a)(1), with 18 US Code 2320(b) prescribing either a very large fine or jail time, plus forfeiture and destruction of the counterfeit goods and restitution for those deceived by such. (18 USC 2320(c)). For an excellent discussion of the US law on this topic, The Newest Prada Galleria Bags Are a Work of Art.
definition in Psychology Today massive problem worldwide. While possession isn’t illegal in the United States, Get In Touch read this wonderful article Your Favorite Brands strict regulations read this wonderful article can be heavily influenced by or even flat-out copy a design because, surprisingly, the design aspects of the bag are not protected: it’s the trademarks (hallmarks) that are. In the United States the LEGAL line between Counterfeit and ”mere” Knock-Off comes down to the presence or absence of these marks, although, just as importantly, the ethics and morality (see above) do not, Your Favorite Brands consequences UK and European Union.
I read this article after a friend sent it to me last week, it sparked a really thoughtful discussion about WHY we buy the things we buy and why we want the things we want. I can see how in a more open setting it might easily lead to some less-than-respectful dialogue. My sense after reading it was these are not women who enjoy beautiful things for beauty’s sake, but rather seemed 100% focused on status, which I think most of us are guilty of on some level, but maybe just in different ways or different types of status. What we wear signals something about who we are, whether it’s a Strand tote or a Birkin. Even when it’s not our intent to send that signal, it’s there nonetheless.
Great perspective. I agree!
What I don’t understand is the glorification of certain “kinds” or any kind of wealth, it honestly stinks of classism. The idea that only “truly wealthy” people appreciate authentic things, because they understand the value of hard work and therefore understand quality is laughable. Are there wealthy people who work hard? Of course, but hard work, authenticity, and appreciation are not qualities that inherently belong to those of high socioeconomic status—in fact there are many who’re “self-made” or “old money” that are the opposition of some/all of all the aforementioned qualities.
Plenty of people work hard, and many times the poorest work the hardest for the least, yet are viewed as lazy, incompetent, or undeserving because their inability to rise in a system the is a lie. Hard work is not nor has ever been a guarantee of financial success. Luxury goods are not a barometer ethics or “class,” and therefore should be separated from them.
Stop the focus and back and forth about what “actual” rich people do. Wealthy people doing or not doing something, does not indicate if an action is ethical or ok, or add any value to an argument. We live in a society that over values money and considers it a sign of virtue (particularly for certain groups of people). Make the meat of the argument about how certain actions hurt other people and and give substantive and quantitative evidence, not an afterthought about “marginalized communities.” That is how you will gain traction and punch the sails of The Cut’s article.
Please write regularly for this blog. This is the content I’m content I didn’t even know I needed. So thoughtful yet perfectly succinct.
and there are still legal.
Completely agree. I come from an extremely old money New York family (we were part of Astor’s 400). My family lost the bulk of its wealth around 20 years ago. I was young enough when it happened that I was able to learn how to support myself when the safety net fell out. My older relatives, on the other hand, had no idea how to earn a living because they were told that their trust funds would provide them with lifetime income. They haven’t bothered to learn, and instead ask me for money while criticizing me for being a workaholic (classic dysfunctional WASP-y family dynamic, but I digress). The author of this opinion piece positions herself as an authority on the “truly wealthy,” opining that they’re too busy with “work” to pursue the time-consuming hobby of collecting fake birkins. What an absurd statement. I know hundreds of (currently and formerly) wealthy people. Not one of them works as hard as my middle class friends (all of whom have a day job and at least one side hustle, and still live paycheck-to-paycheck). The typical “truly wealthy” person I’ve encountered, unless they’re a senior level executive working 80+ hours per week, generally has plenty of free time on their hands (certainly enough time to attend fake birkin parties).
So glad you posted this. Although the topic of this article seems to be counterfeit Birkins, the real subject became a biased, holier than thou view of wealth and class. Honestly this article put me off Erlebniswelt-fliegenfischenShops entirely. Also, I’m a philosophy student and technically speaking, morality is a subset of ethics and cherry picking one principle to substantiate a personal view is certainly not the point of ethics.
We’ll stated!
Completely agree. “If one is truly wealthy….” one works at one’s charities etc.? So very Downton Abbey.
This comment should’ve been pinned to the top, not the other ones that simply agrees with the author
Absolutely 100% this. There are some very valid issues to take up with the replica world, but many of the sentiments in this article left an extremely bad taste in the mouth.
If I could upvote a million times I would
A Bright, Beautiful Refresh of The Polo ID Collection is Here!
This whole article sounds like it’s being written by someone who is afraid the masses will be able to afford 99% of the same things she spends hundreds of thousands of dollars to be “allowed the opportunity” to purchase.
You might just be the most entitled person ever, to think you “deserve” a 15k bag but without paying the correct price for it. Guess what, a 15k bag isn’t a necessity for anyone, some people do have obscene amounts of money so they buy them, it’s not a freaking tragedy!
“This whole comment sounds like it’s being written by someone who is unhappy with their life.”
Wow, I don’t agree with what that person said, but do you really think their comment warranted that kind of response?
Why buy fake and pretend it’s real? Then post a nasty comment to make yourself feel better about it? And no the masses will never be able to afford 99% of what she or anyone else who buys real designer items spends “hundreds of thousands of dollars on.” That’s because they are exclusive items. Made with the highest quality materials by artisans. Not everyone can afford them and that’s ok.
If you are so obsessed with pretending that you have a real item, then trying to attack people who have actually saved up their money, or have otherwise worked their asses off to afford these items (which BTW are an investment), then you’re the one with the problem. Not the author.
Real is real and fake is fake. Anyone can spot a fake. They are worthless and a waste of money. And time. Just like your comment is a giant waste of time.
Enjoy your fake trash. Good luck getting a return on your investment.
I’m sure the people she mentions who are sooooo wealthy don’t have to worry about whether a bag is an investment or not. For someone truly wealthy, you’d think a $10,000 handbag would be nothing.
This whole article was snobbish drivel, like someone said below – imagine being so insecure that you have to gatekeep wealth. For the author to say she’s not concerned about appearances when her entire Instagram profile is bragging about material goods, her claims are clearly untrue. She sounds sad that 99.9999% of people will never know the difference between the VCA and Hermes she brags about and someone who has the fakes.
Snobbish drivel indeed! LoVe the insinuation that “poor” people don’t work hard. Unemployed rich people working hard on their charities is another nugget.
Let them eat cake.
And look, I found the replady!
I read the Cut’s original article as well as the (spicy!) TPF thread that was linked. The inherent contradiction that the pro-fake folks haven’t addressed is this: fake buyers say people paying $15k and up for authentic bags are overpaying, the quality is declining across the board, the replicas are just as good, it’s smart to get a good deal, and so on.
And yet! It seems to be very important to you (“you” being purchasers of fake goods) for other people to believe that YOU are someone who IS able to purchase the real thing, and lots of it. You supposedly think authentic buyers are foolish for paying too much for a subprime product, but you also really want strangers to believe that you’re one of *those* people. You think the game is stupid, but you want people to think you’re a top player in the game.
If it was genuinely only about the bag’s design and craftsmanship, there are any number of mass market and custom brands who can deliver on the key components you want, for cheaper than Hermes or even superfake manufacturers.
I’m just curious how people square this dissonance even to themselves. The many negative externalities of counterfeit goods aside, I’d begrudgingly respect someone who could matter-of-factly say to anyone who asked, “The status that comes with carrying a Birkin is important to me, but I am not able to/do not want to pay for the real thing.” For me, it’s okay to enjoy the facade of something and not care about what’s behind it, but let’s not try to make that out to be a sign of you being smart or thrifty.
This is such a great comment. I can’t upvote this enough.
Great take! I don’t think those people actually see the inherent conflict in their actions. It seems to me that their self-awareness does not go much beyond the superficial aspect, but even if it does, they seem to know that it’s wrong, so the behavior has to be justified.
I don’t think the Cut article is glorifying this practice at all. I find it interesting to learn about the perspectives of people buying fakes, especially when they could afford the real thing. Along those lines, I don’t think reporting about a segment of the market for fakes (wealthy buyers) is the same as claiming they represent most or all of the market. I think the article is highlighting an element of this market that is unexpected or invisible.
I do take issue with your claim that these people are not “truly wealthy.” If their claims about their finances are true (not saying they are), they are wealthy by any measure. I’m not sure what definition you’re using for wealthy, but it seems to be glorifying wealth as purposeful and fulfilling, which it isn’t. You write “the mindset of personally achieving real wealth generally tends to appreciate the work and time it takes to create, grow and build something and the values that undergird the importance of the genuine.” There are plenty of wealthy people who inherit wealth, got lucky, etc. and don’t have any particular “mindset.” I would’ve appreciated some insight into what definition of “true wealth” you’re using here, besides the generally accepted financial definition.
In my book, anyone with millions in assets (like homes) and tons of liquid cash (to buy real or fake purses) is wealthy, period.
Yes, imagine trying to gatekeep “true wealth”.
Lol. Not me! It’s an interesting thought and I wish someone had mentioned it when I was bouncing ideas off people on this article. I’m certainly not trying to do that (see my below comment about the hyperlinked TPF thread where this specific subject came up), I think it’s more about the way they treat things.
That’s a fair point. Perhaps our view of wealth has become skewed. Wealthy vs ridiculously wealthy? Old money vs new? Something to prove vs nothing to prove? I do see a difference, but maybe that’s besides the point. Wealth is what it is. The concept within this discussion was brought up in the PurseForum chat which is hyperlinked above and you can see what was discussed on it. I have no idea whether these people are wealthy – and I guess there are a great many ways to perceive and quantify it. Thank you so much for this insightful comment!
I also felt uncomfortable with the author’s comments about the profile of people who have “true wealth”. Also, I cannot stress enough how nothing in the profile of the women featured in the Cut article demonstrates clinical narcissism which is a complex and serious personality disorder (I work in mental health). Entitlement – sure, but clinical narcissism, no.
While I don’t personally purchase replicas, and I do care about the ethical implications of that market.
I found the tone of this article unpalatable and problematic. Whereas I found the Cut article to be an interesting dive into an absolutely problematic but also fascinating subculture.
I’m against fakes just as much as you but to compare a counterfeit bag to counterfeit medicine is uhm…. A choice. One could kill you if ingested. The other? Not so much. Having the sentiment of “WHERE WILL IT STOP?!?” Is a bit dramatic. Just because someone bought a fake bag doesn’t mean they’re going to rob a bank and proceed to bury a body under their floorboard. Sometimes, the points used just make the entire article a joke and hard to take serious. If there were good points made, they’re instantly overshadowed by the o surf comparisons made. Sorry.
While I do not support counterfeits this almost came off as telling your audience what to do. If I buy a used purse is it real or fake, these days the counterfeits are just as good. I read the reddit threads but not sure what we can do as customers to stop this. Always buy from a store never buy used isn’t fair to those that can’t afford a brand new bag. I’m on the hunt for a used Chanel bag but if I’m reading this I need to buy direct from a store only.
The real problem here is the people encouraging the counterfeiters, not the author of the article. And I agree, these super fakes are ruining the second hand market for the rest of us. When you have replicas immitating the real thing down to the stitching, materials, packaging, labels, who could ever trust a second hand retailer again?
I understand what you’re saying, and of course I recommend buying from the boutique if you can, but there are plenty of reputable places to buy secondhand as well. And most people on TPF would recommend that if you do, you should get it authenticated.
I think this is very interesting. It’s certainly dishonest to pass off a fake as real, and a true mark of privilege—people might believe you have ten birkins if you have a ten million dollar home but they won’t believe any os us normies. And I think it’s actually quite a flex of privilege to appear in this article bragging about how you can pass of fakes as real. You need more privilege to pass off a mass of fakes as real than you need to buy a luxury bag or two.
that said, I’m not sure that buying an Hermes bag is that ethical, even compared to buying a fake. There are much more ethical uses we can put our money to—perhaps donating to help Ukrainian refugees for example. My point isn’t that no one should buy a luxury bag, but rather that it’s an absurd thing to brand as ethical.
I understand what you’re saying – what is the most ethical use of a person’s funds? I do touch on that idea (“we are all going to be hypocrites, eventually”), but this is really a refutation on the more narrow issue of buying and carrying fakes.
The whole luxury industry and most of fashion as a whole is unethical. I say this as someone who works in fashion. People act as if buying a fake bag is the worst thing you could possibly do in life – which I’m not sure if that shows how stupid people are? or how stupidly privileged they are, for that to be the biggest concern in their lives. What I will add is that these billion dollar luxury corporations do ALOT of dirty, unethical things behind the scenes, I mean at the end of the day no company or person becomes worth a billion dollars ethically. So what is the reason to shame people for buying fake goods? People act as if people cannot want what they want and simply not have the funds to get it or that because a billion dollar corp wants to sell a $10k bag that that’s just ethical and nothings wrong with it. Should only “WEALTHY” people be able to obtain certain goods? This whole luxury vs counterfeit conversation that has been happening over the past few months or so with all these articles popping up is starting to seem so disgustingly classist and racist but I don’t even have the time to break that down right now.
You know……. it really doesn’t make any difference if someone has a Birkin or not. I actually do have a real one and it doesn’t make me any better than the other person. Its overpriced and actually rediculous to have. But it was a gift so it sits in my closet. But I can’t believe I am actually saying this…..if someone wants a fake who even cares? You can’t tell anyway. So buy whatever you want and enjoy. It’s health that matters, not a Birkin. Its actually a waste of money in this world we live in.
Thank you for writing this. I actually found the tone of this article to be even more off-putting than the Cut article. Why? I expect silly nonsense from the women profiled in The Cut. What I don’t expect is highly emotionally-charged article of condemnation from an informational luxury bag group. All of this, of course, is just my opinion.
Author, you lost me with your profiling of ‘truly wealthy people’, and examples such as ‘counterfeit medicine’. To compare the desperateness of those who are forced to turn to counterfeit medicine to carrying a new bag is incredibly tone deaf (especially as you’re setting the tone of this article with ‘wealth’).
I expected an article along the lines of the last section, talking about the legal implications, trademarks, and respecting the designer’s work, etc. Instead, the majority of this article became commentary on what you see as being rich, the way you judge someone’s wealth, and failure to acknowledge how each individual may come into their money.
How disappointing that this was written in response to an article that you consider ‘ridiculously awful’, because it failed to address the real problems of fakes.
The original article was a bit perplexing but not surprising to me. I don’t find myself on Social media frequently as it’s never been my thing, but I found myself thinking after reading this. I don’t have many bags, but I do own some special items that I can count on one hand, one being my Chanel classic flap that I purchased after my first bonus in 2013. It’s been a long time since and my life has changed and so have my priorities. For example, I have financial goals that include providing for my children’s education in the future, and so things are just different now. I comfortably bought my first Chanel but that was my last. I have purchased on of these ‘replicas’ in a non-neutral color for fun but I don’t see any shame in it. I don’t think there’s a need to judge others for how they choose to spend their money, or even start to define profiles of what financial comfortability vs true wealth is. As with abortion rights – it’s your right to choose. I just make my own choices and I’m happy with that.
Finding the perfect replica is a fascinating game. The feeling that you have won the game, have the same goods as the others but not have to waste your money is addictive. It’s not illegal to own a counterfeit it’s only illegal to buy and sell them. Children are more likely involved in the manufacturing of your authentic Nike shoes than a top quality fake Birkin. The top fakes are made by hand by highly trained craftsman they just happen to be Asian not European. For many brands the fakes have way less issues…looking at you LV and Chanel lol The sellers and craftsmen get to take care of their families with added perks that are hard to come by in a communist country. I’ve seen them show pics of their children on vacation or at special school programs that this illegal activity has provided. It’s not all evil
I think you are missing the point – some people do appreciate the beauty of an Hermes bag and yet they will never be able to afford a real one. (Or a Chanel or Louis Vuitton….) Previously fake bags were ugly and plastic but now they are so good you can’t even trust all authenticators to get it right. Why not let them enjoy having something nice to use? And who cares if they tell someone it’s real and it’s not. As long as they don’t try to sell it to someone else as real (and there is a thriving market for reselling reps to other rep ladies anyway). I’ve bought a fake bag recently, having only had real designer previously and I told literally everyone who complimented me that it was fake, which they all said they would never have expected. Who cares.
It is awful that you are judging people for the money they have or their affordability of what you deem as luxury. The people who are making these luxury brands and charging people ridiculous amounts of money and associating your status and wealth is simplistically awful and you have bought into that narrative. Human values should be defined as empathy and kindness you practice for others and not if you own 10 berkins and 20 Guccis. If those folks are happy about buying things and possessing things they think they cannot afford then be it. Practice humanity and compassion rather than standing for 1 percenters who have destroyed the world.
Here’s a different take. I’d been eyeing a Chanel purse for many years and have to funds to purchase one. Still, I wasn’t sure if a purse that costly would work for me. I bought a very good dupe to try it out. The purse itself looked incredibly authentic but the bag made me feel conspicuous and uncomfortable. In the end, I’m not cut out for carrying ultra expensive purses and won’t be buying another, authentic or not. My comfort level is in the $500-$750 range—still expensive for most, but not stratospheric.
I have no regrets, I didn’t waste a mortgage payment on an authentic bag, and don’t wear the dupe.
I did the same thing when I bought my dupe Chloe bag in the mid-2000’s. It had the lock and key I so coveted! Ultimately, it was so heavy and I was so glad I didn’t make the investment on a real Chloe.
I was also disappointed the writer didn’t verify the claims people made about their wealth. And they only sent one fake to an expert. The article is gossip, not reporting.
Yes – thank you!
Aww sweety, I can tell you didn’t grow up rich because you don’t really know the inside world of the wealthy. My mother’s family are very wealthy – like every room in every one of their multiple properties has a button by the bed for you to summon one of the maids type of wealthy. Like private island type of wealth. Trust me, they are 100% not above breaking the law and doing whatever they want to get what they feel entitled to. I read that article and I could see why they would want fake birkins – they are people who are used to getting what they want, when they want it, and they don’t take kindly to being told no. So if Hermes wants to have a big stick up their butt about what bags they will deign to offer to whom and when, then of course these very wealthy women will just turn to the black market where they can order exactly the size, style, colour, leather they want, when they want it. They can fill their closets with every bag Hermes never even made if they want and nobody would think twice about whether or not it is real and they wouldn’t care anyway. In fact, they would relish in the idea of making everybody jealous and pulling off their dirty little secret. It would almost make it more fun for them. My grandmother used to wear fake jewels and actually enjoyed when people would compliment her on them (and then use that as a reason to call them ‘low class’). Trust me, it is a twisted world full of these kinds of crazy mind games. So if you want to spend your money on the “real thing” you go nuts, but don’t assume for a second that when you see a bag wafting by on Rodeo Drive that it isn’t actually a fake, because there is every chance that it is.
The fact that you think luxury brands aren’t just as unthetical as those who sell counterfeits proves that you are the one who is staggeringly out of touch with reality.
This is the sort of attitude of “I have the right to whatever I want, even if it hurts others” I have seen on TikTok in the book community (my other love). TT accounts with big followings saying it is fine to read pirated books ugh. Or worse, to buy books, read them, and then return for a refund! Just entitled behaviour.
Now, re fake bags. I don’t really get it. I don’t have a lot of designer bags as i can’t afford a lot of them – I have a fair few contemporary and love Tory Burch and Coach. The designer bags I do own though I didn’t buy for “look at me” kudos. I honestly didn’t. Most people in my city won’t recognize my Loewe and Chloe bags as designer.
I think though, that whatever we can apply to fake bags, can also be applied to fast fashion in terms of the damage done to the environment and those working in it, and I know plenty of people with money who buy real designer bags and shoes, but then get their clothes from Primark and don’t care.
Ummm. I just bought a copy and am thrilled. I’ve never paid more than $500 for a handbag and spent $2,000+ for a “Birkin” and it is mighty pretty in my eyes. Do I plan to even carry it much? I don’t wear my jewelry much in my life. Maybe just having a coveted bag lookalike is enough. If I had paid the $20,000 for the real thing, I would be seriously horrified at how I should have spent such money elsewhere. But $2k is real money to me and the bag makes me smile. My delusions are my own.
Im not sure why all the negative comments are here – the author is merely stating facts about todays climate of luxury – by definition, wearing a luxury bag, let alone the pinnacle of, an Hermes bag means you’ve made it. If you choose to wear one and you can afford it, be it for yourself or to present an image of yourself to others, thats your choice. If you choose to wear a fake one to represent an image of yourself that you cant afford to others, you have deeper issues that bags won’t fix. The author here succinctly summarizes facts and puts forth a case thats pretty much incontestable. Anyone leaving comments otherwise is just going off hive mind groupthink and is internet tough guy flexing.
Interesting topic. What is the opinion on boobs implants and plastic surgery then? How about Botox?
Soooooo you gonna go into the ethics of other industries wealthy people consume too? Blood diamonds? Other jewels unethically mined? And you know lots of clothing and food industries are owned by unethical companies right?
What about the fact that Hermes pays their artisans like 1700 EUR a month when they charge at least 10k a birkin? That’s like below minimum wage.
Just be straight up and see you hate to see poorer people wearing a pretty much the same bag you have but didn’t have to pay 10k+ for it.
I buy authentic and don’t care what other people are buying. Minding your own business does wonders!
I dislike that sub for trying so hard to justify buying fake designer products, they even go to great lengths to not call them what they are (fake), instead they are “replicas”. It wouldn’t be so bad if those fakes would just imitate the style of famous designs, like the Chanel classic, but what I find distressing is that they fake the inside labels as well, to the point they have “Chanel Made in France” written on inside labels, and fake authentication cards, fake codes…. which brings the question: what are these repladies doing with these bags (indistinguishable from the real thing) when they get bored of them? Will they sell them for 500$ as “replicas” or for 5000$ as the real thing? Because they so like to claim you can’t tell them apart from the real thing.
Also this might just be me, but I wouldn’t get the same satisfaction wearing a fake Chanel or LV because I wouldn’t be wearing it for other people, I would be wearing it for the feeling of having something valuable of my own, a product with a rich history and craftsmanship. I would prefer a cheaper authentic bag of another brand instead of an expensive fake, but that’s just me… because for 500$ you can get amazing leather bags from established brands. One of their arguments is that authentic designer products are made in terrible working conditions, but then what does that mean for black market, counterfeit products? Wouldn’t those be made in even worse conditions, since they have zero accountability and they are outside the law?
What a great read this was. A well written article in my opinion. Being a women who loves fashion and her top shelf designers I am aware that many people can not afford luxury items and settle for incredible knock offs. In my opinion its how the item makes a women feel real or fake. As women we go through enough, we should be able to enjoy fashion at any level, as well as be supportive of one another. So to the author, bravo and well done.
Love your points, thank you! Esp. the distinction you made between design aspects and hallmarks. Though the mention of the categorical imperative sent shivers down my spine re classes I had to take (where I skimmed Kant and Hume)
🙂
The bootlicking from this article is insane. All your real birkens wont save you when we EAT THE RICH