My two cents on the inane 'Fat Tax' and how we at Papa Don't Preach ensure we are an 'all-bodies-inclusive' label

Last year Diet Sabya got the fashion industry talking about Fat Tax and I am humbled to be a part of this very important conversation alongside real game-changers. 

As with all things, for any change to be real both depth and width wise, the entire ecosystem needs to support it. Else the change will only be superficial or may only happen in a small section of the country.

"Right from fashion school, we're taught on international size charts, given dress forms of sizes 8 and 10. I was taught to visualise clothes on a tiny body, and picture it on a runway, or in a shoot" says Shubhika in an interview with The Swaddle.

Hence, it starts with education:

1. Fashion education needs to normalize the larger sizes simply as sizes and not call them curvy/plus sizes. Colleges should have dummies/size charts that include all sizing.

2. Fashion illustrations need to be taught on regular body sizes and not on exaggerated skinny and stretched “fashion croquis.”

This is so that when a student/fashion designer envisages a collection/ a garment they don’t automatically visualize it to complement a skinny (9/10 heads) fashion figure.

A student should not have to choose to start a plus size label or brand and be slotted as a different/ unique designer for choosing to do so. The design process right now is we (the designer) design keeping the fashion figure/size charts in mind and THEN tweak them to fit a larger size when asked to customize for paying clients. Which means it may not have sleeves or really low arm holes/ fabrics that fit too snug at inception. It will then have to be altered and tweaked for it to be comfortable for a larger size that ends up ruining the aesthetics for both the designer and the client. This is what has been normalised, because of our skewed conditioning/ foundation work as a student, consumer + purveyor of fashion historically. 

Education works both ways;

In India, the respect for a luxury label as well as respect for a customer buying into luxury is missing. The gap is both ways. When shopping from a luxury brand, a client often approaches it from the belief-

1. The margins are too high - their local tailor will be able to stitch it cheaper - hence one must always bargain.

2. If you are shopping from a designer, you must be able to customize the garment as much as you’d like to - even if it completely changes the designer’s vision-only to get something “exclusive” because only then it is value for money.

3. If you are paying so much - you own the designer - this is the normal approach. 

We don’t walk into a Burberry store and ask them to reprint the checks in blue or a purple to suit us better - same respect needs to apply to Indian labels as well. It is hence, important to state that this responsibility lies on the customer as well to support luxury labels and buy the original designs that hang on the store racks. This would encourage designers to produce each design in all sizes.

Back to the designers,

I was really surprised that we were mentioned as one of the only two brands who don’t charge “fat tax” in Diet Sabya’s conversation (Raw Mango being the other)

THIS IS WHY:

1. By not making regular/ large sizes to hang in store for trials the designer appears to be snubbing them- without consciously intending to.

2. By asking for an extra sum to make larger sies one is not only hurting the customer but is essentially stripping off the “luxury of shopping with them”. Essentially the human side of the relationship/ exchange is missing. As with everything else in India, this too becomes survival of the fittest.

3. Pitting the customer against the designer and vice versa,

When one is shopping with us, a ‘luxury label’ the luxury is an automatic promise, comfort to the client is given. Charging fat tax is against everything we promise when we use words like “couture” or “luxury” to describe our label.

No, if you are a luxury label you do NOT make a loss making an XL size for a paying customer. Yes, embroidery does increase but only marginally so-it can be easily accommodated in the original MRP fabric hardly adds any extra cost. A difference of 1500-2000 or 3000 at max! 

Now India is just so huge, hence this rule only applies to luxury labels - it cannot apply as a blanket across all. There are designers/ boutiques that make clothes that come from and cater to varied economic backgrounds. For them an increase of 500 is also a lot. In this case they should choose a MRP for sizes S-XXL that absorb the increase in the cost price. For e.g.: Charge 5000 for a 2500 outfit across all sizes to absorb the increase (if any) in the larger sizes. What they can save on an XS should be balanced out in the XXL but never must one ask for extra charge.

Charging extra for larger body types is simply inhuman and demeaning to anyone who walks up to you in hopes of feeling confident and beautiful dressed in your creations. 

SOME FACTS:

1. We live, we work and run businesses in a poor country.

2. Most businesses here are turnover run businesses and profit run businesses.

Essentially, a large chunk of what comes in is put back into the business to sustain it, to sustain the team, and to keep creating new products. We then have to shoot it, package it in order to deliver our promise of luxury.

We are also functioning in an environment that is demanding us to be sustainable – as it should be. The only way to do this - being a bridal label - that uses silk and embroidery materials in bulk that aren’t necessarily sustainable is:

 1. We come out with limited collections

2. We only make two - three pieces on each style to hang in our stores and the rest we make to measure. 

How does one then – hang all sizes in store at all times?

Here, I repeat myself- the ecosystems need vitamins and supplements.

We create expensive, high investment embellished pieces in limited sizes (S-M) because, if it doesn’t sell, I know I can repurpose it and send it out as press samples to dress celebrities/ rent them out for music videos/ get featured in editorials for magazines, ensuring we don’t sit with dead stock, which is both a financial as well as an environmental problem. 

SOLUTIONS:

1. The fashion ecosystem needs to support luxury labels by becoming more inclusive when showcasing models in their editorial shoots.

2. Modelling agencies need to hire more inclusive talent so we have options when casting for our shoots. This is very very important. We put a lot of blood, sweat, tears and money when putting out our campaign shoots and finding the right muse to tell your brand story is CRUCIAL!

 VERY IMPORTANT:

We as a population need to endorse, encourage, support and appreciate film stars /celebrities/ influencers in all shapes and sizes. 

Celebrity sourcing in your outfit is very important for designers - it helps their business and work get a platform like no other in a country obsessed with Bollywood. No runway shoot, no campaign shoot, no marketing campaign helps you the way this one does! 

(Like I said a million times I know. The whole eco system needs to change for the ‘No #FatTax’ change to be an actual lasting one)

BOILS DOWN TO:

1. Change in our fashion foundation/ education

2. Fashion ecosystem reboot

3. Basic respect for humanity - both ways

4. Evolution of our species to become truly inclusive! (Alas!)

That’s all folks. Here’s wishing us all the best!