garment industry

#BREAKING: 42 factory owners & government officials charged with murder of 1,100 workers in the infamous Bangladesh factory collapse.

The Rana Plaza disaster has led to an unprecedented legal consequence for those charged with ignoring workers’ basic rights: jail time and possibly a death sentence.

READ this article to learn more about a story that could further shake the global garment industry.

7

Beautifull Clothes, Ugly Reality…

Garment factory workers staged a fashion event called ‘Beautifull Clothes, Ugly Reality’ at the Worker’s Information Center in Phnom Penh, denouncing the poor working conditions and the current oppression they currently face in Cambodia. The participants held a fashion show, attended by some 200 people, wearing clothes from brands like Adidas, H&M and others which are being manufactured here. They also threaded the catwalk on songs by 'The Messengers’, a vocal group of former garment workers, while carrying signs saying 'We need rice, not bullets’, 'Drop the ban on public gathering now’ or 'We need a decent condition and dignity.

The Fat Liberation Manifesto

1. WE believe that fat people are fully entitled to human respect and recognition.

2. WE are angry at mistreatment by commercial and sexist interests. These have exploited our bodies as objects of ridicule, thereby creating an immensely profitable market selling the false promise of avoidance of, or relief from, that ridicule.

3. WE see our struggle as allied with the struggles of other oppressed groups against classism, racism, sexism, ageism, financial exploitation, imperialism and the like.

4. WE demand equal rights for fat people in all aspects of life, as promised in the Constitution of the United States. We demand equal access to goods and services in the public domain, and an end to discrimination against us in the areas of employment, education, public facilities and health services.

5. WE single out as our special enemies the so-called “reducing” industries. These include diet clubs, reducing salons, fat farms, diet doctors, diet books, diet foods and food supplements, surgical procedures, appetite suppressants, drugs and gadgetry such as wraps and “reducing machines”.

WE demand that they take responsibility for their false claims, acknowledge that their products are harmful to the public health, and publish long-term studies proving any statistical efficacy of their products. We make this demand knowing that over 99% of all weight loss programs, when evaluated over a five-year period, fail utterly, and also knowing the extreme proven harmfulness of frequent large changes in weight.

6. WE repudiate the mystified “science” which falsely claims that we are unfit. It has both caused and upheld discrimination against us, in collusion with the financial interests of insurance companies, the fashion and garment industries, reducing industries, the food and drug industries, and the medical and psychiatric establishment.

7. WE refuse to be subjugated to the interests of our enemies. We fully intend to reclaim power over our bodies and our lives. We commit ourselves to pursue these goals together.

FAT PEOPLE OF THE WORLD, UNITE! YOU HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE ….

By Judy Freespirit and Aldebaran
November, 1973
Copyright The Fat Underground

Bangladesh’s $20 billion garment industry is virtually the only way out of poverty and illiteracy for the nation’s women and girls. In 2011, about 12% of Bangladesh women from ages 15 to 30 worked in the industry. For many women, the work is worth the risk of dangerous work conditions – including sacrificing an education. Researchers found that before the garment industry, 27% more young girls were attending school.

Read more via Bloomberg Businessweek.

Happy birthday, Pura Belpré!

Pura Belpré (1899-1982) was the first Puerto Rican librarian in New York City. She was also a writer, collector of folktales, and puppeteer.

Belpré was born in Cidra, Puerto Rico. There is some dispute as to the date of her birth which has been given as February 2, 1899, December 2, 1901 and February 2, 1903. She graduated from Central High School in Santurce, Puerto Rico in 1919 and enrolled at the University of Puerto Rico in Río Piedras. Soon thereafter, in 1920, she interrupted her studies in order to attend her sister Elisa’s wedding in New York City, where, except for brief interludes, she remained for the rest of her life.

Belpré’s career in the New York Public Library commenced in 1921, and she pioneered the library’s outreach within the Puerto Rican community. However, like many of the Puerto Rican women who migrated to New York in the twentieth century, Belpré’s first job was in the garment industry. Her Spanish language, community and literary skills soon earned her a position as Hispanic Assistant in a branch of the public library at 135th Street in Harlem, having been recruited and mentored by Ernestine Rose, head of the Harlem library. Belpré became the first Puerto Rican to be hired by the New York Public Library (NYPL).

In 1925 she began her formal studies in the Library School of the New York Public Library. In 1929, due to the increasing numbers of Puerto Ricans settling in southwest Harlem, Belpré was transferred to a branch of the NYPL at 115th Street. She quickly became an active advocate for the Spanish-speaking community by instituting bilingual story hours, buying Spanish language books, and implementing programs based on traditional holidays like the celebration of Three Kings Day. In her outreach efforts, she attended meetings of civic organizations such as the Porto Rican Brotherhood of America and La Liga Puertorriqueña e Hispana. Through Belpré’s work, the 115th Street branch became an important cultural center for the Latino residents of New York, even hosting important Latin American figures such as the Mexican muralist Diego Rivera. Belpré continued these efforts at the 110th street (or Aguilar) branch.

More on Pura Belpré

the mechanism of production, or: why fast fashion sucks, structurally

I had a conversation with a couple of friends about clothing, and how it’s made, earlier this week, and it wandered into territory I thought y'all might find interesting. So here’s what I had to say, more or less.

Basically: there is a reason the clothes you buy at H&M are so shitty, and it’s not exactly that they’re doing it on purpose. Well, it sort of is. But mostly, it’s because they can’t not be shitty. It’s because the entire production chain, start to finish, has become structured in such a way that it is actually quite difficult to produce quality clothing.

When you buy a piece of clothing at a modern retail store, you are probably buying clothing made with dubiously ethical labor, of fabric sourced to cost as little as possible, made of pieces cut on machines designed to cut as many pieces of fabric as quickly, simply, and efficiently as possible. At every step in the chain, every step that can be cut has been cut. The process of clothing manufacturing is, at this point, breathtakingly streamlined, and it results for the most part in a very specific type of clothing.

If you have any familiarity with vintage clothing, you are probably aware that they are usually of significantly higher quality than most modern clothing. When I say “vintage” I mean, in particular, clothes made before about 1965– before the offshoring of our garment industry began. Most clothes worn in the United States before that time were made domestically, by union labor– that is, skilled workers being paid a living wage. This is relevant.

Also relevant is the fact that clothes used to cost more, as a proportion of a person’s income. The average woman in 1950 had one-quarter a modern woman’s wardrobe, and paid a higher percentage of her income for that wardrobe than a modern woman does. That vintage wardrobe, though smaller, was made to a higher standard– sturdier fabrics, better tailoring, sewn from more complex patterns, adorned with more details and better finishing. That wardrobe routinely featured things like deep-pocketed skirts, matching belts, bound buttonholes, pintucks, piping. These are not things we often see in modern fast fashion.

What happened? Well, it starts with labor. When we lost the domestic garment industry, we lost that pool of skilled labor, and switched to a lower-skilled, lower-paid labor pool. We switched to an emphasis on making as many simple garments as possible, as quickly as possible, rather than fewer, more complex pieces. We chose $5 t-shirts over $250 day dresses.

Which is not to imply that I’m judging people who wear fast fashion. It’s a completely rational economic decision to buy the clothes you can afford, and there are other factors at play here, too.

For instance, the price of fabric was once much lower, and home sewing a much more accessible hobby. Due in part to environmental factors and our changing climate, the price of cotton has risen in recent years– why do you think those whisper-thin cotton knits have been the prevailing trend? Why do you think everyone who can get away with it has switched to synthetics?

This is the point I’m trying to make: at every step in the production chain, from the manufacture of fabric to the design and assembly of the clothes themselves, someone has decided to do the least expensive thing.

Shift dresses require less complex cutting than structured ones– and what, coincidentally, has been the most common shape you see in stores? Miniskirts require less fabric than long skirts– and minis are, coincidentally, in vogue. Sheer fabrics require less raw material to manufacture; machine-assisted beading and studding takes less-skilled labor and less time than other forms of embellishment that call for skill and handwork. Garment workers being paid pennies a piece earn more when they don’t have to add pockets or extra finishing, or sew buttons on too securely.

The cutting machines that stamp out pieces to be assembled into clothing? They’re loaded with as thick a stack of fabric as possible, because the more fabric you cut at once, the more clothes you can make in a day. The thicker the fabric, the fewer pieces you can cut at once; the more pieces you cut, the greater the margin for error, so better make those pieces simple. Clothes that fit close to the body need to be cut and sewn more precisely, unless they’re made of stretchy fabric. Boy, leggings sure are popular these days.

We’re seeing the end result of a garment industry that has cut itself to the bone in pursuit of profit. The clothing currently in stores reflects an industry that has streamlined every process it’s capable of. This has actually influenced trends and driven fashion in a direction that calls for cheap-to-manufacture clothing. It’s a process that is fundamentally unsustainable, because there’s only so much you can cut before you’re left with rags. And it’s built on the backs of a labor pool that has begun to protest its treatment, to demand fair wages and attempt to unionize.

If that happens– and I sincerely hope it does– we may begin to see the price of clothing rise again. With it, if we’re lucky, we may see a rise in quality. When the people who make your clothing are paid a living wage, when they have the ability to develop their skills and be fairly compensated for them, there is a ripple effect through the whole production chain.

We might end up with smaller wardrobes. But perhaps the pieces in them will be worth owning.

4

Jewish-American Heritage Month

Today is the beginning of May, the Jewish American Heritage Month, and it’s also May Day, which in some countries is a celebration of workers and labor activism. In honor of these two days, I’m going to introduce you to some of my favorite Jewish American women activists.

(L-R: Clara Lemlich, Rose Schneiderman, and Pauline Newman; bottom: The Uprising of 20,000, a strike organized by the International Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union, which all three women were involved in)

Clara Lemlich (1886-1982) Lemlich was born in the Ukraine. As a child, she secretly ran errands and wrote letters for her neighbors in order to earn money for Russian books, against her parents’ wishes. She became a Socialist while in the Ukraine, and moved to the United States with her family following a 1903 pogram in Kishinev. In New York, she worked in the garment industry and was elected to the ILGWU executive board at the age of 22.

Lemlich was known for her bravery. Famously, in 1909 gangsters attacked picketers and broke three of her ribs. She remained on the picket line. Later that same year, when (male) leaders of the socialist movement spent most of a meeting speaking about general actions that should be taken, Lemlich was lifted onto the stage by her fellow female workers, where she pledged herself to the movement and rallied the crowd into immediately approving a motion to strike. This strike became the Uprising of the 20,000.

Because of her union activities, Lemlich was blacklisted from the garment industry. She worked for suffrage, although she frequently clashed with upper-class suffragettes and preferred to work with other working-class women. She married in 1913 and was a mother of three, and frequently organized housewives to her various causes. She worked for the Communist Party, the United Council of Working Class Women, the Emma Lazarus Federation of Jewish Women’s Clubs, the Unemployed Councils, and allied with Sojourners for Truth. Her final social campaign was waged from the Jewish Home for the Aged, in LA, where she persuaded the management of the Home to join the United Farm Workers’ boycott and assisted farmers in their organizing. She was then in her mid-eighties, and she died at the age of 96.

Rose Schneiderman (1882-1972) Schneiderman was born in Russian Poland, just north of the city of Chelm. Her parents sent her to cheder, against tradition, when she was a child. When she was eight years old her family immigrated to the United States, and she was forced to drop out of school at age thirteen in order to support her family. She was a capmaker, and she quickly became involved in the union movement.

Standing at 4 feet, 9 inches tall, with flaming red hair, Schneiderman was famous for her passionate speeches, which she delivered across the country, daily, on street corners and in lecture halls, in English as well as Yiddish. Two of her most famous speeches were her August 2, 1911 address in which, following the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire, she lambasted middle and upper class feminists for failing to prioritize labor activism, and a 1912 speech in which she declared that “What the woman who labors wants is the right to live, not simply exist–the right to life as the rich woman has the right to life, and the sun and music and art. You have nothing that the humblest worker has not a right to have also. The worker must have bread, but she must have roses, too.” This last line became a popular slogan and protest song.

Schneiderman was president of the Women’s Trade Union League, worked with the ILGUW, helped found the American Civil Liberties Union, and in 1920 launched an unsuccessful campaign for the Senate on the Labor Party ticket. She became close with the Roosevelts and helped to shape New Deal labor legislation, and in the 30s and 40s she also worked tirelessly in an attempt to bring Jewish refugees from Europe to the United States. Albert Einsteen wrote in praise of her, saying “It must be a source of deep gratification to you to be making so important a contribution to rescuing our persecuted fellow Jews from their calamitous peril…We have no other means of self-defense than our solidarity.”

Schneiderman was in a long-term relationship with fellow WTUL activist Maud Swartz for over twenty years, until Swartz’s death in 1937. Schneiderman herself continued to live in New York City her entire life, until her own death in 1972 at the age of 90.

Pauline Newman (1887-1986) Newman was born in Lithuania. As a child she persuaded her father, a teacher at a cheder, to sit in on her classes, which was the only way she could learn to read and write. She learned Hebrew and Yiddish. At the age of nine, following her father’s death, the family moved to New York and Newman began working in the factory. She worked at the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory, where she became a socialist at the age of fifteen. She was twenty when she lead her first rent strike in 1908, and a year later she organized 40,000 in a labor strike, which at the time was the largest strike ever organized by American women.

Newman worked with the ILGWU, the WTUL, and the Factory Investigation Commission, and although she never lost her skill for street-level organizing, she was also a skilled lobbyist. She also became the director of the ILGWU’s Union Health Center, the first of its kind, and served in that position for sixty years. Like Schneiderman, she worked for women’s suffrage and with the Roosevelts concerning labor legislation.

Newman was famous for wearing her hair short and often wearing men’s clothes, unlike her more reserved colleagues. She met Frieda Miller, an instructor at Bryn Mawr, in 1918, and wrote a letter to Schneiderman expressing her admiration but ambivalence about whether she should pursue the relationships; Schneiderman, who confessed that she herself was often uncertain about her own romantic life, urged Newman to “grasp at the possibility of joy.” Newman and Miller lived together publicly from 1923 to Miller’s death in 1974. Newman herself passed away in 1986 at the age of 98.

phoenixyfriend  asked:

Since you're the one that seems to be spearheading the Jewish Howard Stark headcanon thing (and thank you, for that), would you say that his conversation with Peggy in the recently released sneak peak supports that? His comments on religion and social class being barriers to getting to a higher place in society and all that?

Oh my God, he is Jewish!!

Haha, sorry. Thanks for the ask, that’s the first time I’ve seen the clip. 616 Howard was born into money—he didn’t start his fortune. Apparently MCU Howard Stark’s origin is very different from 616 Howard’s, so some of the assumptions I made in my first post aren’t accurate. 

Let’s break it down:

  • “My mother sewed shirtwaists for a factory”: for most Americans, the term “shirtwaist” evokes images of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire, which killed 146 people. The majority of the women working there were Jewish or Italian. The shirtwaist industry was primarily Jewish. I’ll quote Wikipedia here: “The New York shirtwaist strike of 1909…was a labor strike primarily involving Jewish women working in New York shirtwaist factories.”
  • At the time, 50% of the women working in the garment industry were Jewish. Again, Wikipedia: “In the production of shirtwaists in particular, the workforce was nearly all Jewish women.
  • “The press of the day often referred to the garment industry as ‘a Jewish problem.’ The owners were almost exclusively Jewish, as were the majority of the workers.” (source)
  • he grew up on the Lower East Side: this was a very ethnically diverse neighborhood in the 1910s, but it has always been associated primarily (and very strongly) with the Jewish community. Very strongly. I’m from NYC, and I can tell you that our public schools teach the Lower East Side as a Jewish neighborhood. The Lower East Side is home to some of the most important Jewish cultural signifiers in America. 
  • It was also known as Little Germany for a period, and since, realistically, the only other possible ethnicity for Howard is German, that’s worth examining. However, and this is from Wikipedia, “The neighborhood’s ethnic cohesion began to decline in the late 19th century from the population dynamics of non-German immigrants settling in the area.” In 1904, over a decade before Howard was born, a steamboat chartered by the local Lutheran Church sank, killing about 1,021 of its 1,300 passengers. This greatly accelerated the, at that time rapid, decline of the German population on the Lower East Side. 97 Orchard Street, a major tenement museum and a staple of any public school student’s field trips, apparently serves as a good indicator for ”the neighborhood’s majority ethnic group,” and in 1870 residents of the building were 55% German. By 1910, 100% of residents were Yiddish speaking, meaning they were at least ethnically Jewish. (source)
  • Statistically speaking, the most likely ethnicity for someone born in 1918 on the Lower East Side was Ashkenazi.
  • There’s a ceiling for certain types of people based on how much money your parents have”: The construction of this sentence is interesting. When he’s talking about “certain types of people,” he’s not referring to growing up poor. He’s saying that other poor Americans can get somewhere on their own, but that there’re “certain types of people” who need more than their ingenuity, who can’t just jump into the American dream. That he had to lie to move past his “type.”
  • Your social class, your religion, your sex!” Social class is too vague a term, I’m not going to get into it. He says “sex” at the end very pointedly, indicating that Peggy should agree with him. But why bring up religion? When did religion come into this conversation? It was always there. From the moment he said he grew up on the Lower East Side, Peggy knew what that meant.
  • “The only way to break through that ceiling sometimes is to lie, so that’s my natural instinct: to lie." This one is almost self-explanatory. Why has Howard’s ethnic background never come up? Because he’s Jewish, and he doesn’t tell people that because if he did, his life would be 100x more difficult. Of course, in the context of this scene he’s justifying a very specific lie to Peggy, but he began the conversation with his origins, and he’s still referring to that here. He’s saying, “how did I get past that ceiling for ‘certain types of people?’ I lied about it.” What did he lie about? Not about having money. Not about coming from nothing. Those would be unnecessary and extremely convoluted lies. He lied about his type. And what could his type be, that he had to lie about it? 

If you’re curious about what I’ve written previously, here are the other posts: (basic info) and (the Anna Jarvis scene)

9

Artisans Angkor                                                             
 
The Artisans Angkor mill in Siem Reap, Cambodia, employs over 1,300 people in the production of traditional Khmer handicrafts including: silk-making, stone and wood carving, laquering and painting.

Cambodia’s garment industry employs an estimated 700,000 people and exported $5.3 billion of apparel and shoes in 2013.   

Photographer: Brent Lewin/Bloomberg    

© 2015 Bloomberg Finance LP

John Oliver takes on dialysis, a procedure that's exhausting, deadly, and very profitable
Last Week Tonight host John Oliver loves to spotlight somewhat obscure but very important policy questions that cable news (especially comedic cable news) typically ignores: things like local government “special districts” that spend $100 billion annually with minimal accountability, or abusive garment industry labor practices, or Puerto Rico’s debt crisis. Sunday night, he turned to an issue near and dear to my heart as a kidney donor: the chronic kidney disease problem. While dialysis care is funded for everyone regardless of age or income through Medicare (as Oliver puts it, we have “universal health care in this country for one organ in the body"), about 70 percent of out-patient dialysis clinics are owned by two for-profit companies: Fresenius Medical Care and DaVita. Read more
2

Last month, the Two-Way reported on a discovery at Auschwitz: a mug that held a gold ring and necklace, painstakingly hidden from the Nazis and concealed for 70 years. The museum was unable to determine the owner of the jewelry.

A reader emailed soon after.

“I want to share a story of a similar object,” Sabina Rak Neugebauer wrote. “But in this case I know a lot about the people the object belonged to.” We called Sabina and her mother, Eda Rak, to hear the story of Sabina’s grandparents and their tea canister.

It was a rusty tin canister, about the size of a coffee can. Inside — always — were bags of Swee Touch Nee tea, with a distinctive, floral, sweet smell.

The tea was a hallmark in the home of Guta and Mayer Rak. Eda Rak remembers her parents drinking it out of tall glass cups, with a sugar cube between the teeth. It was more than a little embarrassing, she says.

Before World War II, Mayer Rak had been a writer in Europe. In the decades after, he worked in the garment industry in the Bronx. In between the two lives, he and his wife spent years fleeing Nazi and Soviet persecution.

They didn’t talk much about that time. And they didn’t talk about the tea canister, a humble-looking household object, at all. Until one day, they finally mentioned to their daughter that it might hold something more than tea.

Tea, Pride, Mystery: For One Family That Fled The Nazis, A Tin Canister Held It All

Photos: Courtesy of Sabina Rak Neugebauer

Fat Liberation Manifesto

 1. WE believe that fat people are fully entitled to human respect and recognition.

2. WE are angry at mistreatment by commercial and sexist interests. These have exploited our bodies as objects of ridicule, thereby creating an immensely profitable market selling the false promise of avoidance of, or relief from, that ridicule.

3. WE see our struggle as allied with the struggles of other oppreressed groups against classism, racism, sexism, ageism, financial exploitation, imperialism and the like.

4. WE demand equal rights for fat people in all aspects of life, as promised in the Constitution of the United States. We demand equal access to goods and services in the public domain, and an end to discrimination against us in the areas of employment, education, public facilities and health services.

5. WE single out as our special enemies the so-called “reducing” industries. These include diet clubs, reducing salons, fat farms, diet doctors, diet books, diet foods and food supplements, surgical procedures, appetite suppressants, drugs and gadgetry such as wraps and “reducing machines”.

WE demand that they take responsibility for their false claims, acknowledge that their products are harmful to the public health, and publish long-term studies proving any statistical efficacy of their products. We make this demand knowing that over 99% of all weight loss programs, when evaluated over a five-year period, fail utterly, and also knowing the extreme proven harmfulness of frequent large changes in weight.

6. WE repudiate the mystified “science” which falsely claims that we are unfit. It has both caused and upheld discrimination against us, in collusion with the financial interests of insurance companies, the fashion and garment industries, reducing industries, the food and drug industries, and the medical and psychiatric establishment.

7. WE refuse to be subjugated to the interests of our enemies. We fully intend to reclaim power over our bodies and our lives. We commit ourselves to pursue these goals together.


FAT PEOPLE OF THE WORLD, UNITE! YOU HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE ….
By Judy Freespirit and Aldebaran
November, 1973


I feel it’s time to remind our readers that the Fat Liberation movement existed in the 1970s.

4

Los Angeles is a region better known for Hollywood, but it actually has more manufacturing jobs than any other metro area in the U.S. Of the more than half-million manufacturing jobs in the region, about 50,000 of them are in the garment industry.

Fashion is a big part of LA’s identity, and you feel it in the Fashion District downtown. It has changed a lot since the late 1980s, when plain beige towers called California Mart bustled with all things related to the garment industry.

Brian Weitman grew up around the garment industry and remembers Cal Mart’s heyday.

“It was first-generation migrant workers working their butts off all day long on a sewing machine or cutting tables, and these buildings were just humming. And there were racks rolling in and out all day long. These freight elevators, you’d have to wait to just load your garments in them to get them into a truck to get them to ship out to a store,” Weitman says. “But everyone wanted to be around here because this was the hub. This was the only showroom center in LA.”

From Pocket Lining To Jeans, A Niche Means Survival In LA Fashion

Photos: John Francis Peters for NPR

Maison Martin Margiela autumn—winter 1998—99. Three simultaneous video-projections show three women, each wearing garments of the collection.

Le Foyer de L’Arches, La Grande Arche de la Defence, Paris. A subterranean Space under the Arch de la Defence. Three people are chosen to each represent their professional discipline in presenting their vision on the collection: New York based photographer Mark Borthwick, London based stylist Jane How and Paris based writer Sydney Picasso. Mark Borthwick’s project included the projection of a video in two parts shot in New York in early March 1998 and a book entitled ‘2000-1’. The video features a verbal interaction between three women wearing garments of the collection. The book features photographs taken during the shooting of the video and is published in the autumn of 1998. For Jane How’s project fifteen life-size puppets are each dressed in an outfit of the collection styled by Jane. Two professional puppeteers manipulate each puppet, specially made in UK. Sydney Picasso decided to produce a white cotton ribbon, on which a continuous text is printed, as well as a pamphlet entitled ‘Endless Threads’. The tract is distributed and the ribbon is tied to everyone’s wrist as they enter the space. Thirty members of the Maison Martin Margiela staff, in blouses blanches (white coats) serve red wine to the crowed while the three visions on the collection are being expressed. A soundtrack by Mark Borthwick plays loudly.

Collection:
The second part of a collection is in two parts. The principal group of the collection is made up of five series of `flat’ garments with displaced shoulders or necklines. Their sleeves or their neck opening lies on their front. The panels of industrial garment patterns in black motorbike leather and sheepskin are assembled to form coats and jackets. Flat ‘Grocery Bag’ garments in stretch flannels and woollen herring bone. A series of ‘Envelope’ garments have full-length zips that allow skirts, trousers and sweaters to be opened and laid flat. Various used military garments have been transformed into army trousers (worn inside out), army shirts with a displaced shoulder line. Amongst accessories are leather gloves transformed into pendant wallets and ‘Anti-Theft’ wallets in leather, worn as bags.

I would honestly LOVE to provide support services for people who want to leave the industry–“support services” always sounds dire bc we’re used to it being a euphemism for sweat shop labour in the garment industry or creating punjammies or overpriced trinkets for liberal western consumers, but all they really are, are the essentials:

Financial support while someone learns the skills necessary to make a career change/learns how to use the skills they have in the service of that career change.

But as @galesofnovember points out, support services aren’t cheap.

To make sure your client has solid housing and the threat of losing housing won’t keep her in sex work she doesn’t want to be doing, you basically have to provide housing, possibly for children too.
And food.
And utilities.
And education: either trade skills or other skills that are actually useful.
Most sex workers know how to code switch, but polishing that and learning appropriate responses to the weirdness that is the “professional” world. (What DO you do when your union rep your asks about your tits? Someone needs to explain to all entry level staff that HR is not there for your support, it’s there to minimize company liability and doesn’t actually CARE that your Union rep stares at your tits and talks about how he can’t stop staring at your tits and if you’re used to getting PAID to put up with this shit, and paid WELL–that takes practise to deal with)
And transportation, and blahblahblah on and on.
An appropriate wardrobe.

There is no country on earth currently equipped to truly help all of its sex workers leave the industry, let alone JUST the ones who want to.

They simply aren’t willing to spend that kind of money on a marginalised group.

See also:

Housing crisis
Houseless people
Welfare slashing
And on and on and on.

End demand is a not funny joke and this is one talking point you all need to remember and bring up.

If your country won’t even fund shelters for the most at-risk youth (and the states will not, see failure of RHYA) it’s not going to support people “exiting the industry” in ways that allow them to survive the transition.

It will simply push them further underground and away from safety.

Tldr end end demand and donate to STROLL so I can have my drop in center with laundry and shower facilities and skill sharing workshops.

Hausvogteiplatz in Mitte, 1996

Die Gegend um den Hausvorgteiplatz war vor dem Krieg ein Zentrum der Konfektionsindustrie. Auch das Haus zur Berolina wurde 1985 nach einem Entwurf des Architekten Hermann August Krause als Konfektionshandels- und Lagerhaus erbaut. Es steht heute unter Denkmalschutz.

Before the war the area around Hausvorgteiplatz was a center of the garment industry. Also the Haus zur Berolina was designed in 1895 by architect Hermann August Krause as a commercial building and warehouse. It is now a listed building.