(read more)
Why Women Still Struggle to Lead
The Illusion of Progress
Fashion sells itself as a force of transformation. It thrives on the promise of reinvention, of challenging norms, of shattering conventions to pave the way for the new. It is where gender fluidity has found a global stage, where rebellion is stitched into the seams, where power is articulated through the language of clothing. And yet, in the very heart of this industry—at the highest level of decision-making—the narrative remains stagnant.
As another International Women’s Day arrives, a time to look at how far we’ve come and the road ahead, the luxury fashion industry presents an unsettling contradiction. The designers shaping the future of women’s fashion are, for the most part, not women. The numbers tell a story that can’t be ignored: of the 35 most influential fashion houses, only ten are led by women. Yet, when they do step into leadership, they enter a battlefield where expectations are sky-high, and tolerance is halved.
Givenchy’s newly appointed creative director, Sarah Burton, spent over 20 years defining the identity of Alexander McQueen, but when she exited in 2023, her replacement was yet another man. Louise Trotter, now taking the reins at Bottega Veneta, follows in the footsteps of men whose names are synonymous with power in fashion. Meanwhile, Phoebe Philo, whose tenure at Céline redefined modern luxury and inspired a generation, chose to step away from the corporate fashion machine to launch her own independent label. And while Veronica Leoni’s arrival at Calvin Klein signals a shift, she is still one of the few women who have broken into a domain that persists as hypermasculinized at the top.
The “Boy Genius” Myth
Luxury fashion has long been obsessed with the idea of the lone male genius—the enfant terrible whose singular vision is destined to define an era. From Yves Saint Laurent to Alexander McQueen, the narrative of fashion’s greatest disruptors has been consistently male, reinforcing a cycle where power is apparently passed down within an insular, self-perpetuating hierarchy.
Women, however, are rarely given the same mythical status. Despite the seismic influence of Coco Chanel, their leadership is met with skepticism, their successes credited to the teams around them rather than their own creative force.
Meanwhile, luxury fashion continues its so-called game of “musical chairs”, cycling through the same group of white male creative directors between major houses. There is a sense that designers who have yet to prove themselves as true visionaries are given the benefit of the doubt, while their female counterparts must validate their worth at every turn.
Barriers Beyond Talent
The issue is not about skill. It is about who is granted access. The road to power—whether in fashion or beyond—is not built solely on creative brilliance but on connections, privilege, and deeply ingrained biases. Top-tier fashion houses still favor internal promotions, yet when decision-makers are already overwhelmingly male, this only serves to reinforce the existing imbalance.
Economic conservatism has supposedly further cemented this pattern. When faced with uncertainty, brands default to what they perceive as a risk-free choice, which often means appointing yet another man. But this logic is flawed. Studies consistently show that companies with diverse leadership are not only more innovative but more profitable. The ongoing success of Prada, Hermès, and Versace, all led by women, proves that female-led brands are not a liability but an advantage.
This contradiction becomes even more evident in an industry where women dominate the runways—not only in visibility but also in earnings. Female models consistently out-earn their male counterparts, a rare exception in the gender pay gap.
Imagining a Different Future
International Women’s Day is not just about acknowledgement but about dismantling structures that keep women in the background while celebrating their undeniable contributions to every aspect of culture. What would fashion look like if more women were in charge? If the industry actually reflected the people who wear its designs, who fuel its economy, who have shaped its history?
The answer isn’t speculative: it’s already been glimpsed in the work of the women who have fought to carve out space for themselves. Gabriela Hearst at Chloé introduced a forward-thinking approach that rewrote the rulebook on how high fashion can engage with environmental responsibility. Stella McCartney, a pioneer in conscious luxury, built a global brand proving that ethics and innovation can be seamlessly interwoven without compromising desirability. The Row, founded by Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen, has cultivated a cult following precisely because it understands women’s lives in a way that goes beyond aesthetics. Sarah Burton’s legacy at McQueen extends far beyond couture—it is about craftsmanship, storytelling, and the refusal to conform to predefined notions of success.
We would like to believe that to envision a more equitable future for fashion is not to propose a utopia. It is to demand that an industry so obsessed with progress finally apply that ethos to itself.
Fashion has always shaped the way we see the world. It has the power to challenge, to subvert, to redefine. The only thing radical now would be to accept the status quo as unchangeable.
It isn’t. And it never was.
