The cancellation of the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s planned exhibition dedicated to John Galliano has once again placed the designer’s past at the centre of fashion’s attention. His antisemitic and racist remarks, made in Paris in 2011, have never disappeared from his history. Galliano was convicted in France following the incident and dismissed from Dior, before eventually returning to fashion and rebuilding his career at Maison Margiela. Now, fifteen years later, the lasting impact of his controversies is very much still present, just as much as the generally accepted fact that he is one of the biggest and most prolific fashion creators of the past decades.
And while two things can be true at the same time, it seems that, as usual, society is selective about what it chooses to remember or forget. The discourse surrounding the exhibition, the subsequent cancellation and the implications of it all is omnipresent, and with just one click, you can discover millions of opinions and takes on the matter until you find one that you agree with or that makes the most “moral” sense to you.
But if Galliano’s history makes his work impossible to exhibit, celebrate or separate from the person who created it, there are quite a few other names the fashion industry might want to reconsider, yet seem to be selectively forgotten (and forgiven?) under the assumption that time and a lack of media attention can erase everything.
Fashion has always been remarkably good at remembering certain scandals while allowing others to become footnotes, apologies or simply old news, but since the industry’s moral compasses seem to be pointing in a clear direction these days, we take this fleeting opportunity to bring to your attention, refresh the memory or pull some very famous names out from under the rug that continue to be celebrated, worn and promoted despite important and, in some cases, very serious allegations against them.
Alexander Wang
In 2020 and 2021, multiple people accused Alexander Wang of sexual misconduct. Among them was model Owen Mooney, who alleged that Wang groped him at a New York nightclub and Keaton Bullen, a twenty-one-year-old student at New York’s Parsons School of Design. Other allegations followed, including claims involving drugging and sexual assault. Wang denied the allegations and described them as false.
The allegations generated considerable attention at the time, but they did not end Wang’s career. In September 2025, he returned to New York Fashion Week for the twentieth anniversary of his brand, a comeback that once again raised questions about how quickly fashion is willing to move past allegations of serious misconduct. We have continued to see major celebrities wearing his pieces and even attending the Met Gala by his side, as if nothing ever happened.
The allegations generated considerable attention at the time, but they did not end Wang’s career. In September 2025, he returned to New York Fashion Week for the twentieth anniversary of his brand, a comeback that once again raised questions about how quickly fashion is willing to move past allegations of serious misconduct. We have continued to see major celebrities wearing his pieces and even attending the Met Gala by his side, as if nothing ever happened.
Dolce&Gabbana
Domenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana have given fashion several reasons to be uncomfortable over the years, but somehow they have never faced any strong repercussions beyond a couple of days of controversy and conversations that eventually fade with time. In 2015, Dolce said that he opposed gay adoption and described children born through IVF as “synthetic,” comments that prompted a major backlash and boycott. Dolce later apologised.
Three years later, Dolce&Gabbana released a campaign in China showing a Chinese model attempting to eat Italian food with chopsticks. The campaign was widely condemned as racist and culturally insensitive, and the brand’s Shanghai show was cancelled. The controversy was compounded by screenshots of racist messages apparently sent from Gabbana’s account. The brand said the account had been hacked and apologised.
Dolce&Gabbana remains exactly where you would expect to find it: on red carpets, in fashion magazines, on celebrities and in luxury stores around the world. In 2024, the house was even the subject of a major exhibition at Milan’s Palazzo Reale, an event that also functioned as an attempt to rehabilitate an image damaged by the controversies surrounding the brand. But perhaps that is what makes it all so easy: recurrent apologies that become a habit, a little time and a constant presence in the right places seem to be enough for everything to be forgotten.
Three years later, Dolce&Gabbana released a campaign in China showing a Chinese model attempting to eat Italian food with chopsticks. The campaign was widely condemned as racist and culturally insensitive, and the brand’s Shanghai show was cancelled. The controversy was compounded by screenshots of racist messages apparently sent from Gabbana’s account. The brand said the account had been hacked and apologised.
Dolce&Gabbana remains exactly where you would expect to find it: on red carpets, in fashion magazines, on celebrities and in luxury stores around the world. In 2024, the house was even the subject of a major exhibition at Milan’s Palazzo Reale, an event that also functioned as an attempt to rehabilitate an image damaged by the controversies surrounding the brand. But perhaps that is what makes it all so easy: recurrent apologies that become a habit, a little time and a constant presence in the right places seem to be enough for everything to be forgotten.
Gosha Rubchinskiy
Gosha Rubchinskiy’s story is another one that seems to have become strangely easy to forget. In 2018, a sixteen-year-old boy published screenshots of conversations with the designer that appeared to show Rubchinskiy asking him to send suggestive photographs privately, while another person subsequently made a similar allegation. Rubchinskiy denied wrongdoing, with his representatives describing the accusation as invalid and saying the exchange was connected to casting.
It also did not permanently remove Rubchinskiy from fashion. In 2023, he was appointed head of design at Yeezy, from which he departed in February 2025, only to relaunch his eponymous label later that September. Many people praised the comeback, while others were left wondering whether they had simply imagined the scandal in the first place, judging by how normally everyone seemed to behave as he moved on as if nothing had happened.
It also did not permanently remove Rubchinskiy from fashion. In 2023, he was appointed head of design at Yeezy, from which he departed in February 2025, only to relaunch his eponymous label later that September. Many people praised the comeback, while others were left wondering whether they had simply imagined the scandal in the first place, judging by how normally everyone seemed to behave as he moved on as if nothing had happened.
Karl Lagerfeld
If Galliano’s past makes a Met exhibition impossible, Karl Lagerfeld’s presents itself as an apparent exception to the norm. Lagerfeld spent decades making public comments that were widely criticised for being misogynistic, fatphobic, anti-immigrant and hostile towards aspects of the #MeToo movement. His comments about refugees, women’s bodies and sexual assault became a recurring part of the conversation surrounding his legacy.
Yet in 2023, the Metropolitan Museum of Art dedicated its entire Costume Institute exhibition to him. Karl Lagerfeld: A Line of Beauty brought together more than 150 garments from his work at Chanel, Fendi, Chloé and his own label. The Met’s own exhibition guide made the distinction explicit: it said the show focused on “Lagerfeld the designer,” rather than the mythology surrounding “Lagerfeld the man.”
Couldn’t the Galliano exhibition have been framed in the same way? Or would it have still faced the same backlash? The Lagerfeld exhibition was posthumous, and perhaps that softened hearts and memories, but can the two cases be compared? Why is it right for some and not for others?
Yet in 2023, the Metropolitan Museum of Art dedicated its entire Costume Institute exhibition to him. Karl Lagerfeld: A Line of Beauty brought together more than 150 garments from his work at Chanel, Fendi, Chloé and his own label. The Met’s own exhibition guide made the distinction explicit: it said the show focused on “Lagerfeld the designer,” rather than the mythology surrounding “Lagerfeld the man.”
Couldn’t the Galliano exhibition have been framed in the same way? Or would it have still faced the same backlash? The Lagerfeld exhibition was posthumous, and perhaps that softened hearts and memories, but can the two cases be compared? Why is it right for some and not for others?
Riccardo Tisci
Riccardo Tisci is a more recent case, and one where the story is still unfolding. In 2025, Tisci was sued in New York by Patrick Cooper, who alleged that the designer drugged and sexually assaulted him in 2024. Tisci has denied the allegations. The renowned Italian singer Mahmood has become involved in the case after being mentioned by both sides as being present during the night in question, and Cooper’s legal team has also alleged that he was involved in the spiking of Cooper’s drink that night.
The case is still ongoing, but it hasn’t been talked about as much as others. Tisci is a very prominent figure in the industry, deeply loved by fashion enthusiasts and the star system, with a large and well-known circle of celebrity friends who have apparently always been there, no matter what.
The case is still ongoing, but it hasn’t been talked about as much as others. Tisci is a very prominent figure in the industry, deeply loved by fashion enthusiasts and the star system, with a large and well-known circle of celebrity friends who have apparently always been there, no matter what.
Coco Chanel & Hugo Boss
Then there are the names whose histories are old enough that the distance itself has become a kind of protection. Coco Chanel’s relationship with German intelligence during the Second World War has been extensively documented, as has her antisemitism and her involvement in attempts to benefit from Nazi laws targeting Jewish-owned businesses. Archival research has identified Chanel as Abwehr agent F-7124, although historians have continued to debate the extent and nature of her collaboration with Nazi Germany. The Chanel name, however, has become almost completely detached from Gabrielle Chanel the person. Her wartime history exists in biographies and archives while the double C continues to represent luxury, elegance and French fashion.
Hugo Ferdinand Boss presents another version of the same phenomenon. Boss joined the Nazi Party in 1931, and his company produced uniforms for Nazi organisations and, later, the German armed forces. During the Second World War, the factory employed 140 forced labourers and 40 French prisoners of war. HUGO BOSS later commissioned an independent historical study of the company’s activities during the Third Reich and expressed its “profound regret” for those who suffered. The company itself acknowledges that it profited from National Socialism and that the demand for uniforms helped the business grow.
But both brands survived, and so did the images of their founders as prolific fashion figures worth praising.
So, what’s right and what’s wrong? Does the industry have a selective memory? Hope this helped refresh yours.
Hugo Ferdinand Boss presents another version of the same phenomenon. Boss joined the Nazi Party in 1931, and his company produced uniforms for Nazi organisations and, later, the German armed forces. During the Second World War, the factory employed 140 forced labourers and 40 French prisoners of war. HUGO BOSS later commissioned an independent historical study of the company’s activities during the Third Reich and expressed its “profound regret” for those who suffered. The company itself acknowledges that it profited from National Socialism and that the demand for uniforms helped the business grow.
But both brands survived, and so did the images of their founders as prolific fashion figures worth praising.
So, what’s right and what’s wrong? Does the industry have a selective memory? Hope this helped refresh yours.