Alright, let’s talk Met Gala 2025. The theme? “Superfine: Tailoring Black Style.” A big, bold celebration of Black fashion, culture, and creative legacy. A chance to spotlight icons, stories, and statements that shaped style—and history.
Enter K-pop superstar Lisa Manobal, making her much-hyped Met Gala debut. She walked the carpet in a custom Louis Vuitton lace bodysuit featuring portraits by renowned artist Henry Taylor. Known for painting people close to him—friends, family, muses—Taylor’s work is layered, emotional, and often raw.
But then things got messy.
One of the portraits, placed on the lower part of Lisa’s bodysuit, bore a strong resemblance to civil rights icon Rosa Parks. And the internet, as expected, didn’t take that lightly.
“Why does Lisa have Rosa Parks in her pants? 😭😭 One of the historic women who fought against racism,” one user wrote on X. “I don’t think her designer thought this through… it’s definitely a cultural misunderstanding,” another added.
And just like that, what was meant to be a tribute turned into a talking point—for all the wrong reasons.
When art meets fashion
Louis Vuitton later clarified that the portraits were drawn from Taylor’s own world, not necessarily famous faces. But that’s the tricky part: the resemblance was there. And when the public thinks they see Rosa Parks on someone’s crotch at an event meant to honor Black excellence, you better believe it’s going to spark a conversation.
Here’s the thing—fashion and art are both about pushing boundaries. But push too far without context, and it stops being edgy and starts looking careless.
The legacy of Rosa Parks
A quick rewind for those who only know her as “the lady who didn’t give up her bus seat.” That moment in Montgomery in 1955 wasn’t just about being tired. Rosa Parks was an activist, long before that headline-grabbing act. She was the secretary of the Montgomery NAACP, investigated racial crimes, and stood up—quietly but firmly—against a system designed to crush people like her.
Her refusal to move on that bus launched the 381-day Montgomery Bus Boycott, a pivotal chapter in the civil rights movement. And even after that, life didn’t exactly get easier. She and her husband lost their jobs and had to leave Alabama. But Rosa kept fighting—from Detroit, in Congress, and through the youth-focused Rosa and Raymond Parks Institute.
She wasn’t just a symbol. She was a strategist, a leader, and a woman who lived her principles even when the spotlight faded.
So yeah, people were upset. And understandably so.
Fashion can be bold and brave, but not careless
Now, let’s zoom out.
Fashion has always been borrowed from history. Designers love remixing the past—there’s drama, elegance, nostalgia, and iconic imagery to play with. And that’s not a bad thing. Reimagining historical figures in modern design can make them feel more relatable, more human. It’s a great storytelling device if done right.
But here’s where it gets tricky: there’s a fine line between creative homage and cultural insensitivity. You can’t just grab a face—especially one so symbolic—and place it somewhere provocative just for shock value. That’s not bold. That’s clumsy.
Rosa Parks isn’t an “aesthetic.” She’s not a graphic tee or an artsy bodysuit embellishment. She’s a woman who changed the world. So, if you’re going to use her image—or even something that resembles her—you better think about what message you’re sending.
Let’s be real. If that same portrait had been placed near the heart, or even styled as part of a powerful back piece, this conversation might have gone very differently. But context is everything in fashion—especially when historical and cultural legacies are involved.
Designers and stylists need to ask the hard questions before sending a look down a carpet:
Who are we referencing?
Why are we referencing them?
And how are we doing it?
If the answers aren’t clear, thoughtful, and respectful, maybe rethink the look.
This whole moment with Lisa at the Met Gala? It’s a masterclass in why cultural awareness isn’t optional in creative industries—it’s essential. You can be experimental. You can be bold. But you can’t be blind.
Because when fashion forgets to respect the weight of history, it stops being art—and starts being a headline for all the wrong reasons.
