HEADWEAR DISCRIMINATION

THE PERSPECTIVE PROBLEM

since their introduction in 1849, baseball hats have evolved significantly, but their development has primarily favored white men. this reflects the psychological default to the white male as the social standard.

despite this, baseball hats have transcended their accessory status to become iconic symbols of fashion, sports, and self-expression, embraced across gender and race. unconscious bias in a headwear industry that centers white men has failed to inclusively adapt for the diverse demographics that universally love headwear.

underrepresented demographics have been underserved for so long that we are conditioned to adapt to the product rather than insist the product adapt for us. this highlights deep issues of cultural conditioning, systemic marginalization, racism, misogyny, and lack of female and Global Majority representation at the highest levels.

WHAT IS HEADWEAR DISCRIMINATION?

women and marginalized demographics are conditioned to accept even the most meager accommodations. we don’t think twice about poor design or lack of accessibility and selection. we fail to question that things could possibly be another way…

…until now. rosebloom is challenging the 175-year old baseball hat design’s lack of inclusivity and innovation. it is exclusionary by structure alone, anatomically designed to fit society’s default white male.

our styles are designed by a woman who directly experienced headwear discrimination over a decade of working in the headwear industry. with no styles to serve her hair or hairstyle needs, it forced questions centered in headwear fit, equity, design, and accessibility.

do your hats serve you, your hair, and your style? is it just how it is? or is it headwear discrimination?