Part 6/10:
Supporters of her stance argue that her conduct is art—an avant-garde statement about Black Dandeeism and the downfall of traditional luxury standards. Critics dismiss this as performative outrage with little substance, pointing out the sheer absurdity of staging such theatrics, especially when publicly misbehaving in a way that blatantly disrespects others.
The controversy intensifies when viewers notice elaborate prosthetic scars fashioned to resemble branded logos on her face, aiming to evoke themes of branding and objectification. These grotesque accessories reinforce the idea that her actions are rooted in shock value rather than genuine self-expression.