Luxury has a Madonna Whore complex problem.

Recently, I would encounter this phenomenon as I posted a photograph and the reaction was predictable. What interested me was not the reaction to the photograph but rather what it revealed about luxury, embodiment, authority and the expectation markets place on brands and founders within these sectors. This would lead me into deeper research on how luxury, desire and sensuality are interconnected and it led me into exploring The Madonna Whore Complex. What I found provides the answer to the question I have been asking myself for quite some time, “Why are luxury brands and brands in general nowadays so boring? “

The Madonna Whore complex is a term coined by psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud, by Google definition is defined as, a psychological phenomenon where a person unconsciously divides women into one of two extreme categories: the "Madonna" (pure, virtuous, untouchable, and maternal) and the "Whore" (debased, hyper-sexualized, and unworthy of respect).

The complex stems from an inability to view a single person as both a loving partner and a sexual being. In heterosexual men suffering from this dynamic, it creates a severe psychological divide in desire:

While originally defined in early psychoanalysis, modern psychology and feminist theory view the complex as a social construct driven by internalized misogyny, patriarchal values, and puritanical conditioning.

Now of course, this is a broader definition connecting to relationships but in a branding, cultural and positioning sense, we can take from this and apply it here also. Within the world of branding, marketing, sales and culture building, this psychological split manifests as stoicism, sterility, self erasure, erasure of culture, identity and sensuality. This reinforces a white masculinity corporate standard within markets that have made brands dull, lacking of self, identity, culture and presence.

Markets have used terms to describe luxury as quiet and disciplined. This isn’t by no mistake either as these terms have also been used to gate keep black and brown people who are naturally expression, colorful and prideful out of premium and luxury markets. These terms act as strategic gatekeepers not just terms said to describe “luxury”. Due to these terms, brown and black people have adopted this rigid, sterile, boring, dull of culture and presence brands. They then stamp luxury on it when really it’s just boring.

As an advisor and consultant, I sit with brands and founders everyday. I run a full scale agency with applications coming in daily so I get a front row seat at seeing these patterns play out in real time. A founder comes in with their brand asking me questions such as,

“We have done campaigns and hired a marketing agency. Yet, our consumers aren’t deciding. Allison, what is the solution?”

“We connect with our audience however they still don’t decide as consistently, What is the next direction?”

“We hired a website developer, but the website still feels like something is missing, Allison what do you think and is there anyway you can take over website design?”

What these brands assume is, I am going to give them a full scale marketing strategy and branding framework which…yes, I will but the first thing they need to hear is before we get to that point is the harsh cold truth.

When I tell founders this, it stings them because they been creating under this guise of “professionalism” forgetting brands that are distinct and remembered require activation, presence, identity and polarization. Not necessarily professionalism in a white masculine corporate sense. Women especially. You cannot remove the sensual and sexual nature out of the brand as that is the very thing that creates desire amongst audiences and consumers.

Luxury is extremely Provocative. Not the opposite. That is what makes it encountered, not consumed.

Many women in these branding sectors remove their sensual nature and essence and wonder why consumers don’t choose them. They remove the very thing that makes them desirable, wanted and distinct. These very women will wonder why higher tier consumers don’t decide on them and the answer is simple, you’re boring.

I don’t mean that in a “rude” sense but rather in a observant way. I want audiences and markets to observe their patterns rather than react to them. I want you to understand desire is luxury. Sensuality is luxury. Sexuality is luxury. You are luxury. Your personality is luxury. If you are building an institution in this era and if you’re building to be The Icon, you must divest from the illusion that safety equals success. The premium market does not pay for modesty; it pays for mastery. When you attempt to make your brand digestible for everyone, you make it memorable for no one.

This is the very thing I share with clients and what I now share with you: You aren’t helping consumers decide when you remain sterile, you’re just boring them.

The Madonna Complex is very obvious in these instances.

Women get triggered by women founders and brands that play into this provocative nature assuming that she isn’t in control but rather controlled by forces outside of her. This belief is patriarchal and the sterile masculine attempting to present itself as “guidance” when really it’s malicious envy towards liberation. Many women don’t know how to encounter sexual nature especially in professional and creative spaces. Women are very lesbian. Women like women more than men do. When women consumers encounter women founders and brands who have integrated sensuality into their building, I often see 2 reactions.

There are consumers and women who will applaud, be uplifted, inspired, driven to create, source and tap into her own natural essence and energy and then theres group 2 that tells her she is “too much”, “we didn’t expect this”, “this isn’t of you”, “hide yourself, this isn’t the brand”. Group 2 reaction is The Madonna Whore Complex played out. It demands the founder and brand to mute themselves for the sake of safety and containment as there was an image and expectation placed on the founder and brand. Because that limitation was broken, audiences and markets are forced to confront their own definitions and projections.

Screenshots from our most recent Instagram post

Group 2 is why the market is boring. Especially, luxury markets. It is why founders choose beige websites, false modesty and silence as a “strategic” move when really it’s just the safest move.

The expectation for black and brown founders is to be consumed. To be the source who gives endlessly and nothing else. This thinking pattern is not only rooted in racism but it explains why black and brown founders are consistently seen marketing labour, struggle and hardship to emotionally connect with audiences and markets. To be seen in full enjoyment proves that you don’t have to struggle in order to obtain as the expectation, is you only deserve what you have if the audience and market can see you working hard and struggling.

Hard work for black and brown founders became the brand strategy itself.

A way to remove doubt, confusion, anger and attack.

As a child and throughout my teenage years, I remember being heavily sexualized. What I remember most, however, is not feeling beautiful.

As a Black and Brown woman, you are often sexualized long before you are truly recognized, and with that comes a set of expectations imposed on you everywhere you go. Your presence is interpreted before you have the opportunity to define it for yourself.

I have always been deeply creative, eccentric, and fiercely independent in the way I expressed myself. I was never particularly interested in fitting neatly into prescribed boxes. That independence came with its advantages, but it also carried consequences. The more authentically I expressed myself, the more I found myself navigating projections, assumptions, and expectations that often had very little to do with who I actually was. In school, I was bullied. Harshly. My style was picked apart, my hair was laughed at and I was seen as “funny-looking”. You weren’t allowed to celebrate yourself. If you were seen celebrating yourself, you were given every reason to why you shouldn’t.

This encounter would cut me off from exploring sexual nature and as a result, I didn’t know how to fully tap into the art of desire.

Not the kind commonly spoken about, but something far more profound.

I began to understand that desire is not something to suppress, apologize for, or intellectualize away. Desire is one of the most powerful forces shaping human behavior. It influences what we pursue, what we value, what we admire, and ultimately, what we are willing to invest in.

I realized that desire is safe to engage with.

In many ways, luxury itself is the architecture of desire. Luxury is not built on necessity. It is built on longing. On anticipation. On attraction. On the emotional experience of wanting something before possessing it.

Luxury is sensual.

Luxury is seductive.

Luxury is deeply, undeniably sexual because it operates through the same mechanisms that govern attraction. Mystery. Tension. Exclusivity. Anticipation. The promise of transformation. The greatest luxury brands in the world have always understood this. They do not simply sell products. They cultivate desire. They create an emotional charge powerful enough that ownership becomes secondary to the experience of longing itself.

The more I studied luxury, the more I realized that desire was never the enemy. It was the language. And once I understood that, I stopped viewing sensuality and intellect as opposing forces. They were partners in the same conversation. The audience and market doesn’t decide, you decide. You are in control. Not the audience. When you give the audience control, you force your brand into a box you never intended it to be in.

Whether your brand is luxury or not, your brand should remain fun and liberating not boring and sterile. I should not yawn when I encounter your brand. Your brand should feel like an experience. It should invite fascination. Conversation. Movement.

Many founders believe consumers make decisions logically. They don't. Consumers justify purchases logically. They make them emotionally. This is why two businesses can sell the same service, solve the same problem, charge similar rates, and yet one consistently attracts more attention, demand, referrals, opportunities, and sales.

One creates desire. The other creates information.

Information explains. Desire moves. Information educates. Desire activates. Information tells people what something is. Desire makes them imagine who they become because of it. This is where many founders fail. They focus entirely on utility while neglecting attraction.

They explain the service. Explain the framework. Explain the methodology. Explain the features. Yet they never create emotional movement. The audience understands what they do but never feels compelled to move toward it. Luxury brands have understood this for centuries. They do not simply communicate value.

They stage desire → They build anticipation → They cultivate fascination→ They create emotional gravity.

The founder who understands this stops asking, "How do I explain this better?"

They begin asking, "How do I make this more desirable?"

The second question changes everything.

What happens when the box and expectation is broken?

Many founders and brands avoid this question. They stay within the expectation and box. They allow themselves to be consumed. They allow audiences to place rules on the brand. Rules on the creation. They allow markets to dictate how impactful their brand can be. What happens to the founder is more devastating. The founder is left uninspired by their own work. They are left feeling dull and lacking of movement because their audience won’t allow it.

Encounters isn't just restraint. It is what happens when founders, public figures, and brands become so distinct that markets and audiences are forced to adjust to their standard rather than the other way around. Most brands spend their existence adapting themselves to the market. They study trends, mimic language, follow cultural currents, and continuously reposition themselves in pursuit of relevance.

The encounter operates differently.

The founder develops such a clear movement, such a recognizable perspective, and such a distinct presence that adaptation begins flowing in the opposite direction.

The audience learns the language.

The market learns the standards.

The industry learns the expectations.

What was once considered unconventional becomes the reference point.

This is why the most influential founders are rarely remembered for fitting in. They are remembered because they established a standard powerful enough that others eventually organized themselves around it. An encounter is not the result of withholding. It is the result of distinction. It is the moment a founder, public figure, or brand becomes so clear in who they are that the market can no longer ignore, reinterpret, or dilute them.

The market adjusts.

The audience adapts.

We are happy to welcome you into The Encounter: Our Official Publication for The Brand Copy where we release weekly publications that observes culture, markets, language, human behavior, psychology and luxury.

Be the first to receive when you subscribe.

Of course, to be the first to receive our most personalized, researched and detailed answers, we encourage you to apply to our website for Bespoke Brand Consultancy and Advisory: Submit a Application to be Considered.

OUR PLAYBOOK COLLECTION

The Billionaire Brand Playbook: Observations on power, hierarchy, structure, human behavior and psychology inspired by billionaire brands around the globe.

The Middle Brand Escape Playbook: Because no one likes the middle.

Be Encountered, Not Consumed

ISSUE 1: The Motherland Problem: Why I Stopped Believing In Personal Branding

Written By: Allison Nicole Sharp