Digital & Print Membership
Yearly + Receive 8 free printed back issues
$420 Annually
Monthly + Receive 3 free printed back issues
$40 Monthly
Fatphobia in the Fashion Industry
maya finoh & Jordan Underwood Reflect on Regressive Culture

Reflecting on the cultural shifts we’ve seen since the rise of Ozempic as a blockbuster drug, we are two agency-signed fat models who have been actively working in the fashion industry for years, interviewing each other on the state of plus-size modeling. As models over a US size 22, we have borne the brunt of anti-fatness in the industry over the years and have also experienced the ramifications of cultural body preference shifts on personal and professional levels. Our photo story utilizes both bright colors and more neutral genderqueer aesthetics to shine a spotlight on the outcast beauty that is the fat form which has been increasingly pushed out of public life, despite being depicted as an image of abundance in many cultures historically.
Through interviewing each other, we hope to examine the current move in fashion and culture back to almost Y2K levels of ultra thinness (e.g., the decrease in curve models on the runway, many curve models getting dropped from their agencies, the constant vitriol on social media directed at visibly fat folks, and the declaration that the ‘BBL era’ is over) and how it’s connected to systemic fatphobia stoked by health anxiety and the desire to return to normalcy after years of the COVID-19 pandemic.
The fashion industry is one of the first cultural spheres to manufacture bias against certain body types, facial features, and so on via style trends. Anti- fatness has been and continues to be used as a tool of militarism (as seen through the presidential fitness test, and the Bush Administration’s declaration of a ‘War on Obesity’ in 2002). With authoritarianism rising globally, we posit that publicly naming these regressive trends is the first step as media can be a tool to either perpetuate these systems or disrupt them. Ultimately, we hope this conversation offers readers some possible tools to fight against anti-fat bias in their own lives.
MAYA FINOH: I had a longtime interest in modeling. I would think to myself, “Oh, I would love to model” because I’ve loved fashion since I was a tween. But I don’t think it was until I moved to New York and met a community of creatives—Black, queer, and trans artists especially—that I felt like this dream or this vision of me as a fat Black model in the industry could become a reality. For non-essential workers, the COVID-19 lockdown offered the space to focus on hobbies, creative dreams, and other endeavors that you wouldn’t have time to nurture otherwise. So I was lucky to connect with people who were entering their photography practices at that time, who would say to me “Let’s do a test shoot. I just want to shoot.”
I began to post those photoshoots online and then folks from the Parsons MFA Fashion Design & Society Program reached out to me about a class they had about designing inclusively. I had to go to Parsons consistently for a semester and had the clothes that student designers made fit to my body, which was cool. It was a lovely experience being a plus-size fit model, and from there, I started to get asked to do more modeling gigs. I believe it was in July 2021, that my mother agent found me on Instagram, and I became a signed model from there.
When did you become a model?

JORDAN: I always loved fashion. I was that kid that had little outfit sketches on the back of all my papers, and I always loved getting my picture taken, which is kind of funny, I don’t know, kind of cringe, but people always told me that I was really photogenic, which, maybe is fatphobic. I don’t know. “Pretty face” syndrome. That’s neither here nor there. I was always fat, and growing up during the “thin is in” era of the 2000’s, I didn’t really see modeling as a possibility for me. When I moved to New York in 2014, I briefly looked into modeling agencies that had plus size talent on their rosters, but at that time, it was incredibly rare to see a model under 5’7” signed, and I’m 5’4”. So, I tabled that idea.
After graduating in 2018, I was focused primarily on my career as an actor but started doing some modeling on the side. In November 2018, my agent posted a casting call looking for models with no size or height requirements. A friend sent it to me, and I submitted a few headshots and a video of me dancing on a whim, not thinking that anything would come from it. I signed with them that same week, and I’m still with that agency today. That was a huge turning point for me.
When the pandemic hit, theatres closed and I had to shift gears. I had more free time, so I started creating content online. That really helped boost my modeling career. Many of my test shoots and content I was creating on my own were getting shared, and I was able to make connections with brands through social media. Now, my career is about 50/50—half through my agent, half through social media. For plus-size models, especially those of us above a size 20, social media can be crucial because big brands often aren’t looking for models like us.
I find it interesting how the fashion industry seems to want to be bold and innovative and critique oppressive systems, while also so often supporting and reinforcing white supremacist hegemony with their artistic and casting choices. — Jordan
MAYA: You know, I love that you took a chance and applied to that agency just to see what would happen. Within a week, you were signed, and now here we are. I want to focus on the “thin-is-in” era, the Y2K fatphobic era 20 years ago. It’s wild to think about how much fatphobia was normalized. You could be a size eight or whatever, like Jessica Simpson or Raven-Symoné, and be considered the fattest thing in the world. And now we’re regressing back to that. What about this particular socio-political moment makes you think—or rather, makes you know—we’re regressing?
JORDAN: That’s so funny, because I had a very similar question for you: Do you see any differences between the “thin-is-in” fads of history and the current moment we’re in with the rise of Ozempic as a blockbuster drug?
I feel like we asked kind of the same question. For me, now everything is so steeped in neoliberal feminism. You see things like the Hims & Hers ad that was aired during the Superbowl this year. There is an explicit co-option of the language of fat liberation. The language of, specifically, Black radical thinkers has been misappropriated to sell weight loss products, and push anti- fat ideology. These companies slap this language of liberation on top of the same anti-fat rhetoric we’ve witnessed for decades in an attempt to trick us into thinking that they are “body positive” and critical of the anti-fatness of the early 2000s, all the while telling us to literally buy into the very system that they are pretending to critique.
MAYA: Absolutely. I feel like what you’re getting at is that neoliberal feminism, more commonly known as choice feminism, is allowing people to say, “It’s my choice to use this drug that’s meant for diabetic bodies for weight loss.” Let’s start there. Fundamentally, Ozempic was made for people who have a chronic illness and they’re now experiencing shortages trying to get it, so there’s a lack of regard for diabetic people and their needs in the use of this drug solely for weight loss. There’s also this delusion within choice feminism, a belief that choices can exist without the input of the superstructure of society around us. These choices don’t happen in silos, or a bubble, completely absent from influences. Our choices are impacted by fatphobia and other systems of oppression whether we like it or not.

JORDAN: I think it’s important to note that these conversations are happening all the time on social media in comment sections, on TikTok and Instagram and Substack, and always have been. I came to fat liberation through Tumblr in the 2010s but in the 2000s these conversations were being had on LiveJournal and in zines and at places like the NOLOSE conferences. I recently read an article where someone said, and I’m paraphrasing, “The difference between the 2000s thin-is-in moment, and now is that now we’re having these conversations.”
The reality is that people have always been having these conversations, and I think that it’s really disingenuous, or rather, when people say that I find that they are shining a light on their own ignorance to the history of fat liberation and liberation movements in general. Because these conversations have been happening literally forever. Even when talking about the history of body positivity and fat liberation, we go back to the civil rights movement where, many fat Black women who were leaders in that time were talking about anti- fatness as oppressive system that exists under white supremacy. I’m thinking specifically about people like Audre Lorde, Fannie Lou Hamer, and Johnnie Tilmon.
MAYA: Yeah, I always go back to Hunter Shackelford’s definition of fat liberation and how we can’t untie it from anti-Blackness. So in that regard, fat liberation started in the cargo hold of the slave ship. The first acts of rebellion towards fat liberation were the acts of insurrection and rioting that enslaved Africans did on the slave ship. So I absolutely agree.
JORDAN: I see a lot of people, at least when talking about Ozempic, be it via the Hims & Hers commercial or anywhere else that this conversation pops up, I often do see a lot of defensiveness from people, specifically people who have diabetes, bring up the original intended use of the drugs. I see a lot of people who take Ozempic or semaglutides, whatever the mode is, get very dug into the pathology of fatness, saying, “Oh, well, you don’t know what it’s like to be ‘obese’ and have the disease.” I’ve always found that self pathologization really interesting. They are pathologizing their own experiences, obviously, because doctors or whoever have told them to, which is so interesting too, in this current moment, because of the way in which we’ve seen, “obesity” be designated as a disease and then not disease, and the medical community going back and forth. We see flip-flopping from the people who have dedicated their lives to ending fatness as something that exists, period. Medically, and culturally, there seems to be a desire to pathologize fatness, to view being fat as a sickness, but at the same time, we see this consistent critique of a lot of fat activists’ work where people will claim that we’re conflating fatness and disability. So then my question becomes, is fatness a disability? Or is it not?
MAYA: It is. My fatness can be disabling! If I don’t get certain accommodations a place or environment can become inaccessible to me.
JORDAN: And that only seems to be a problem when we say it, and when we ask for accommodations for our disabilities as fat people, whether our disabilities are related to our sizes or not. The people who are the most entrenched in anti-fat ideology really grip to this idea that they are pro-science, but some of the loudest anti-fat voices I’ve encountered online come from people who are not only ignoring the decades of research that we have on the negative health outcomes that fat people face due to weight bias in medicine, but are also coming from people supporting politicians who are blatantly anti-vax and deny climate change.
MAYA: What you’re bringing up makes me think about the difference between the 2000s “thin-is-in” and this 2025 era of regressive body politics, which now has an authoritarian turn, or rather, a new adaptation of a regime in office.
In the Hims & Hers commercial, I found it interesting and Ericka Hart pointed this out, that they used “This is America” by Childish Gambino. I have many critiques of Childish Gambino and that music video, especially its disregard for Black life, but it’s telling that they chose a song meant to critique police brutality and the mass murder of Black people to sell a product related to Ozempic. I think this highlights a major difference between the early 2000s and 2025—a new kind of co-optation, minimization, and disrespect of Black cultural identity.
Black culture is now pop culture in the U.S., and the way we talk about it has changed. In the past year or two, we saw media declaring an end to the ‘BBL era,’ which symbolizes a rejection of bodies that have been stereotyped and associated with Blackness. The Brazilian butt lift, for example, has ties to the eugenics movement of Brazilian plastic surgeons, who aimed to take traits from Indigenous Brazilians and Afro-Brazilians they deemed worthwhile and apply them to lighter-skinned, white Brazilians. So many plastic surgery techniques originating from Brazil were attempts to strip their society of Blackness and Indigeneity while preserving specific “desirable” aspects of those communities.
Many people who claim to be pro-science and anti-vax are still promoting racial pseudoscience about fatness. The hatred of fatness doesn’t come from a concern for health—it’s rooted in racism. — maya
Sabrina Strings, in her book Fearing the Black Body, explains how anti-fatness as a coherent ideology is born out of racism. Fatness was used as a signifier to justify chattel slavery—those Black Africans deemed “fat” were labeled as greedy and lazy, and therefore undeserving of freedom. This marked them as people who deserved to be governed, enslaved, and colonized. The connection between pseudoscience about fatness, white supremacy, and anti-vax ideology has centuries of history aligned with white European hegemony and racial hierarchy.
JORDAN: And it’s admitted pseudoscience, right? Adolphe Quetelet who invented the BMI literally said (paraphrasing), “This is not to be used to determine health. This is for statistics. This is not for medical use.” That man was a proud eugenicist; he was literally a race scientist.
MAYA: Can I circle back to part of our question, about how you think the fashion industry in this particular moment is complicit, aiding and abetting this regression and this increase of fatphobia and all other forms of disregard for bodies that are not white, thin and able-bodied?
JORDAN: When we talk about body politics and body fascism translating into the fashion industry, the industry likes to think of itself as a trendsetter. But I don’t know how much I buy that, especially right now. The fashion industry is almost always a reflection of our politics and culture. That’s not to say there aren’t people in the industry—Black and brown designers, queer and trans designers, disabled designers, fat designers—who are pushing boundaries and making statements through their art and fashion as political commentary. But in this current moment of Ozempic, things have really shifted.
New Year’s 2023, there was a noticeable shift in the industry. I think a lot of us saw it coming, especially given how the conversations around fatness started changing when Ozempic was introduced. A lot of people predicted this moment, including Imani Barbarin, who was creating content back in 2020 warning us about ableism and fatphobia as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
MAYA: I definitely felt that. I think COVID-19, this global pandemic, opened the door to intense anxiety around health. There was also this desire to return to normal after the lockdown, even though the pandemic is still ongoing. But after the end of lockdown, people craved a return to normalcy. It’s also this desire to go back to simpler, more “innocent” times. That translates into wanting ultra-thinness, wanting whiteness. Particularly, there was a push to see healthy and fit bodies after millions of people died and we had to slow down during lockdown. We didn’t want to see sickness or disease. We didn’t want to see disabled people. We wanted to see healthy, fit bodies. So, we became even more anti-fat, and terms like the “R-word” began resurfacing. This moment isn’t just about vitriol; it’s about the desire to dismiss disabled and fat people from public life.
JORDAN: A lot of anti-fatness came into play almost immediately as we saw fatness being blamed for COVID deaths. That is incredibly relevant when we talk about this health anxiety because when you tell people, “Oh, you’re going to die of COVID because you’re fat,” then of course, the cultural response is going to be “Okay. Well, I’m not going to be fat. I’m going to do everything in my power to not be fat so I don’t die and if I get COVID I can be okay.” Even though we know that that’s not how this works, that many thin, “healthy,” able-bodied people have died of COVID and many continue to suffer from the severe effects of long COVID.
MAYA: I would also add that COVID showed a lot of people how the government will abandon you. “If I don’t have health insurance, I better be fit and healthy. I can’t be fat because I can’t trust the state to take care of me.” This reflects the ways in which this country, focused on capitalist accumulation, is willing to sacrifice any human life that gets in the way of profit. I’m not sure how many people fully grasp the totality of it, but I think most folks have a basic understanding of the horrors of our healthcare system right now. Watching so many people drop dead in the early months of the lockdown made it clear: “I can’t be fat or disabled because, literally, the triage protocols are designed to let fat and disabled people die.”
JORDAN: Capitalism is comfortable letting us die, and the solution becomes spending $1,000 a month on a blockbuster drug. Even elevating this drug as a “magic” solution—people call it a magic drug, right? There are claims that it helps curb addiction, alcoholism, and so much more. The list goes on and on. People will tell you semaglutide can solve literally any problem you’re struggling with. And I think people need it to be true, for their sanity, because the reality is not so simple. We want it to be, “Oh, I take this pill or shot, and I’ll be healthy, and I won’t have to struggle.” But that’s just not true. We’ve seen this before—every 10 or 20 years, there’s a new magic drug. It just seems that critical thinking is missing here. We’re not questioning who benefits from this.
I see a lot of people acknowledging the damage of weight stigma while promoting semaglutides as a solution. And I think that’s really interesting because we’re acknowledging a systemic issue and then offering an individual solution for it. Charging people $1,000 a month for this individual solution to a systemic issue. Even if Ozempic were a solution—which it’s not—but following their logic, if they’re presenting it as the answer, Medicaid doesn’t cover Ozempic. Medicaid doesn’t cover any weight loss medication. And we know that people who live in poverty, statistically, are more likely to be fat. So we’re gatekeeping this magic drug from the people most impacted by what they call a disease. They’re saying, “You have a disease, here’s a magic drug to cure you,” but because you’re poor, we’re not going to give it to you. And why is that?
MAYA: Who’s it really for?

JORDAN: Eradicating fatness does not eradicate anti-fatness. And the reality is that fat people have always existed.
MAYA: There’s something I’ve noticed more and more in terms of anti-fat harassment online: “There’s Ozempic now, so there’s no excuse to look like that.” Now Ozempic has become more than what it actually is. It’s become this mythic drug with which you can lose half of your body weight instead of the reality of around 15 to 20 pounds. I think fashion does go hand in hand with our political moment. I’ve been reflecting a lot on Nazi Germany and the collaborators, and how brands like HUGO BOSS, which produced Nazi military uniforms, played a role. It’s interesting seeing figures like Ivanka Trump and Usha Vance dressed in custom couture for the presidential inauguration, especially after the 2016 Trump administration, when many fashion brands made a spectacle of saying they wouldn’t dress or collaborate with them. This election marked a big shift.
I want to talk about this shift, especially how it’s affected us as plus-size models. Since 2020, the introduction of Ozempic as a blockbuster drug, and the end of lockdown, we’ve seen a decrease in opportunities. There’s been a push to get rid of the “COVID-15” and return to normal, which has led to fewer jobs for plus-size models, fewer opportunities on the runway, and even models being dropped from agencies because there are no jobs for them. I’d love to hear your thoughts on this.
JORDAN: I think it’s interesting because, after the start of the lockdown, there was a big push for increased representation of different body sizes. In 2021, it seemed there was more mainstream support for body diversity in commercials and larger companies. Then, it felt like a sharp backlash, as if they pushed too far. This is the trap of representation—when there’s representation without protections, without tangible changes, or without broad-scale education. We see this with transness as well. There’s representation of trans people, but particularly with trans women, this hyper-visibility leads to pushback through transmisogyny, especially for Black trans women, who are exposed to really serious violence.
MAYA: What you’re making me think about is that the uprisings of 2020, particularly the George Floyd and Breonna Taylor protests, that led to that brief moment of increased visibility. Black liberation, both in the U.S. and globally, opened the door for other movements to have space and gain attention. In this case, we’re talking about the performance of representation, but I think it still matters. The increased body diversity in 2020-2021, with more fat, disabled, trans, and darker-skinned models, is rooted in the work of the Black Freedom Struggle Black liberation is key to collective liberation and cannot be downplayed. As we already mentioned, anti-fatness is tied to anti-Blackness, so it makes sense that fat models also had that brief moment, as we saw brands perform their “diversity” with black squares and weak gestures. Ultimately, we know that despite creating diversity and inclusion roles and work plans, these changes have been rolled back in the past year. But the foundation of that brief moment is rooted in Black liberation.
JORDAN: Something that I have always found really frustrating in fat liberation spaces is the whitewashing of fat liberation through the mainstreaming of body positivity, where it’s seen as a cis white lady thing. When you actually engage with fat liberation work, it has always had its roots in Black liberation and the people who are producing the most pivotal texts in fat studies are fat Black queer people like Da’Shaun L. Harrison, Roxanne Gay, Kiese Laymon…
MAYA: It’s like the liberal dilution of that work.
JORDAN: That hyper-focus on representation leaves fat people vulnerable, because people don’t fully understand what they’re fighting for or against. We often name random fat influencers as our leaders, but they’re not equipped for this work. They’re not activists, nor have they studied liberation, especially fat liberation. It’s interesting who gets labeled as activists in this field. People, not necessarily you or I, allow ourselves to be continually let down by those who aren’t qualified. Just because someone has a million followers and is fat doesn’t mean they can tell you how to love yourself. “Tell me how to love myself” will never liberate you. It might give you tools to self-advocate, but it’s not the solution.
MAYA: It’s not about love. Institutions can’t love us. This is about systemic anti-fatness, it’s about whether we can live with dignity or have our lives cut short by others’ fat discrimination and neglect. I also want to uplift Andrea Shaw Nevins, who wrote The Embodiment of Disobedience. She doesn’t get enough credit for naming fat Black women’s contributions to the politics of fat liberation, almost 20 years ago.
We should also touch on anti-fatness in relation to militarism and imperialism, especially in this time of ongoing genocides. I want to bring up a Jerusalem Post article from October 2023 that discussed using the “stress from the Israel-Hamas war to lose weight.” I also want to address how the war on obesity, declared by the Bush administration in 2002 before the Iraq War, framed obesity as a bigger threat than terrorism in the United States. The U.S. Surgeon General Richard Carmona even called obesity “the terror within.”
JORDAN: The war on terror, the war on drugs, the war on obesity, all of these quasi ‘wars’ are waged by the US government to keep us distracted, fighting each other so we don’t fight them. You’re telling me that while we’re witnessing multiple genocides the thing that we should be most focused on is keeping our bodies snatched?
MAYA: Meanwhile, people are starving a couple of miles away from you—being decimated— in fact.
JORDAN: I also think that there’s something in the government wanting the people to be comfortable starving: to keep people weak, to keep people in line, and to say “Don’t eat. It’s better for you.”
MAYA: The declaration of a ‘war on obesity’ frames fatness as an emergency because we need people to be fit—to be police officers or part of the military. The United States requires a steady supply of recruits for the military-industrial complex, which needs soldiers to keep the war machine running.
JORDAN: There is a billboard that I’ve seen many times in my life for bariatric surgery, where it is a before and after, and the before is just some fat guy, and the after, he’s in a fucking police uniform. They said the quiet part out loud: “Be skinny. Arm the state.” When we talk about Israel specifically, that’s also a country that has mandatory military service.
MAYA: Even the way Israelis talk about their military—claiming to have a bunch of vegans—reflects a focus on health and beauty. Discussions about their military might, particularly through the violence they enact on Palestinians through occupation, are bolstered by conversations about Israelis’ perceived health and beauty. The emphasis on “sexiness” and the popularity of white supremacist and fatphobic views on media platforms today support the maintenance of empire. Fatphobia, as an ideology, is a part of the upkeep of empire.
JORDAN: It’s common to see declarations of allegiance to white supremacy followed by hatred of fat people. Most recently, Kanye West’s tweets began with “I am a Nazi” and ended with “I hate fat woke bitches.” Even outside of Kanye, there’s an influencer who posted on TikTok saying, “I hate liberals, love Trump, and hate fat people.” Hatred of fatness is often central to these declarations.
MAYA: I would argue that fatphobia, anti-fatness, and ableism are symptoms of fascist, authoritarian ideologies, which are now consolidating in places like the White House and across Europe. Many nations are experiencing a new fascist turn. Fat and disabled communities serve as universal scapegoats, with people across the political spectrum—whether fascist or leftist—claiming they have no place in the revolution.
JORDAN: I see this often when discussing disability and fatness, where even people in the disability community say, “You did it to yourself,” implying no right to complain. For many, including me, disability and fatness are intertwined; my disability causes weight gain, and for many fat disabled people, inaccessibility stems from fatness, not just separate disabilities. Capitalism shifts the blame onto individuals instead of addressing the systems that keep us sick.
What does it mean to push back when culture has regressed in the way that it has, but also regressed and got smarter? When we’re seeing a sort of blatant co-option of the language of fat liberation, the language of liberation in general, I think we have to go back to the basics. We have to go back to education. We have to go back to having these conversations with people on a one- to-one level and meeting people where they are.
MAYA: To be frank, the pendulum has swung this way, and in 10 years we might see a swing back towards liberal diversity, or rather the liberal politics of representation and diversity with the next wave of movement organizing that happens in U.S. empire. I think then we’ll see a lot of the fashion industry, who at this moment are being outwardly fatphobic, pretend like they weren’t. There’s going to be a lot of revisionism.
There’s always going to be fat people here. Fat people have made it through multiple eras of regressive body politics. Fat people have been here and always will be because you can feed two people exactly the same way, and just because of different genetics and the diverse human experience, they will carry weight in different parts of their body. They’re not going to look the same. It’s the beauty of humanity, and fascism really tries to pretend like that’s not true: that we can get uniformity, we can get Nazi ‘Aryan’ beauty. As fucked up as that regime was—as horrific and unimaginable as the loss of life was—ultimately, this type of thinking does not work. You’ll never be able to eradicate fat and disabled people out of existence.
JORDAN: Obviously it’s so cliche, and everyone is saying it, but community really is key. We have each other. I’m not a pessimist, but fat people saw it coming. If I had a message for thin people, it would be to listen to fat people, listen to fat, Black, and disabled people specifically. This cultural moment should not have been a surprise to anyone, because it was not a surprise to us.
MAYA: Global pandemics have always led to increased ableism, fatphobia, and regressive body politics as people try to regain control after mass loss of life and widespread disability. This pandemic, in particular, has left millions with long COVID and new chronic disabilities, forced to create a new way of life that many are unprepared for. Instead of accommodations or a world that values disability justice, there’s been a move by the ruling class towards fear and control, with a push to return to normal by scapegoating fat and disabled people.
Like you said, it’s crucial to listen to those who’ve studied history and the work of long-time organizers. History doesn’t repeat itself, but it’s shaped by past choices. This articulation of authoritarianism and regressivism demonstrates that.
{
"article":
{
"title" : "Fatphobia in the Fashion Industry: maya finoh & Jordan Underwood Reflect on Regressive Culture",
"author" : "maya finoh, Jordan Underwood",
"category" : "interviews",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/fatphobia-in-the-fashion-industry",
"date" : "2025-03-21 17:36:00 -0400",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/05.jpg",
"excerpt" : "",
"content" : "Reflecting on the cultural shifts we’ve seen since the rise of Ozempic as a blockbuster drug, we are two agency-signed fat models who have been actively working in the fashion industry for years, interviewing each other on the state of plus-size modeling. As models over a US size 22, we have borne the brunt of anti-fatness in the industry over the years and have also experienced the ramifications of cultural body preference shifts on personal and professional levels. Our photo story utilizes both bright colors and more neutral genderqueer aesthetics to shine a spotlight on the outcast beauty that is the fat form which has been increasingly pushed out of public life, despite being depicted as an image of abundance in many cultures historically.Through interviewing each other, we hope to examine the current move in fashion and culture back to almost Y2K levels of ultra thinness (e.g., the decrease in curve models on the runway, many curve models getting dropped from their agencies, the constant vitriol on social media directed at visibly fat folks, and the declaration that the ‘BBL era’ is over) and how it’s connected to systemic fatphobia stoked by health anxiety and the desire to return to normalcy after years of the COVID-19 pandemic.The fashion industry is one of the first cultural spheres to manufacture bias against certain body types, facial features, and so on via style trends. Anti- fatness has been and continues to be used as a tool of militarism (as seen through the presidential fitness test, and the Bush Administration’s declaration of a ‘War on Obesity’ in 2002). With authoritarianism rising globally, we posit that publicly naming these regressive trends is the first step as media can be a tool to either perpetuate these systems or disrupt them. Ultimately, we hope this conversation offers readers some possible tools to fight against anti-fat bias in their own lives.MAYA FINOH: I had a longtime interest in modeling. I would think to myself, “Oh, I would love to model” because I’ve loved fashion since I was a tween. But I don’t think it was until I moved to New York and met a community of creatives—Black, queer, and trans artists especially—that I felt like this dream or this vision of me as a fat Black model in the industry could become a reality. For non-essential workers, the COVID-19 lockdown offered the space to focus on hobbies, creative dreams, and other endeavors that you wouldn’t have time to nurture otherwise. So I was lucky to connect with people who were entering their photography practices at that time, who would say to me “Let’s do a test shoot. I just want to shoot.”I began to post those photoshoots online and then folks from the Parsons MFA Fashion Design & Society Program reached out to me about a class they had about designing inclusively. I had to go to Parsons consistently for a semester and had the clothes that student designers made fit to my body, which was cool. It was a lovely experience being a plus-size fit model, and from there, I started to get asked to do more modeling gigs. I believe it was in July 2021, that my mother agent found me on Instagram, and I became a signed model from there.When did you become a model?JORDAN: I always loved fashion. I was that kid that had little outfit sketches on the back of all my papers, and I always loved getting my picture taken, which is kind of funny, I don’t know, kind of cringe, but people always told me that I was really photogenic, which, maybe is fatphobic. I don’t know. “Pretty face” syndrome. That’s neither here nor there. I was always fat, and growing up during the “thin is in” era of the 2000’s, I didn’t really see modeling as a possibility for me. When I moved to New York in 2014, I briefly looked into modeling agencies that had plus size talent on their rosters, but at that time, it was incredibly rare to see a model under 5’7” signed, and I’m 5’4”. So, I tabled that idea.After graduating in 2018, I was focused primarily on my career as an actor but started doing some modeling on the side. In November 2018, my agent posted a casting call looking for models with no size or height requirements. A friend sent it to me, and I submitted a few headshots and a video of me dancing on a whim, not thinking that anything would come from it. I signed with them that same week, and I’m still with that agency today. That was a huge turning point for me.When the pandemic hit, theatres closed and I had to shift gears. I had more free time, so I started creating content online. That really helped boost my modeling career. Many of my test shoots and content I was creating on my own were getting shared, and I was able to make connections with brands through social media. Now, my career is about 50/50—half through my agent, half through social media. For plus-size models, especially those of us above a size 20, social media can be crucial because big brands often aren’t looking for models like us. I find it interesting how the fashion industry seems to want to be bold and innovative and critique oppressive systems, while also so often supporting and reinforcing white supremacist hegemony with their artistic and casting choices. — JordanMAYA: You know, I love that you took a chance and applied to that agency just to see what would happen. Within a week, you were signed, and now here we are. I want to focus on the “thin-is-in” era, the Y2K fatphobic era 20 years ago. It’s wild to think about how much fatphobia was normalized. You could be a size eight or whatever, like Jessica Simpson or Raven-Symoné, and be considered the fattest thing in the world. And now we’re regressing back to that. What about this particular socio-political moment makes you think—or rather, makes you know—we’re regressing?JORDAN: That’s so funny, because I had a very similar question for you: Do you see any differences between the “thin-is-in” fads of history and the current moment we’re in with the rise of Ozempic as a blockbuster drug?I feel like we asked kind of the same question. For me, now everything is so steeped in neoliberal feminism. You see things like the Hims & Hers ad that was aired during the Superbowl this year. There is an explicit co-option of the language of fat liberation. The language of, specifically, Black radical thinkers has been misappropriated to sell weight loss products, and push anti- fat ideology. These companies slap this language of liberation on top of the same anti-fat rhetoric we’ve witnessed for decades in an attempt to trick us into thinking that they are “body positive” and critical of the anti-fatness of the early 2000s, all the while telling us to literally buy into the very system that they are pretending to critique.MAYA: Absolutely. I feel like what you’re getting at is that neoliberal feminism, more commonly known as choice feminism, is allowing people to say, “It’s my choice to use this drug that’s meant for diabetic bodies for weight loss.” Let’s start there. Fundamentally, Ozempic was made for people who have a chronic illness and they’re now experiencing shortages trying to get it, so there’s a lack of regard for diabetic people and their needs in the use of this drug solely for weight loss. There’s also this delusion within choice feminism, a belief that choices can exist without the input of the superstructure of society around us. These choices don’t happen in silos, or a bubble, completely absent from influences. Our choices are impacted by fatphobia and other systems of oppression whether we like it or not.JORDAN: I think it’s important to note that these conversations are happening all the time on social media in comment sections, on TikTok and Instagram and Substack, and always have been. I came to fat liberation through Tumblr in the 2010s but in the 2000s these conversations were being had on LiveJournal and in zines and at places like the NOLOSE conferences. I recently read an article where someone said, and I’m paraphrasing, “The difference between the 2000s thin-is-in moment, and now is that now we’re having these conversations.”The reality is that people have always been having these conversations, and I think that it’s really disingenuous, or rather, when people say that I find that they are shining a light on their own ignorance to the history of fat liberation and liberation movements in general. Because these conversations have been happening literally forever. Even when talking about the history of body positivity and fat liberation, we go back to the civil rights movement where, many fat Black women who were leaders in that time were talking about anti- fatness as oppressive system that exists under white supremacy. I’m thinking specifically about people like Audre Lorde, Fannie Lou Hamer, and Johnnie Tilmon.MAYA: Yeah, I always go back to Hunter Shackelford’s definition of fat liberation and how we can’t untie it from anti-Blackness. So in that regard, fat liberation started in the cargo hold of the slave ship. The first acts of rebellion towards fat liberation were the acts of insurrection and rioting that enslaved Africans did on the slave ship. So I absolutely agree.JORDAN: I see a lot of people, at least when talking about Ozempic, be it via the Hims & Hers commercial or anywhere else that this conversation pops up, I often do see a lot of defensiveness from people, specifically people who have diabetes, bring up the original intended use of the drugs. I see a lot of people who take Ozempic or semaglutides, whatever the mode is, get very dug into the pathology of fatness, saying, “Oh, well, you don’t know what it’s like to be ‘obese’ and have the disease.” I’ve always found that self pathologization really interesting. They are pathologizing their own experiences, obviously, because doctors or whoever have told them to, which is so interesting too, in this current moment, because of the way in which we’ve seen, “obesity” be designated as a disease and then not disease, and the medical community going back and forth. We see flip-flopping from the people who have dedicated their lives to ending fatness as something that exists, period. Medically, and culturally, there seems to be a desire to pathologize fatness, to view being fat as a sickness, but at the same time, we see this consistent critique of a lot of fat activists’ work where people will claim that we’re conflating fatness and disability. So then my question becomes, is fatness a disability? Or is it not?MAYA: It is. My fatness can be disabling! If I don’t get certain accommodations a place or environment can become inaccessible to me.JORDAN: And that only seems to be a problem when we say it, and when we ask for accommodations for our disabilities as fat people, whether our disabilities are related to our sizes or not. The people who are the most entrenched in anti-fat ideology really grip to this idea that they are pro-science, but some of the loudest anti-fat voices I’ve encountered online come from people who are not only ignoring the decades of research that we have on the negative health outcomes that fat people face due to weight bias in medicine, but are also coming from people supporting politicians who are blatantly anti-vax and deny climate change.MAYA: What you’re bringing up makes me think about the difference between the 2000s “thin-is-in” and this 2025 era of regressive body politics, which now has an authoritarian turn, or rather, a new adaptation of a regime in office.In the Hims & Hers commercial, I found it interesting and Ericka Hart pointed this out, that they used “This is America” by Childish Gambino. I have many critiques of Childish Gambino and that music video, especially its disregard for Black life, but it’s telling that they chose a song meant to critique police brutality and the mass murder of Black people to sell a product related to Ozempic. I think this highlights a major difference between the early 2000s and 2025—a new kind of co-optation, minimization, and disrespect of Black cultural identity.Black culture is now pop culture in the U.S., and the way we talk about it has changed. In the past year or two, we saw media declaring an end to the ‘BBL era,’ which symbolizes a rejection of bodies that have been stereotyped and associated with Blackness. The Brazilian butt lift, for example, has ties to the eugenics movement of Brazilian plastic surgeons, who aimed to take traits from Indigenous Brazilians and Afro-Brazilians they deemed worthwhile and apply them to lighter-skinned, white Brazilians. So many plastic surgery techniques originating from Brazil were attempts to strip their society of Blackness and Indigeneity while preserving specific “desirable” aspects of those communities. Many people who claim to be pro-science and anti-vax are still promoting racial pseudoscience about fatness. The hatred of fatness doesn’t come from a concern for health—it’s rooted in racism. — mayaSabrina Strings, in her book Fearing the Black Body, explains how anti-fatness as a coherent ideology is born out of racism. Fatness was used as a signifier to justify chattel slavery—those Black Africans deemed “fat” were labeled as greedy and lazy, and therefore undeserving of freedom. This marked them as people who deserved to be governed, enslaved, and colonized. The connection between pseudoscience about fatness, white supremacy, and anti-vax ideology has centuries of history aligned with white European hegemony and racial hierarchy.JORDAN: And it’s admitted pseudoscience, right? Adolphe Quetelet who invented the BMI literally said (paraphrasing), “This is not to be used to determine health. This is for statistics. This is not for medical use.” That man was a proud eugenicist; he was literally a race scientist.MAYA: Can I circle back to part of our question, about how you think the fashion industry in this particular moment is complicit, aiding and abetting this regression and this increase of fatphobia and all other forms of disregard for bodies that are not white, thin and able-bodied?JORDAN: When we talk about body politics and body fascism translating into the fashion industry, the industry likes to think of itself as a trendsetter. But I don’t know how much I buy that, especially right now. The fashion industry is almost always a reflection of our politics and culture. That’s not to say there aren’t people in the industry—Black and brown designers, queer and trans designers, disabled designers, fat designers—who are pushing boundaries and making statements through their art and fashion as political commentary. But in this current moment of Ozempic, things have really shifted.New Year’s 2023, there was a noticeable shift in the industry. I think a lot of us saw it coming, especially given how the conversations around fatness started changing when Ozempic was introduced. A lot of people predicted this moment, including Imani Barbarin, who was creating content back in 2020 warning us about ableism and fatphobia as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic.MAYA: I definitely felt that. I think COVID-19, this global pandemic, opened the door to intense anxiety around health. There was also this desire to return to normal after the lockdown, even though the pandemic is still ongoing. But after the end of lockdown, people craved a return to normalcy. It’s also this desire to go back to simpler, more “innocent” times. That translates into wanting ultra-thinness, wanting whiteness. Particularly, there was a push to see healthy and fit bodies after millions of people died and we had to slow down during lockdown. We didn’t want to see sickness or disease. We didn’t want to see disabled people. We wanted to see healthy, fit bodies. So, we became even more anti-fat, and terms like the “R-word” began resurfacing. This moment isn’t just about vitriol; it’s about the desire to dismiss disabled and fat people from public life.JORDAN: A lot of anti-fatness came into play almost immediately as we saw fatness being blamed for COVID deaths. That is incredibly relevant when we talk about this health anxiety because when you tell people, “Oh, you’re going to die of COVID because you’re fat,” then of course, the cultural response is going to be “Okay. Well, I’m not going to be fat. I’m going to do everything in my power to not be fat so I don’t die and if I get COVID I can be okay.” Even though we know that that’s not how this works, that many thin, “healthy,” able-bodied people have died of COVID and many continue to suffer from the severe effects of long COVID.MAYA: I would also add that COVID showed a lot of people how the government will abandon you. “If I don’t have health insurance, I better be fit and healthy. I can’t be fat because I can’t trust the state to take care of me.” This reflects the ways in which this country, focused on capitalist accumulation, is willing to sacrifice any human life that gets in the way of profit. I’m not sure how many people fully grasp the totality of it, but I think most folks have a basic understanding of the horrors of our healthcare system right now. Watching so many people drop dead in the early months of the lockdown made it clear: “I can’t be fat or disabled because, literally, the triage protocols are designed to let fat and disabled people die.”JORDAN: Capitalism is comfortable letting us die, and the solution becomes spending $1,000 a month on a blockbuster drug. Even elevating this drug as a “magic” solution—people call it a magic drug, right? There are claims that it helps curb addiction, alcoholism, and so much more. The list goes on and on. People will tell you semaglutide can solve literally any problem you’re struggling with. And I think people need it to be true, for their sanity, because the reality is not so simple. We want it to be, “Oh, I take this pill or shot, and I’ll be healthy, and I won’t have to struggle.” But that’s just not true. We’ve seen this before—every 10 or 20 years, there’s a new magic drug. It just seems that critical thinking is missing here. We’re not questioning who benefits from this.I see a lot of people acknowledging the damage of weight stigma while promoting semaglutides as a solution. And I think that’s really interesting because we’re acknowledging a systemic issue and then offering an individual solution for it. Charging people $1,000 a month for this individual solution to a systemic issue. Even if Ozempic were a solution—which it’s not—but following their logic, if they’re presenting it as the answer, Medicaid doesn’t cover Ozempic. Medicaid doesn’t cover any weight loss medication. And we know that people who live in poverty, statistically, are more likely to be fat. So we’re gatekeeping this magic drug from the people most impacted by what they call a disease. They’re saying, “You have a disease, here’s a magic drug to cure you,” but because you’re poor, we’re not going to give it to you. And why is that?MAYA: Who’s it really for?JORDAN: Eradicating fatness does not eradicate anti-fatness. And the reality is that fat people have always existed.MAYA: There’s something I’ve noticed more and more in terms of anti-fat harassment online: “There’s Ozempic now, so there’s no excuse to look like that.” Now Ozempic has become more than what it actually is. It’s become this mythic drug with which you can lose half of your body weight instead of the reality of around 15 to 20 pounds. I think fashion does go hand in hand with our political moment. I’ve been reflecting a lot on Nazi Germany and the collaborators, and how brands like HUGO BOSS, which produced Nazi military uniforms, played a role. It’s interesting seeing figures like Ivanka Trump and Usha Vance dressed in custom couture for the presidential inauguration, especially after the 2016 Trump administration, when many fashion brands made a spectacle of saying they wouldn’t dress or collaborate with them. This election marked a big shift.I want to talk about this shift, especially how it’s affected us as plus-size models. Since 2020, the introduction of Ozempic as a blockbuster drug, and the end of lockdown, we’ve seen a decrease in opportunities. There’s been a push to get rid of the “COVID-15” and return to normal, which has led to fewer jobs for plus-size models, fewer opportunities on the runway, and even models being dropped from agencies because there are no jobs for them. I’d love to hear your thoughts on this.JORDAN: I think it’s interesting because, after the start of the lockdown, there was a big push for increased representation of different body sizes. In 2021, it seemed there was more mainstream support for body diversity in commercials and larger companies. Then, it felt like a sharp backlash, as if they pushed too far. This is the trap of representation—when there’s representation without protections, without tangible changes, or without broad-scale education. We see this with transness as well. There’s representation of trans people, but particularly with trans women, this hyper-visibility leads to pushback through transmisogyny, especially for Black trans women, who are exposed to really serious violence.MAYA: What you’re making me think about is that the uprisings of 2020, particularly the George Floyd and Breonna Taylor protests, that led to that brief moment of increased visibility. Black liberation, both in the U.S. and globally, opened the door for other movements to have space and gain attention. In this case, we’re talking about the performance of representation, but I think it still matters. The increased body diversity in 2020-2021, with more fat, disabled, trans, and darker-skinned models, is rooted in the work of the Black Freedom Struggle Black liberation is key to collective liberation and cannot be downplayed. As we already mentioned, anti-fatness is tied to anti-Blackness, so it makes sense that fat models also had that brief moment, as we saw brands perform their “diversity” with black squares and weak gestures. Ultimately, we know that despite creating diversity and inclusion roles and work plans, these changes have been rolled back in the past year. But the foundation of that brief moment is rooted in Black liberation.JORDAN: Something that I have always found really frustrating in fat liberation spaces is the whitewashing of fat liberation through the mainstreaming of body positivity, where it’s seen as a cis white lady thing. When you actually engage with fat liberation work, it has always had its roots in Black liberation and the people who are producing the most pivotal texts in fat studies are fat Black queer people like Da’Shaun L. Harrison, Roxanne Gay, Kiese Laymon…MAYA: It’s like the liberal dilution of that work.JORDAN: That hyper-focus on representation leaves fat people vulnerable, because people don’t fully understand what they’re fighting for or against. We often name random fat influencers as our leaders, but they’re not equipped for this work. They’re not activists, nor have they studied liberation, especially fat liberation. It’s interesting who gets labeled as activists in this field. People, not necessarily you or I, allow ourselves to be continually let down by those who aren’t qualified. Just because someone has a million followers and is fat doesn’t mean they can tell you how to love yourself. “Tell me how to love myself” will never liberate you. It might give you tools to self-advocate, but it’s not the solution.MAYA: It’s not about love. Institutions can’t love us. This is about systemic anti-fatness, it’s about whether we can live with dignity or have our lives cut short by others’ fat discrimination and neglect. I also want to uplift Andrea Shaw Nevins, who wrote The Embodiment of Disobedience. She doesn’t get enough credit for naming fat Black women’s contributions to the politics of fat liberation, almost 20 years ago.We should also touch on anti-fatness in relation to militarism and imperialism, especially in this time of ongoing genocides. I want to bring up a Jerusalem Post article from October 2023 that discussed using the “stress from the Israel-Hamas war to lose weight.” I also want to address how the war on obesity, declared by the Bush administration in 2002 before the Iraq War, framed obesity as a bigger threat than terrorism in the United States. The U.S. Surgeon General Richard Carmona even called obesity “the terror within.”JORDAN: The war on terror, the war on drugs, the war on obesity, all of these quasi ‘wars’ are waged by the US government to keep us distracted, fighting each other so we don’t fight them. You’re telling me that while we’re witnessing multiple genocides the thing that we should be most focused on is keeping our bodies snatched?MAYA: Meanwhile, people are starving a couple of miles away from you—being decimated— in fact.JORDAN: I also think that there’s something in the government wanting the people to be comfortable starving: to keep people weak, to keep people in line, and to say “Don’t eat. It’s better for you.” MAYA: The declaration of a ‘war on obesity’ frames fatness as an emergency because we need people to be fit—to be police officers or part of the military. The United States requires a steady supply of recruits for the military-industrial complex, which needs soldiers to keep the war machine running.JORDAN: There is a billboard that I’ve seen many times in my life for bariatric surgery, where it is a before and after, and the before is just some fat guy, and the after, he’s in a fucking police uniform. They said the quiet part out loud: “Be skinny. Arm the state.” When we talk about Israel specifically, that’s also a country that has mandatory military service.MAYA: Even the way Israelis talk about their military—claiming to have a bunch of vegans—reflects a focus on health and beauty. Discussions about their military might, particularly through the violence they enact on Palestinians through occupation, are bolstered by conversations about Israelis’ perceived health and beauty. The emphasis on “sexiness” and the popularity of white supremacist and fatphobic views on media platforms today support the maintenance of empire. Fatphobia, as an ideology, is a part of the upkeep of empire.JORDAN: It’s common to see declarations of allegiance to white supremacy followed by hatred of fat people. Most recently, Kanye West’s tweets began with “I am a Nazi” and ended with “I hate fat woke bitches.” Even outside of Kanye, there’s an influencer who posted on TikTok saying, “I hate liberals, love Trump, and hate fat people.” Hatred of fatness is often central to these declarations. MAYA: I would argue that fatphobia, anti-fatness, and ableism are symptoms of fascist, authoritarian ideologies, which are now consolidating in places like the White House and across Europe. Many nations are experiencing a new fascist turn. Fat and disabled communities serve as universal scapegoats, with people across the political spectrum—whether fascist or leftist—claiming they have no place in the revolution.JORDAN: I see this often when discussing disability and fatness, where even people in the disability community say, “You did it to yourself,” implying no right to complain. For many, including me, disability and fatness are intertwined; my disability causes weight gain, and for many fat disabled people, inaccessibility stems from fatness, not just separate disabilities. Capitalism shifts the blame onto individuals instead of addressing the systems that keep us sick.What does it mean to push back when culture has regressed in the way that it has, but also regressed and got smarter? When we’re seeing a sort of blatant co-option of the language of fat liberation, the language of liberation in general, I think we have to go back to the basics. We have to go back to education. We have to go back to having these conversations with people on a one- to-one level and meeting people where they are.MAYA: To be frank, the pendulum has swung this way, and in 10 years we might see a swing back towards liberal diversity, or rather the liberal politics of representation and diversity with the next wave of movement organizing that happens in U.S. empire. I think then we’ll see a lot of the fashion industry, who at this moment are being outwardly fatphobic, pretend like they weren’t. There’s going to be a lot of revisionism.There’s always going to be fat people here. Fat people have made it through multiple eras of regressive body politics. Fat people have been here and always will be because you can feed two people exactly the same way, and just because of different genetics and the diverse human experience, they will carry weight in different parts of their body. They’re not going to look the same. It’s the beauty of humanity, and fascism really tries to pretend like that’s not true: that we can get uniformity, we can get Nazi ‘Aryan’ beauty. As fucked up as that regime was—as horrific and unimaginable as the loss of life was—ultimately, this type of thinking does not work. You’ll never be able to eradicate fat and disabled people out of existence.JORDAN: Obviously it’s so cliche, and everyone is saying it, but community really is key. We have each other. I’m not a pessimist, but fat people saw it coming. If I had a message for thin people, it would be to listen to fat people, listen to fat, Black, and disabled people specifically. This cultural moment should not have been a surprise to anyone, because it was not a surprise to us.MAYA: Global pandemics have always led to increased ableism, fatphobia, and regressive body politics as people try to regain control after mass loss of life and widespread disability. This pandemic, in particular, has left millions with long COVID and new chronic disabilities, forced to create a new way of life that many are unprepared for. Instead of accommodations or a world that values disability justice, there’s been a move by the ruling class towards fear and control, with a push to return to normal by scapegoating fat and disabled people.Like you said, it’s crucial to listen to those who’ve studied history and the work of long-time organizers. History doesn’t repeat itself, but it’s shaped by past choices. This articulation of authoritarianism and regressivism demonstrates that."
}
,
"relatedposts": [
{
"title" : "What We Can Learn from the Inuit Mapping of the Arctic",
"author" : "William Rankin",
"category" : "excerpts",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/inuit-mapping-arctic",
"date" : "2025-12-02 12:49:00 -0500",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/Cover_EIP_Template-Inuit_Map.jpg",
"excerpt" : "This excerpt is from RADICAL CARTOGRAPHY by William Rankin, published by Viking, an imprint of Penguin Publishing Group, a division of Penguin Random House, LLC. Copyright © 2025 by William Rankin.",
"content" : "This excerpt is from RADICAL CARTOGRAPHY by William Rankin, published by Viking, an imprint of Penguin Publishing Group, a division of Penguin Random House, LLC. Copyright © 2025 by William Rankin.In 1994, the Berkeley geographer Bernard Nietschmann made a famous claim about the power of mapping in the global struggle for Indigenous rights. It was a claim about how the tools of historical oppression could be reclaimed by the oppressed: “More Indigenous territory has been claimed by maps than by guns. This assertion has its corollary: more Indigenous territory can be defended and reclaimed by maps than by guns.” The idea was that by putting themselves on the map—documenting their lives and their communities—Indigenous peoples would not be so easy to erase. Nietschmann was working in Central America, often heroically, during a time of violence and displacement, and he inspired a generation of researchers and activists interested in flipping the power structure of state-centric cartography on its head.But despite the spread of bottom-up mapping projects in the past 30 years, perhaps the most successful example of Indigenous mapping actually predates Nietschmann’s call to action. Just one year prior, in 1993, the Inuit of northern Canada signed a treaty creating the territory of Nunavut—the largest self-governing Indigenous territory in the world—and mapping was central to both the negotiation and the outcome. It remains one of the rare cases of Indigenous geographic knowledge decolonizing the world map.So why hasn’t the Inuit project been replicable elsewhere, despite decades more work on Indigenous mapping? The answer lies in the very idea of territory itself, and in particular in one of the most threatened parts of the Inuit landscape today: ice. The winter extent of Arctic sea ice reached a record low earlier this year, and a new low is predicted for the winter ahead. Yet the shrinking ice isn’t just an unshakable sign of Arctic warming; it’s also a poignant reminder of what Nietschmann got right—and what he missed—about the relationship between cartography and power. In particular, it shows how Inuit conceptions of space, place, and belonging are rooted in a dynamic, seasonal geography that’s often completely invisible on Western-style maps.The story begins in the 1970s, when the young Inuit leader Tagak Curley, today considered a “living father” of Nunavut, hired the Arctic anthropologist Milton Freeman to lead a collaborative mapping project of unprecedented scope and ambition. Freeman taught at McMaster University about an hour outside Toronto; he was white, but his wife, Mini Aodla Freeman, was Inuit (she was a translator and later a celebrated writer). Freeman assembled a team of other anthropologists and Arctic geographers—also white—to split the mapping into regions. They called their method the “map biography.” The goal was to capture the life history of every Inuit hunter in cartographic form, recording each person’s memories of where, at any point in their life, they had found roughly three dozen species of wildlife—from caribou and ptarmigan to beluga, narwhal, and seaweed. Each map biography would be a testimony of personal experience.After the mapping was split into regions, about 150 field-workers—almost all Inuit—traveled between 33 northern settlements with a stack of government-issued topographic maps to conduct interviews. Each hunter was asked to draw lines or shapes directly on the maps with colored pens or pencils. The interviewers stayed about 10 weeks in each settlement, visiting most hunters in their own homes, and the final participation rate was an astonishing 85 percent of all adult Inuit men. They collected 1,600 biographies in total, some on maps as large as 10 feet square.Then came the cartographers, back in Ontario: one professor and a team of about 15 students. The first map below (Figure 1) shows how the individual map biographies were transformed into summary maps, one for each community. For every species, the overlap of all hunters’ testimony became a single blob, and then blobs for all species were overlaid to make a complete map. The second map (Figure 2) shows one of the finished atlas pages along the Northwest Passage. The immediate impression is that the Arctic is in no way an empty expanse of barren land and unclaimed mineral riches. It is dense with human activity, necessary for personal and collective survival. The community maps combined to show almost uninterrupted Inuit presence stretching from northern Labrador to the Alaska border.Figure 1: Top left is a simplified version of a “map biography” from a single Inuit hunter, showing his birthplace and the places he hunted caribou, fox, wolf, grizzly bear, moose, and fish at various points in his life. (The original biography would have been drawn over a familiar government-issued topographic map.) The other three maps show how multiple biographies were then combined into patterned blobs for all hunters and all species. (Map courtesy of William Rankin/ Penguin Random House LLC.)Figure 2: A two-page spread from the finished atlas showing the seven kinds of animals hunted from the settlements of Igloolik and Hall Beach, in an area about 500 by 300 miles: caribou, polar bear, walrus, whale, fish, seal, and waterfowl. (Because of the large number of individual species recorded in the map biographies, some species were grouped together in the final maps.) The blobs are a strong, even overpowering figure atop an unusually subtle ground. Notice in particular how difficult it is to distinguish land and water areas, since the dark shading extends beyond coastlines even for individual species. This map in fact includes the Northwest Passage—the famous sea route around the tip of North America—but the crucial Fury and Hecla Strait (named after the two British ships that first learned of, but did not navigate, the passage in 1822) is almost entirely obscured. (Map courtesy of William Rankin/ Penguin Random House LLC.)Nothing about the cartography was meant to be subversive—or even controversial. For the cartographers, the only message was that the Inuit hunted a variety of species over large areas. But look again at the finished map in Figure 2. Yes, a foreground is layered over a background in the usual way, but the visual argument is strikingly different from a typical layered map in, say, a census atlas, where the foreground data doesn’t stray beyond crisp pre-existing borders. Here, in contrast, even the basic distinction between land and water is often obscure. The maps’ content is the facts of species and area; the maps’ argument is that Inuit culture is grounded in a substantially different understanding of territory than the one Western cartography was designed to show.As a result, this new atlas shifted the negotiations between the Inuit and the Canadian government decisively. Not only did the maps provide a legal claim to the Inuit-used land, documenting 750,000 square miles—an area the size of Mexico—but also a claim to the sea, showing an additional 325,000 square miles offshore.It took many years for the full implications to play out, but the erosion of the land–water boundary became central to the Inuit vision. At the time, wildlife on land was managed by the regional Northwest Territories government, while offshore marine species were the responsibility of centralized federal agencies. The Inuit used the atlas to win agreement for a new agency with equal responsibility over both. At the same time, the Inuit also improved their position by offering their offshore claims as evidence the Canadian government would use—not just in the 1980s, but even as recently as 2024—to resist foreign encroachment in the Northwest Passage. The final agreement in 1993 granted the Inuit $1.15 billion in cash, title to about 17 percent of the land in the “settlement area,” representation on several new management agencies, a share of all natural-resource revenue, broad hunting and fishing rights, and a promise that the territory of Nunavut would come into being on April 1, 1999.It’s easy to count this project as a success story, but it’s also important to remember that it depended both on the government’s own interest in negotiation and on the willingness of Indigenous peoples, or at least their leadership, to translate their sense of space onto a map, solidifying what had previously been fluid. It also meant abandoning claims to ancestral lands that had not been used in living experience and provoking new boundary disputes with neighboring, and previously amicable, Indigenous groups. These tradeoffs have led some scholars to critique mapping as only “drawing Indigenous peoples into a modern capitalist economy while maintaining the centrality of state power.” But for the Inuit, the alternatives seemed quite a bit worse.With the more recent proliferation of Indigenous mapping initiatives elsewhere—in Latin America, Africa, and Asia—the tradeoffs have been harder to evaluate. Most governments have shown little interest in addressing Indigenous claims, and when bottom-up mapping has been pushed instead by international nonprofits interested in environmental conservation, the downsides of mapping have often come without any of the upsides.Yet it’s not just the attitude of the state that’s been different; it’s also the cartography. In nearly all these other cases, the finished maps have shown none of the territorial inversion of the Inuit atlas. Instead, Indigenous knowledge is either overlaid on an existing base map in perfectly legible form, or it’s used to construct a new base map of a remarkably conventional sort, using the same visual vocabulary as Western maps.Did the Inuit project just show the data so clearly that its deeper implications were immediately apparent? No, not really, since the great irony here is that the cartographers were in fact quite dissatisfied. Follow-up surveys reached the conclusion that the atlas was only “moderately successful” by their usual mapmaking standards.The Inuit atlas was a kind of happy accident—one that doesn’t conform to any of the usual stories about Indigenous mapping, in Canada or elsewhere. The lesson here isn’t that maps should be as Indigenous as possible, or that they should be as orthodox as possible. These maps were neither. My take is simpler: the atlas shows that maps can, in fact, support alternative conceptions of space—and that showing space in a different way is crucial.The possibilities aren’t endless, but they’re broader than we might think. Plotting different sorts of data is a necessary step, but no less important are the relationships between that data and the assumptions of what lies below. For the Inuit, these assumptions were about land, water, and territory. These were in the background both visually and politically, and they were upstaged by an unexpectedly provocative foreground. The layers did not behave as they were meant to, and despite the tradeoffs, they allowed an Indigenous community to fight for their home and their way of life."
}
,
{
"title" : "Malcolm X and Islam: U.S. Islamophobia Didn’t Start with 9/11",
"author" : "Collis Browne",
"category" : "essays",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/malcolm-x-and-islam",
"date" : "2025-11-27 14:58:00 -0500",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/life-malcolm-3.jpg",
"excerpt" : "",
"content" : "Anti-Muslim hate has been deeply engrained and intertwined with anti-Black racism in the United States for well over 60 years, far longer than most of us are taught or are aware.As the EIP team dug into design research for the new magazine format of our first anniversary issue, we revisited 1960s issues of LIFE magazine—and landed on the March 1965 edition, published just after the assassination of Malcolm X.The reporting is staggering in its openness: blatantly anti-Black and anti-Muslim in a way that normalizes white supremacy at its most fundamental level. The anti-Blackness, while horrifying, is not surprising. This was a moment when, despite the formal dismantling of Jim Crow, more than 10,000 “sundown towns” still existed across the country, segregation remained the norm, and racial terror structured daily life.What shocked our team was the nakedness of the anti-Muslim propaganda.This was not yet framed as anti-Arab in the way Western Islamophobia is often framed today. Arab and Middle Eastern people were not present in the narrative at all. Instead, what was being targeted was organized resistance to white supremacy—specifically, the adoption of Islam by Black communities as a source of political power, dignity, and self-determination. From this moment, we can trace a clear ideological line from anti-Muslim sentiment rooted in anti-Black racism in the 1960s to the anti-Arab, anti-MENA, and anti-SWANA racism that saturates Western culture today.The reporting leaned heavily on familiar colonial tropes: the implication of “inter-tribal” violence, the suggestion that resistance to white supremacy is itself a form of reverse racism or inherent aggression, and the detached, almost smug tone surrounding the violent death of a cultural leader.Of course, the Nation of Islam and Elijah Muhammad represent only expressions within an immense and diverse global Muslim world—spanning Morocco, Sudan, the Gulf, Iraq, Pakistan, Indonesia, and far beyond. Yet U.S. cultural and military power has long blurred these distinctions, collapsing complexity into a singular enemy image.It is worth naming this history clearly and connecting the dots: U.S. Islamophobia did not begin with 9/11. It is rooted in a much older racial project—one that has always braided anti-Blackness and anti-Muslim sentiment together in service of white supremacy, at home and abroad."
}
,
{
"title" : "The Billionaire Who Bought the Met Gala: What the Bezoses’ Check Means for Fashion’s Future",
"author" : "Louis Pisano",
"category" : "essays",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/the-billionaire-who-bought-the-met-gala",
"date" : "2025-11-27 10:41:00 -0500",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/Cover_EIP_TBesos_MET_Galajpg.jpg",
"excerpt" : "On the morning of November 17, 2025, the Metropolitan Museum of Art announced that Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sánchez Bezos would serve as the sole lead sponsors of the 2026 Met Gala and its accompanying Costume Institute exhibition, “Costume Art”. Saint Laurent and Condé Nast were listed as supporting partners. To be clear, this is not a co-sponsorship. It is not “in association with.” It is the first time in the modern history of the gala that the headline slot, previously occupied by Louis Vuitton, TikTok, or a discreet old-money surname, has been handed to a tech billionaire and his wife. The donation amount remains undisclosed, but sources familiar with the negotiations place it comfortably north of seven figures, in line with the checks that helped the event raise $22 million last year.",
"content" : "On the morning of November 17, 2025, the Metropolitan Museum of Art announced that Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sánchez Bezos would serve as the sole lead sponsors of the 2026 Met Gala and its accompanying Costume Institute exhibition, “Costume Art”. Saint Laurent and Condé Nast were listed as supporting partners. To be clear, this is not a co-sponsorship. It is not “in association with.” It is the first time in the modern history of the gala that the headline slot, previously occupied by Louis Vuitton, TikTok, or a discreet old-money surname, has been handed to a tech billionaire and his wife. The donation amount remains undisclosed, but sources familiar with the negotiations place it comfortably north of seven figures, in line with the checks that helped the event raise $22 million last year.Within hours of the announcement, the Met’s Instagram post was overrun with comments proclaiming the gala “dead.” On TikTok and X, users paired declarations of late-stage capitalism with memes of the museum staircase wrapped in Amazon boxes. Not that this was unexpected. Anyone paying attention could see it coming for over a decade.When billionaires like Bezos, whose Amazon warehouses reported injury rates nearly double the industry average in 2024 and whose fashion supply chain has been linked to forced labor and poverty wages globally, acquire influence over prestigious institutions like the Met Museum through sponsorships, it risks commodifying fashion as a tool for not only personal but corporate image-laundering. To put it simply: who’s going to bite the hand that feeds them? Designers, editors, and curators will have little choice but to turn a blind eye to keep the money flowing and the lights on.Back in 2012, Amazon co-chaired the “Schiaparelli and Prada” gala, and honorary chair Jeff Bezos showed up in a perfectly respectable tux with then-wife MacKenzie Scott by his side and an Anna Wintour-advised pocket square. After his divorce from Scott in 2019, Bezos made a solo appearance at the Met Gala, signaling that he was becoming a familiar presence in fashion circles on his own. Of course, by that point, he already had Lauren Sánchez. Fast forward to 2020: print advertising was crumbling, and Anna Wintour co-signed The Drop, a set of limited CFDA collections sold exclusively on Amazon, giving the company a veneer of fashion credibility. By 2024, Sánchez made her Met debut in a mirrored Oscar de la Renta gown personally approved by Wintour, signaling that the Bezos orbit was now squarely inside the fashion world.Then, the political world started to catch up, as it always does. In January 2025, Sánchez and Bezos sat three rows behind President-elect Donald Trump at the inauguration. Amazon wrote a one-million-dollar check to Trump’s inaugural fund, and Bezos, once mocked by Trump as “Jeff Bozo,” publicly congratulated Trump on an “extraordinary political comeback.” By June 2025, Bezos and Sánchez became cultural and political mainstays: Sánchez married Bezos in Venice, wearing a Dolce & Gabbana gown Wintour had helped select. This landed Sánchez the digital cover of American Vogue almost immediately afterward. Wintour quietly handed day-to-day control of the magazine to Chloe Malle but kept the Met Gala, the global title, and her Condé Nast equity stake, cementing a new era of fashion power where money, influence, and optics are inseparable.Underneath all of it, the quiet hum of Amazon’s fashion machine continued to whirr. By 2024, the company already controlled 16.2 percent of every dollar Americans spent on clothing, footwear, and accessories—more than Walmart, Target, Macy’s, and Nordstrom combined. That same year, it generated $34.7 billion in U.S. apparel and footwear revenue that year, with the women’s category alone on pace to top $40 billion. No legacy house has ever had that volume of real-time data on what people actually try on, keep, or return in shame. Amazon can react in weeks rather than seasons, reordering winning pieces, tweaking existing ones, and killing unpopular options before they’re even produced at scale.Wintour did more than simply observe this shift; she engineered a soft landing by bringing Amazon in when it was still somewhat uncool and seen mostly as a discount retailer, lending it credibility when it needed legitimacy, and spending the last two years turning Sánchez from tabloid footnote to Vogue cover star. The Condé Nast sale rumors that began circulating in July 2025, complete with talk of Wintour cashing out her equity and Sánchez taking a creative role, have been denied by every official mouthpiece. But they have also refused to die, because the timeline is simply too tidy.The clearest preview of what billionaire ownership can do to a cultural institution remains Bezos’ other pet project, The Washington Post. Bezos bought it for $250 million in 2013, saved it from bankruptcy, and built it into a profitable digital operation with 2.5 million subscribers. Then, in October 2024, he personally blocked a planned editorial endorsement of Kamala Harris. More than 250,000 subscribers canceled in the following days. By February 2025, the opinion section was restructured around “personal liberties and free markets,” triggering another exodus and the resignation of editorial page editor David Shipley. Former executive editor Marty Baron called it “craven.” The timing, just months after Bezos began warming to the incoming Trump administration, was not lost on anyone. The story didn’t stop there: in the last few days, U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance revealed he had texted Bezos suggesting the hiring of a right-leaning Breitbart journalist, Matthew Boyle, to run the Post’s political coverage. This is a clear signal of how staffing decisions at a storied paper now sit within the same power matrix that funds the Met Gala and shapes culture, media, and politics alike. It’s a tangled, strategic web—all of Bezos’ making.It’s curious that, in the same 30-day window that the Trump DOJ expanded its antitrust inquiry into Amazon, specifically how its algorithms favor its own products over third-party sellers, including many fashion brands, the MET, a city-owned museum, handed the keys of its marquee event to the man whose company now wields outsized influence over designers’ fortunes and faces regulatory scrutiny from the administration he helped reinstall. This is not sponsorship; it’s leverage. Wintour once froze Melania Trump out of Vogue because she could afford to.But she cannot freeze out Sánchez or Bezos. Nor does she want to.So on the first Monday in May, the museum doors will open as they always do for the Met Gala. The carpet will still be red (or whatever color the theme demands). The photographs of celebrities posing in their interpretations of “Costume Art” will still break the internet. Andrew Bolton’s exhibition, roughly 200 objects tracing the dressed body across five millennia, displayed in the newly renamed Condé Nast Galleries, will still be brilliant. But the biggest check will come from the couple who already control 16 percent of America’s clothing spend, who own The Washington Post, and who sat three rows behind Trump at the inauguration. Everything else, guest list tweaks, livestream deals, shoppable moments, will flow from that single source of money and power. That is who now has the final word on the most influential night in American fashion."
}
]
}