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" : "Argentina’s Migration “Security Turn”: How Javier Milei’s Migration Policies Are Reshaping Belonging in Argentina",
"author" : "Marina Simonet Hernandez Jurado",
"category" : "essays",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/argentinas-migration-security-turn",
"date" : "2026-03-17 10:39:00 -0400",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/Screenshot-2026-03-12-at-4.14.21PM.jpg",
"excerpt" : "",
"content" : "In late January, Argentina’s Ministry of Security published a video on Instagram showing federal forces conducting an operation in Villa Celina, a working-class neighborhood in La Matanza, reportedly searching for undocumented immigrants. Days earlier, a Colombian-born trans man who had requested asylum in Argentina, was detained at the airport for six days, unable to communicate with his family. According to La Izquierda Diario, his asylum claim was rejected, and he was placed on a flight to Porto Alegre, Brazil, under the classification of a “false tourist. ” According to an X post by Alejandra Monteoliva, Argentina’s Minister of National Security, “in December and January, nearly 5,000 foreign nationals were either denied entry or expelled from the country”. These episodes unfolded amid significant changes to Argentina’s immigration governance. Before Javier Milei took office in December 2023, immigration policy fell under the Ministry of the Interior, but former Minister Patricia Bullrich transferred oversight of immigration to the Ministry of National Security in November 2025, effectively redefining migration not as a matter of civil administration, but as an issue of national security. There have been no large-scale arrests of undocumented migrants in Argentina. Yet the symbolic force of security operations in poor neighborhoods and the high-profile expulsion of an asylum seeker signals to a broader political narrative. Like Donald Trump’s “law and order” rhetoric in the United States, Milei’s discourse relies on nationalist appeals and moral distinctions between “decent Argentinians” and those portrayed as threats. Slogans such as “el que las hace las paga” (an idiom similar to “do the crime, do the time”) compress complex social realities into punitive certainties, repositioning immigrants, workers, and other vulnerable groups as subjects of suspicion rather than individuals with rights. The correlation between Milei’s and Trump’s anti-immigrant policies is clear from the dates of implementation: Javier Milei took office in December 2023 and made no major changes to immigration policies until May 2025 (only five months after Trump took office) with the publication of the decree 366/2025 that announced modifications to the Migration Law, especially in article 114 where the creation of the “Auxiliary Migration Police” was announced. Furthermore, the desire to emulate Trump’s ICE is explicit even from members of the Milei administration, as reflected in these statements published by La Nacion, by a source close to Patricia Bullrich’s office: “The ANM (National Migration Agency) will adopt a security-driven approach. It will be modeled on the United States Department of Homeland Security, including its Border Patrol and the TSA [Transportation Security Administration, which oversees airport screening]. We are working to establish a civilian-police force operating at all of Argentina’s border crossings — an agency that centralizes migration control and maintains comprehensive records of individuals with criminal backgrounds”. Argentina’s Ambivalent Immigration TraditionArgentina’s national mythology celebrates immigration more explicitly than that of most countries in the Americas—a tradition rooted not only in historical narrative but also in constitutional language, and linked to the country’s vast, sparsely populated territory. The 1853 Preamble famously commits the nation to “secure the blessings of liberty … for all men of the world who wish to dwell on Argentine soil,” embedding an explicit invitation to migrants within the country’s founding legal imagination and framing hospitality as a foundational principle rather than a contingent policy choice. Dominant narratives credit European migration in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries with shaping Argentina’s economic and cultural development, as well as its national identity—one that has often imagined Argentines as descendants of Europeans and, therefore, distinct from the rest of Latin America. However, enthusiasm for immigration was never universal. In 1899, physician and intellectual José María Ramos Mejía wrote in Las multitudes Argentinas that immigration had “made Buenos Aires ill,” contaminating the traditions of established families. This anxiety reflected elite fears of demographic change, urban disorder, and political radicalism. In the context of the country’s expanding capitalist economy, these fears translated into hostility toward labor organizing, often portrayed as a foreign and subversive activity, as unions began to develop under the influence of anarchist and socialist ideas, including organizations such as the FORA, the country’s first major anarchist labor federation, as documented by Working Class History. The state also responded with legislation facilitating deportations, most notably the 1902 Ley de Residencia (Law 4144), which allowed the executive to expel foreigners deemed a threat to public order. Today’s nostalgia for a “good immigration” rests on two fragile premises. First, European migration is interpreted through a contemporary lens that imagines Europe as inherently prosperous and orderly, projecting present-day “First World” status onto a past marked by poverty, instability, and social conflict. Second, that race did not matter. Yet Argentina’s self-image as a predominantly white nation emerged alongside the violent erasure of much of its Indigenous population, including state campaigns such as the Conquest of the Desert, and the marginalization of Afro-Argentine communities. The celebration of European immigration has always been intertwined with racial hierarchy, evident in the markedly different treatment given to European migrants compared to those from neighboring countries such as Paraguay and Bolivia, who were racialized in distinct ways. The distinction between “good” and “bad” immigrants persists, now recorded through the language of legality and security. The False Security ArgumentThe Milei administration justifies its migration policies in the name of public safety. However, official data complicates that claim. Administrative data from the National Registry of Persons (RENAPER) indicates that Argentina has roughly 2. 3 million foreign-born residents, representing about 5 percent of the total population. Compared to countries where immigration dominates electoral politics, Argentina’s foreign-born population remains relatively small. According to 2023 national penitentiary statistics, foreigners account for roughly 6 percent of Argentina’s incarcerated population, approximately in line with their share of the country’s population. These figures suggest that migrants are not overrepresented within Argentina’s criminal justice system. Essentially, migration has not been a central axis of political instability or social crisis in recent years. Framing migration as a primary security concern appears disproportionate to the available evidence and contrasts with claims by President Javier Milei that migrants disproportionately benefit from public services such as health care and education or contribute significantly to Argentina’s economic crisis. Emulation and Political StrategyThe parallels with Trump-era discourse are not accidental. Javier Milei has openly aligned himself rhetorically with global right-wing leaders who frame migration as both a cultural and criminal threat. The emphasis on border control, internal enforcement, and moral categorization mirrors strategies used by U. S. and European conservatives to consolidate political identity around fear and grievance, while also resonating with broader regional trends. Argentina is not an isolated case in the adoption of restrictive migration policies; rather, it reflects a broader regional trend. In Chile, President-elect José Antonio Kast campaigned on proposals that included large-scale deportations of undocumented migrants. Similarly, in Costa Rica, President Rodrigo Chaves Robles declared a state of emergency in 2023 in response to migrants transiting the country en route to the United States, as reported by Reuters. In a recent interview with Louis Sarkozy, son of former French president Nicolas Sarkozy, Milei argued that when a migrant “does not adapt to your culture,” it constitutes an “invasion” capable of “altering the cultural foundations” of a country. Yet beneath this security narrative lies a broader political project. The administration’s economic agenda (including labor reforms framed as “modernization”) favors deregulation and business interests. In this context, anti-immigrant rhetoric functions less as a response to empirical conditions than as a symbolic instrument: it constructs an internal adversary while redirecting attention away from structural economic transformation. The coherence of this narrative is further complicated by reports, including those published by The New York Times, suggesting an alleged agreement between Trump and Milei for Argentina to receive deported migrants from the United States. In this sense, security has become the language through which a deeper class realignment is articulated. Argentina’s history shows that debates over immigration have often reflected anxieties about identity, race, and labor control rather than measurable threats. The current turn toward securitization thus represents not merely a policy shift, but a transformation in democratic language itself. The question, then, is not whether Argentina faces a migration crisis, the available data suggests it does not, but what political purpose is served by insisting that it does, and what this insistence reveals about the broader direction of governance under Milei. By constructing an internal enemy embodied by vulnerable populations, the government seeks to redirect attention to politically expedient scapegoats. This logic is reflected not only in the immigration policies described here, but also in labor reforms that frame workers’ rights as a burden on public spending, the repression of retirees demanding improved pensions, and new restrictions on protest and the right to strike that limit collective organization. Taken together, these measures suggest that immigration restrictions form part of a broader institutional reconfiguration, one that prioritizes the projection of authority over the resolution of concrete social and economic challenges. In doing so, the government reframes manageable social dynamics as existential threats, a shift that risks undermining the very constitutional principles it claims to defend, both domestically and in its international positioning. "
}
,
{
"title" : "Borrowed Geography: How US Bases Serve the Empire",
"author" : "Jwan Zreiq",
"category" : "essays",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/borrowed-geography",
"date" : "2026-03-17 10:03:00 -0400",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/us-syria.jpg",
"excerpt" : "Who are the bases for? For decades, the United States and Arab regimes have rehearsed the same script: the lie that American military presence in the region protects the Arab world, to preserve stability, and to defend against external threats. Hundreds of bases, tens of thousands of troops, naval fleets parked in the Gulf, all of it, supposedly, for Arab safety. But if protection is the purpose, then the question answers itself: protected from what, exactly? The Arab region has endured more wars, more destruction, and more instability since the establishment of these bases than in any comparable period before them. Iraq was invaded. Syria was shattered. Yemen was starved. Libya was bombed into state collapse. Palestine remains under occupation and siege. If this is what protection looks like, then the word has lost all meaning.",
"content" : "Who are the bases for? For decades, the United States and Arab regimes have rehearsed the same script: the lie that American military presence in the region protects the Arab world, to preserve stability, and to defend against external threats. Hundreds of bases, tens of thousands of troops, naval fleets parked in the Gulf, all of it, supposedly, for Arab safety. But if protection is the purpose, then the question answers itself: protected from what, exactly? The Arab region has endured more wars, more destruction, and more instability since the establishment of these bases than in any comparable period before them. Iraq was invaded. Syria was shattered. Yemen was starved. Libya was bombed into state collapse. Palestine remains under occupation and siege. If this is what protection looks like, then the word has lost all meaning. The Scale of PresenceThe American military footprint in the Arab region is staggering. The United States maintains forces in more than a dozen countries, with at least nineteen military sites, eight considered permanent. Qatar hosts Al Udeid Air Base, the largest US installation in the Middle East, serving as the forward headquarters for US Central Command with around 10,000 troops. As of mid-2025, roughly 40,000 American service members were deployed across the region. The narrative behind the purpose of these bases were sold to Arab governments, and by extension, to Arab publics, as shields against regional threats, primarily framed as Iran. But the record tells a very different story. They have served as launch pads for the destruction of Arab states, not their protection. What the Bases Did to IraqThe invasion of Iraq in 2003 remains the most damning evidence, and a vital one to read alongside what is happening today with Iran. Here is an Arab country, a founding member of the Arab League, destroyed using bases hosted by neighbouring Arab states. Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, and others became staging grounds for an invasion whose human cost is staggering. Population-based studies estimate over one million Iraqi deaths resulting from the war, while the Iraq Body Count project has documented between 186,901 and 210,296 violent civilian deaths. Brown University’s Costs of War project estimates that over 940,000 people were killed by direct post-9/11 war violence across Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, and Pakistan, with more than 432,000 of those being civilians. The bases did not protect Iraq. The bases destroyed Iraq. And the Arab states that hosted those bases were complicit, whether they admitted it or not, in the annihilation of an Arab neighbour. If the bases exist to protect Arab nations from external aggression, then what do you call an invasion launched from those very bases against an Arab capital?At the time of writing this, the pattern is repeating, and it is vital to read what is happening today alongside the record of Iraq. The US-Israeli alliance has launched strikes on a sovereign nation, Iran, calling it preemptive. Unnecessary, unprovoked, and deeply violent. What much Western media has failed to acknowledge is that the strike is unlawful. Not a grey area. A criminal act under international law. The current escalation is driven not by any genuine Iranian or Arab interest but by Israeli strategic calculations that position American bases as staging grounds for strikes against a neighbouring, non-Arab, Muslim-majority country with which Arab states share geography, trade, and centuries of cultural exchange. The shield became the target. Exactly as predicted. Netanyahu’s Guarantee; Peace Is Always One War AwayThere is no better illustration of Israel’s role as the architect of this configuration than the words of Benjamin Netanyahu himself, whose career has been defined by a single recurring promise: destroy the current enemy, and peace will come. The enemy changes. The promise never does and it never will. In the 1980s, Netanyahu told Pat Robertson that the Soviet Union was “a major force” behind international terrorism and that “if you take away the Soviet Union, its chief proxy, the PLO, international terrorism would collapse. ” In 2002, Netanyahu appeared before the US Congress to lobby for the invasion of Iraq. He told lawmakers: “If you take out Saddam’s regime, I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations in the region. ” Predicting that regime change in Baghdad would trigger the implosion of Iran. In 2015, he returned to Congress to sabotage the Iran nuclear deal, claiming it would guarantee an Iranian bomb. The same language of certainty he had used about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction, which never existed. In 2024, he stood before Congress again: “Israel will fight until we destroy Hamas’s military capabilities and its rule in Gaza. That’s what total victory means. ” He framed every front as one war: “When we fight Hamas, we’re fighting Iran. When we fight Hezbollah, we’re fighting Iran. When we fight the Houthis, we’re fighting Iran”. The normalisation agreements of the Abraham Accords were about integrating Israel into a security architecture in which American bases, Arab territory, and Israeli strategic interests become indistinguishable. Even the $142 billion Saudi arms deal is constrained by America’s guarantee that Israel receives more advanced weaponry than any Arab state, a policy known as the “qualitative military edge. ” A deal that, as Foreign Affairs documented, was designed to normalise relations with Israel without demanding, in exchange, the establishment of an independent Palestinian state. The bases that were once justified as protecting Arab sovereignty now serve a framework that prioritises Israeli security at Arab expense. At no point in this trajectory have the bases served the interests of ordinary Arab citizens. They have served American power projection, Israeli regional ambitions, and the narrow survival calculations of ruling elites who exchange sovereignty for patronage. The geography has been borrowed for decades. The return on that investment has been the destruction of Iraq, missiles falling on Doha, and trillions flowing in the wrong direction. The Geography Reclaims ItselfBut the myth is fracturing. In January 2026, the Iraqi army assumed full control of Ain al-Asad Airbase after a complete US withdrawal, ending more than two decades of American military presence in western Iraq. In Jordan, daily protests after October 7 forced the government to recall its ambassador from Israel; Israel evacuated its own and has not replaced its diplomatic mission since. In Morocco, which normalised relations with Israel in 2020, public support for normalisation collapsed from 31 percent to 13 percent after October 7, and in 2025, the country’s largest labour union called for banning Israeli-bound ships from Moroccan waters and organised protests in support of Gaza. The 2025 Arab Opinion Index, the largest public opinion survey in the Arab world, covering 40,000 respondents across fifteen countries, found that 87 percent of Arabs oppose recognition of Israel, citing its status as a “settler-colonial state occupying Palestine”. Despite the Abraham Accords, support for normalisation dropped even further, including in signatory states. This is not passive discontent. It is a political force constraining governments that would otherwise deepen their alignment with Washington and Tel Aviv. Within the Arab world, a generation of writers, organisers, and researchers from Azmi Bishara’s work on sovereignty and the failure of normalisation, to Abdel Razzaq Takriti’s recovery of Gulf revolutionary traditions, to the policy analysts at Al-Shabaka dismantling the security-sector myth, is building the analytical tools to name what previous generations could not say aloud: that the security architecture sold to them was never designed for their protection, and that genuine regional security begins with sovereignty–not the kind performed at summits and investment forums, but the kind that decides who can and cannot wage war from your soil. The Yemeni blockade of Red Sea shipping, whatever one’s position on the Houthis may be,, demonstrated something that decades of Arab League communiqués never did: that collective action rooted in solidarity with Palestine can materially disrupt the logistics of empire. "
}
,
{
"title" : "Kurdistan and Palestine: Mapping Solidarity Beyond Colonial Borders",
"author" : "Rojin Namer, Jwan Zreiq",
"category" : "essays",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/kurdistan-and-palestine",
"date" : "2026-03-17 10:00:00 -0400",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/shutterstock_232668253-956x539-c.jpg",
"excerpt" : "“No one can understand the suffering of the palestinian people more than the Kurds. No people can share a relationship of empathy more than the peoples of Palestine and Kurdistan. This has been proven by their experiences and joint struggle. It was as such yesterday and it is as such today.” - Duran Kalkan",
"content" : "“No one can understand the suffering of the palestinian people more than the Kurds. No people can share a relationship of empathy more than the peoples of Palestine and Kurdistan. This has been proven by their experiences and joint struggle. It was as such yesterday and it is as such today. ” - Duran KalkanKurds live under imposed borders and know occupation firsthand. People shaped by displacement do not romanticize occupation or occupiers as allies. Kurdish writer Egultekin’s words cut through decades of propaganda that has painted Kurdish movements as Israeli proxies. The truth is simpler and far more painful: the “Kurdish-Israeli alliance” is a narrative weapon wielded by the very states that carved up Kurdistan, designed to turn regional solidarity into suspicion and transform indigenous resistance into foreign conspiracy. As a result, Kurdish and Palestinian struggles have been deliberately misunderstood as competing, when in fact they share a common root. Both of their people live as the largest stateless populations in the world, their identities fractured across borders drawn by colonial powers who never asked for their consent. The Kurds estimated number is 40 to 45 million across Turkey (Bakur), Syria (Rojava), Iraq (Başȗr), Iran (Rojhilat) – names the Kurds use for their own lands– as well as in diaspora. Palestinians number 15. 5 million, scattered across Palestine and the diaspora. Both peoples have lived and survived through genocide, displacement, and the systematic erasure of their existence, still fighting, relentlessly, just to assert their right to exist. The Architecture of FragmentingKurdistan is often described as if it were an absence, a land that does not exist because it does not appear on official maps. This absence is political, not historical. What appears today as four separate “minority” populations spread across widely recognized nation-states was once a connected social, linguistic, and cultural landscape where the Kurds lived as the indigenous people of the mountains, which is where the famous saying comes from, “No friends but the mountains,” a phrase born from watching these mountains given to different countries while the Kurds themselves were denied the ability to move through land that had always been theirs. Those same mountains were also pathways for commerce, escape, and cover for those fleeing or fighting. Many Kurds lived as Koçers–a Kurdish word related to families’ seasonal migration with their belongings, their sheep and goats, between lowland winters and highland summers. Their routes never knew the borders that would later claim to define them. Borders that would turn their ancestral movement into crime, making them “illegal” on land their ancestors had traversed freely for generations. To understand the ties between Palestine and Kurdistan, we must trace the borders that fractured them. In 1916, Britain and France signed the Sykes-Picot Agreement, dividing Bilad al-Sham, the Levant. They partitioned what had been a living geography of different tribes, faiths, and peoples into Syria, Jordan, Palestine, and Lebanon, carving nations from what was once one land. The same lines fractured Kurdistan across Turkey, Iraq, Syria, and Iran, leaving its people stateless across four different borders. The agreement laid the ground for the Balfour Declaration the following year, which promised Palestine to a European Zionist movement while Palestinian hands still worked its soil, cultivating the land while it’s being promised away. These colonial borders made Kurdish existence itself a threat to four different nation-states simultaneously, which means attempts at autonomy have been met with violent repression to this day. Because acknowledging Kurdish identity challenges the legitimacy of the borders themselves, and challenging the story these states tell about who belongs and who doesn’t, also challenging who controls the resources beneath their feet. Kurdish lands, recognized as one of the world’s most significant untapped energy frontiers, holding massive reserves of oil, gas, minerals, and fertile agricultural land, none of which has benefited Kurdish populations. In Iraq alone, Kurdish regions sit on an estimated 45 billion barrels of oil reserves, resources that all four states have consistently fought to keep out of Kurdish hands. Taken together, control over these resources has allowed these states to determine who holds political power and who remains outside it; who sits at the table, and who is never invited. So when we ask why the mere existence of Kurdish identity remains so threatening to the states built on their erasure, the answer lies in understanding how statelessness becomes not just a condition but a tool. Israel’s interest in Kurdish movements has nothing to do with self-determination and everything to do with weakening Iran, fragmenting Iraq. The same imperial logic that created Kurdish statelessness is now offered back as an alliance. Rojava: Liberation, ethnic and gender justice movementIn 2012, amid the Syrian civil war and the withdrawal of regime forces from Kurdish-majority areas, Kurdish political forces in northern Syria began to organize autonomous self-governance. While defending their territories against ISIS, they initiated a political project grounded in grassroots democracy. This radical resistance movement evolved into what is known today as the Autonomous Administration of North Syria. Crucially, what began in predominantly Kurdish areas expanded to include Arabs, Assyrians, Armenians, Turkmens, and other communities as they joined the autonomous regions. The system adapted a council-based structure extending from local communes to district and regional assemblies. Representation is based not on ethnicity nor religion, but on a shared participation in self-governance. In a region marked by unresolved national questions and sectarian fragmentation, this model represents both a rupture and a possibility; challenging the nation-state through decentralization and multi-ethnic coexistence. Crucially, gender equality is not an addendum but the structure itself. The women’s movement within the revolution has transformed social and political life, placing women’s liberation at the center of democratic transformation. In this way, every governing body in Rojava operates under mandatory co-leadership between a woman and a man, with a minimum 40% quota for women’s participation across all institutions, and women’s councils hold autonomous veto power over community decisions, meaning that no law, no policy, or local decision can ever be moved forward without women’s consent. One of the most notable accomplishments perhaps is how the administration has banned polygamy, child marriage, and forced marriage. Equally significant, it criminalized honor killings and gender-based violence –transforming what were once dismissed as private cultural matters into prosecutable violations. Alongside this legal transformation, women formed their own armed units, the YPJ (Women’s Protection Units), founded in 2013 as an autonomous military formation that fought ISIS on the frontlines as independent fighters, defying the narrative of women fighters as auxiliaries to male forces by becoming instrumental in the liberation of Kobani and the rescue of thousands of Yazidis from genocide on Mount Sinjar. Beyond military defense, Kurdish women established their own justice system through Mala Jin (Women’s Houses), a network of more than 60 centers across the region. Here, women resolve disputes, address domestic violence, and challenge patriarchal practices without state or male mediation; offering reconciliation and mediation processes at the community level, instead of through courts or police. Educational academies followed, training women in everything from political theory to cooperative economics, and in the process, they created the infrastructure for women’s autonomous power. In the spirit of women resisting together, Leila Khaled, the Palestinian revolutionary and PFLP member, has consistently recognized the Kurdish struggle as inseparable from Palestine’s. Khaled visited Leyla Güven, a Kurdish parliamentarian imprisoned for opposing Turkish incursions into Syria, during Güven’s hunger strike demanding an end to the isolation of imprisoned Kurdish leader Abdullah Öcalan. Khaled draws direct parallels between the partition of Palestine and the partition of Kurdistan, between the denial of Palestinian return and the denial of Kurdish movement through their mountains. A Bijî Kurdistan & Free PalestineKurdish writer Özlem Goner’s words map the liberation path forward when she wrote: “Kurds and Palestinians in this particular context have suffered various forms of colonial violence at the hands of Turkey and Israel respectively, and it is our alliance, together with all the other colonized and oppressed populations of the Middle East and beyond, that can bring justice and peace. From learning to self-defend together, to invaluable moments of solidarity. ”Daily resistance is not always courageous. Sometimes it is a compromise you’re willing to take in simply choosing not to disappear. In both Kurdish and Palestinian contexts, resistance then, is a condition of existence, perhaps the only one available when your whole being is read as a political stance. The question has never been whether there will be one state or two, but whether that state will be based on equality or continue to be based on domination. The map with further fragmentation of lands promises resolution while preserving the very architecture of oppression. So, until the maps and borders reflect justice rather than colonial division, until Kurds can traverse their mountains and Palestinians can return to their lands, the project of liberation remains unfinished. Liberation will emerge, if at all, from the recognition that to be Kurdish, to be Palestinian, is to have one’s very existence made political by those who drew borders to erase it, and that survival itself no state has managed to extinguish. From women governing in Rojava to families returning to olive groves in Palestine, the stubborn refusal to stop being who we are is the political act no state or borders can legislate away. "
}
]
}