I have a habit of going to Newbury Street as often as is physically possible; however, something that has always struck me as vaguely upsetting is the constant line around the block to get into Brandy Melville. Brandy Melville is a clothing store famous for only selling one size of clothes, and the size of those clothes is tiny (XS-S). This is a major aspect of their branding and notoriety, with Brandy Melville being recognized as a store where only “skinny” people can shop. Their recent resurgence in popularity is striking, but not entirely unexpected.
Skinny is in, is a phrase that one can find repeated all over the internet, phrased in a variety of ways, but all with the same message. Recently, a post on Brandeis Fizz, an anonymous social media app where only Brandeis students can post, read, “how do I achieve coke skinny without doing coke.” Coke skinny or Cocaine skinny is a reference to the practice of taking cocaine to make one lose weight. It is obvious that Brandeis hasn’t avoided this rising obsession with pant size. The real questions are, how are individuals propagating this kind of rhetoric, where is it coming from, and how should we respond?
The internet is no stranger to speculating on the plastic surgery procedures a variety of celebrities have undergone; however, the speculations have switched. What used to be accusations of Brazilian Butt Lifts and filler have been replaced with possible Ozempic use and the reversal of many “enlarging” surgeries, such as chest implants. It isn’t hard to see the real possibility of these surgeries by just looking at celebrities who used to build their brands on their larger size. Plus-sized and mid-sized people are losing all possible representation in the media, as being skinny is only one injection and $1,500 a month away.
Celebrities, whether they like it or not, are what many women strive to look like; they are the epicenter of beauty trends. 15 million Americans are currently on Ozempic or a similar GLP-1 and one-in-eight American adults have attempted to use such drugs. This culture of being less and less is not relegated to those who meet the legal definition of adult.
Slang terms have risen alongside Ozempic and Brandy Melville. The term “big back” has gained popularity to the point that one can hardly walk into the dining hall without hearing someone shouting at someone else. Unlike some slang, which can have positive to neutral contexts, “big back” is only used in a negative connotation to insult someone for eating too much or being fat. However, the word didn’t always have this meaning.
“Big back” originated in African American Vernacular English (AAVE) as a compliment. To have a big back was to have a large butt. The most recognizable use of the term in this context is the Sir-Mix-A-Lot song “Baby Got Back.” The etymological factors that led to the shift in definition for the phrase aren’t well understood, yet, like in the cultural view, being/having a big back became negative.
This constant shifting to and from diet culture and body positivity is a symptom of a much larger disease. It is easy to convince women they need to buy more products if every 10 years the expectations placed on them are entirely different. Right now, you must buy diet pills, green smoothies, Skims and waist trainers to look as skinny as possible. Don’t forget your contour to make your face smaller and the Ozempic, don’t worry, it’s just an injection once a week for the rest of your life. Five years ago, they were selling us padded bras and leggings, plastic surgery if you wanted it to be permanent, and filler for your lips. You could be fat as long as you were also conventionally attractive and talented; I’m not going to pretend like it was fun being fat back then, either. The line between fat and skinny was moving towards more people being considered skinny. All of this shifting in what is attractive and what’s “in fashion” is created by corporations to sell you more things.
Our bodies are not for sale. Many people think the solution to diet culture is body positivity, a movement that declares all bodies as beautiful and valuable. This seems to be a great idea on paper, yet it still ties the worth of one’s body to its beauty. It says that all bodies are beautiful; therefore, all bodies are valuable. This philosophy doesn’t acknowledge that it is basically impossible for a person to feel beautiful all of the time. When one doesn’t feel beautiful, it is easy to question one’s value. This doesn’t have to be the answer.
Instead of turning to body positivity, I propose body neutrality, the idea that your body doesn’t need to be beautiful; it is a vessel that serves a function. It posits that there is no inherent morality to one’s body. Your body is a tool that you must first take care of. This movement preaches exercise and healthy eating at the same time as recognizing fatness isn’t a moral failing. It does all of this while also allowing one to decorate their body as they see fit; dye your hair fun colors, shave your body or don’t, do whatever makes you happy. Treat your body like a Toyota Camry, take it to the shop for maintenance, and it will last for a long time, decorate it with bumper stickers and vines and a pair of dice hanging from your rearview mirror.
