Why Inclusivity Is A Failure And Hypocritical


1. Brands, especially designer brands, aren't actually becoming more inclusive.

Most brands just create hype. H&M for example, "expanded" their sizing. It wasn't really changed. They just made a 4 into a 6 and 10 into a 12 and so on.

In addition, most "designer" brands who cast AG or other plus size models don't really actually make plus size. Try going into Dior/YSL/Gucci/D&G and ask for a plus size item. It's not gonna happen.

2. Inclusivity doesn't actually solve the problem.

The main problem is healthy lifestyle and girls' self esteem. Instead of focusing on size, people should be focusing on health and telling girls to not compare themselves to models/celebrities/guys opinion.

Why Inclusivity Is A Failure And Hypocritical

3. It isn't kindness to tell plus size women that they are attractive IF you don't actually think that. And you don't have authority over what others think or say.

For example, if your grossly obese friend ask you if you think she is fat, it isn't kind to just say that she doesn't look fat. It is kinder to actually have the uncomfortable conversation. Because let's face it, when she goes outside of her comfort zone/friends/family, she will be criticized. It is kinder to let her know softly and work on a solution with her/him.

4. It isn't fair to force inclusivity out of brands that don't want to do it.

I'm going to use VS (Victoria Secret) here. If they don't want to target plus size, that is fine.

Why Inclusivity Is A Failure And Hypocritical

5. Victim mentality.

In addition, these plus size people claim that they are "oppressed". I'm sorry to inform them that they are not oppressed. Oppressed people don't have organizations and groups of people fighting for them. Oppressed people don't have specific stores catering to just their own needs.

Why Inclusivity Is A Failure And Hypocritical

Ant here is the biggest problem:

6. Those who push for inclusivity only push for selective inclusivity.

They say that they want inclusivity for everyone but only pick on certain brands. In general, they have no problem having straight-sized girls excluded from certain brands. For one, they have no problem with brands like Lane Bryant, Torrid etc, who do not offer products for smaller women. If you really wanted inclusivity for everyone, shouldn't you be made at these brands too?

Why Inclusivity Is A Failure And Hypocritical

Why Inclusivity Is A Failure And Hypocritical

In addition they have no problem buying bags/shoes /accessories from designer brands like Chanel and Gucci who don't support plus size. Hell, they will carry that Gucci bag with pride. They turn blind to the idea that its elite brands like Agent Provocateur, La Perla who charges $200+ on average for lingerie that are actually less inclusive. VS sells upto a 40 band, but Agent Provocateur and La Perla only often go to 38 (xs-L).

7. I don't think they'd actually care for brands that don't offer their size.

Here is why. Most plus size girls complain that plus size bras cost too much. I did the research and it costs, on average, around $20 to $70 (AdditionElle). I don't even think that plus size clothing costs that much- looking at brands like Forever21, H&M, Torrid, AdditionElle, Lane Bryant. My clothes actually costs the same.

And furthermore, even if Victoria Secret offered more plus size, I don't think that the price would be favourable enough for plus size shoppers to buy it. VS charges $40-70 for their current bras. Imagine how much they would charge for a plus size bra. They would be bankrupt. Besides, their number one priority is China, where people aren't plus size, so it's not a good move.

In all, I just don't think plus size girls have my back and I don't think they want real inclusivity.

Why Inclusivity Is A Failure And Hypocritical
Add Opinion
7Girl Opinion
17Guy Opinion

Most Helpful Girl

  • Anonymous
    I beleive every body type is beautiful and like you said if someone doesn't think curvy looks good then they can think so just like if someone doesn't think skinny looks good they can think so. But SOME women do get oppressed these days in the modeling industry because of their skin color or their bodytype. And if you make a store for only one body type then I get that. Personally I would never do that but for example, Victoria secret only show one pretty unhealthy body type but sell many different ones because of money. And if they wanted to save money then they would have had short skinny flat models because that's less material. It happends really often that women of color and different bodytypes don't get the modeling job. I think we should still have the flat tall skinny white model but more different ones. Because I beleive in equality. It's not so hard to put in more of different races and bodytypes. BUT! Ofcorse sometimes maybe even often someone prefer to have the typical skinny flat white tall model then that is 100% okay. But I think it's wrong when people leave you out ALWAYS because of your skin color or your bodytype. And that happends A lot in Hollywood. And to answer your question. I Think there should be different bodytypes in all stores not only curvy or only flat that would be biased of me to say. But if you do clothes to one body type to reprecent then do that only size in the store. Tyra banks, Ashley Graham, Gigi Hadid, Kendall Jenner and many other huge models have talked about this issue in Hollywood.

    This is my opinion not everyones. You don't have to agree I don't care but if you do, do it in a mature way.
    Like 1 Person
    Is this still revelant?
    • My point was that people who support inclusivity do it in a hypocritical way. See the last 2 pts

    • Anonymous

      Not all that's wrong to say but some of them do I agree.

    • Not all? U serious? Have u ever seen an sjw complain to torrid or lame Bryant to make small sizes?

    • Show All

Most Helpful Guys

  • RolandCuthbert
    1. Not sure what that has to do with anything.

    2. True.

    3. True. But I will add, men date plus size women all the time. And I mean the men women consider to be the sexiest, most masculine among us. Men don't date and marry these women because they are trying to be hyper nice. They haven't give in to the victim complex. They found someone who was special. She just didn't hit the gym everyday. Some people spend more time developing their personality, being kind, helping people, etc.

    4. I don't know what you mean by "fair". No one can force a brand to be inclusive. And if obese folks are not oppressed by brands. Then brands most certainly are not oppressed by obese folks. It is victim mentality to play the victim when your brand isn't inclusive and you pay the price in sales.

    5. See 4.

    6. Of course they do. How can you be an advocate for a group you are not apart of? Only the people who are "victims" of the issues that affect small women can be proper advocates. Representation matters.

    7. Perhaps. But in that case why is this even worthy of discussion? The brand can't suffer if the people who don't buy from their line are complaining, right?

    Disagree 4 People
    Is this still revelant?
    • 1- I was just pointing to the fact "inclusivity" trend is mostly just that. A trend, an illusion that's not actually happening. Yes some brands are an exception. But mostly just a trend.

      2. & 3. Not really caring about the dating part. My article isn't debating whether men find fat girls attractive.

      6. Yes, and this shows that their claims are mostly based on feelings, not logic or facts. This is partly why some people (mostly outside of the US) can't get on board with their "movement"

      And no, representation does not matter for confidence. I grew up as an Asian girl at a time (I'm older than my profile) in the US when there was no Asians in the media. I grew up just fine without representation. It's called parenting.

      7. my point was that these groups of people have extremely selfish and ulterior motives. They simply want to become the desired group and overthrow thin girls. They probably just want to see VS burn to the ground. And the brand does suffer.

    • Brand could suffer from bad press, poor ratings etc.

    • 1. Then why complain about it? It's like you are taking issue with something you admit isn't an issue.

      2&3. Just making sure it is understood. If women can't accept other women because they are fat or whatever. Just know that to many men, that does not make a dime's worth of difference. And no magazine or political campaign has changed what we prefer in terms of attractiveness. We have been this way for centuries.

      6. Nah, you missed the point. A obese person can't be an advocate for a small person. Its like you don't see that you provide the best response to your point. Where were small women when magazines were obviously excluding both groups? Again, they were not even advocates for themselves, right?

      7. That is simple projection. I am not into conspiracy theories. It is pretty obvious that media images do not portray positive images of overweight folks. One would think you wouldn't mind overweight people being on their own side.


    • Show All
  • Anonymous
    I beleive every body type is beautiful and like you said if someone doesn't think curvy looks good then they can think so just like if someone doesn't think skinny looks good they can think so. But SOME women do get oppressed these days in the modeling industry because of their skin color or their bodytype. And if you make a store for only one body type then I get that. Personally I would never do that but for example, Victoria secret only show one pretty unhealthy body type but sell many different ones because of money. And if they wanted to save money then they would have had short skinny flat models because that's less material. It happends really often that women of color and different bodytypes don't get the modeling job.
    LikeDisagree 2 People
    Is this still revelant?
    • VS models are healthy. it's been proven. And they hire very racially diverse set of women.

Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

  • CoffeeWC
    I really like this take
  • DevikaButts95
    1. They are, they include more models of different sizes.
    2. Inclusivity solves that problem by having models that more girls can compare, actually.
    3. It is actually. Despite what you may think, building up someone's self esteem does actually help them, especially since there are people who do truly think they are attractive. Plus in general just saying something along the lines like thicc thighs saves lives plants the idea that it could be attractive into many others. Psychology dude.
    4. Literally from a business standpoint, it is. Why would I want to shop at a place that doesn't sell clothes that are gunna match me? And even if not me, why would I want to shop at a place with clothes that aren't gunna match other girls? Doesn't sound like a place with a customer friendly mind.
    5. Although I would hardly call them oppressed myself, your MyTake literally only proves their point, doubly so because it's been dumb so far. "Oppressed people don't have organizations and groups of people fighting for them. Oppressed people don't have specific stores catering to just their own needs." Both of these points are just incorrect completely.
    6. Honestly, don't even think you have an anecdote of this particular thing. At best, confirmation/selective bias of specific experiences you've had and would not be indicative of any realistic group, at worst, total BS.
    7. Lot's to debunk here. First what you think is pointless, yes plus sized girls would buy from a brand that offers their size. Not all, but literally they have more of a chance of buying from that brand if ya' know, they have their size. Not to mention competition forces other brands to also carry plus size stuff so they can rationally compete. Second, plus size girls aren't poor. They can be poor, but them being plus sized doesn't make them poor. Pointless argument about price.
    VS's priority is all their customers if they want to be a good business. They definitely have a shit ton of business here in the U. S. why even mention this.
    "In all, I just don't think plus size girls have my back and I don't think they want real inclusivity." You haven't proved anything of value to argue this, but like, in what way shape or form are you not already included in most brands? You can't argue that you want to be included in everything if you already are. At best you got smaller businesses that specialize in plus sized clothing for the fact that it is/was rarer as a niche and because it was profitable.
    • Jenny12345

      Its been proven that most plus size people are poor. Not all, but most. The point was that plus size girls are only selectively inlusive. They are completely fine with lv or gucci not offering their size but vs must? Lol

    • @Jenny12345
      "Its been proven that most plus size people are poor." I'm just gunna call BS on that one. You don't have proof of that, just some random thing you wanna toss out there. In fact, I think that's flat out just wrong, considering the "obesity epidemic" in America, most plus size people probably fall into middle class if I had to guess.
      Also, even if that's true, that adds nothing to this conversation. There are plenty of non-poor plus size people regardless, and I don't know where you get this idea that VS is a rich person's place but like... it's not. Lmao.
      I'm sure there's complaints about gucci too honestly. I don't know what lv stands for though.

    • Jenny12345

      The writer was also talking about the fact that plus size bras are more expensive than straight size bras. It isn't. I've looked at bra pricing at Lane Beyant, Torrid etc. Its about the same as victoria secret.

      No there isn't a lot of complaints against premium brands like Gucci. LV is louis vuitton.

      I never said vs is for rich people only. Dont put words in my mouth. They target the fit, petite, upper middle class women. Yes, other women buy them too, but their target is upper middle class. They are also going towards the more luxury brands by partnerships with LIVY (french brand that charges $200 and more per bra).

      And second, i never said all plus size women are poor. Some are rich and do buy luxury brands. Not many though, which is why LV/gucci/fendi/prada often doesn't gp beyond xl.

      And there is research and documentaries out there that states that most plus size women dont make that much money and are in a lower income category.

    • Show All
  • Ciscoin
    "Oppressed people don't have organizations and groups of people fighting for them"
    1. What the fuck
    2. Jab at Lane Bryant and their competitors is weak as shit. What reason do they have to offer clothes non plus sized women? The market is oversaturated with enough clothing to accomodate them as it is. It makes no business sense.
    3. Of course they don't have a problem with buying gucci bags and whatever. The issue isn't about them not supporting plus sizes, it's about not being able to find clothes that fit them.
    4. Clothing stores charge based on brand names, and material, not size. Why do you think that when you see jackets on a rack ranging from size S to XL, they cost the same, despite obviously using more material? It costs them next to nothing to actually manufacture their stuff, so VS won't charge more a bra just because the size is different. They would constantly be alienating, and thus, angering their consumers, regardless of size.
    I want to make it clear that I don't thinl private companies have to accomodate for everyone - that's ridiculous, and it would be hypocritical of me to say after what I said about plus sized stores. However, the fact this "take" of yours is overflowing with strawmanning, tu quoqe, and ad hominem leads me to believe that actually have no idea that you're talking about.
    • Yogagirl88

      U misread the article.

      1. Yes kind of beside the point but true. Happened to me at H&M. I was a size 4. Went into buy stuff and was told that I was a six. Had a convo about extended sizing with employee. Was told it wasn’t actually extended. Confirmed with friends in fashion that a lot of times brands do this to create buzz.

      2. &3. Didn’t take jabs. The portions about lane Bryant and torrid was about how these people who want “diversity” only take issue with only certain stores. They claim that “all store staff should cater to all sizes” yet only take issue with certain stores and not others? Unfair. If vs is criticized for not catering to certain sizes, then so should torrid. That’s fair.

      The article never said plus size clothing costs more to make. It referred to the fact that plus size women complain that their clothes cost more to buy which isn’t true. Plus size clothes at forever 21 cost generally same as their other clothing.

    • Yogagirl88

      In general, if these activists really mean it when they say “brands should cater to all bodies” (and yes this is their message, then they should actually hold ALL brands accountable and protest to them, not just a select few that they could be a part of. But they don’t. When they show indifference to plus-size stores, they show that what they actually want to say is “I want easier access to clothes so I’m going to demand it from certain accessible (price wise) companies. I’m completely fine with plus size stores catering to only me but not ok with skinny people having the same thing, at least not with accessible stores.

      It’s completely hypocritical on their part to say that they stand for all women when they only have their interest in mind. They should either change and start acting for all body types and actually stand up against stores like torrid or they should just change their message to “we want plus size clothing at certain accessible stores and be seen as ideal.”

    • Yogagirl88

      At least if they say what they actually mean, I may be compelled to help them out of pity. But they hide their true message under “everybody is beautiful and all stores should cater to everything” to try and make it palatable. Well it doesn’t work on most people. Say what u actually want and maybe we will help out and advocate for plus size out of compassion.

  • MScifiwriter
    You know there a very wise saying that people seem to have forgotten about in recent years. "You can please some of the people some of the time, but you can't please everyone, all of the time."

    Simply put, do the best you can, do it extremely well. And what comes afterwards from your efforts. That's what you've acheived. If you try to make everyone happy, you end up with a bland nothingness mess.
    Like 1 Person
  • ashleyb93
    Honestly though VS is really good about providing larger sizes despite the fact they advertise with ridiculously scrawny models. I'm usually a medium but in VS clothes extra small is still a little baggy on me.
    Disagree 1 Person
  • AlexKitsnow
    Selective inclusivity was the word I was looking for to describe, "Modern socialist equality,". Only "oppressed" people are equal. Instead of trying to raise themselves up to mens so-called "Priviledge level" by actually following their core belief (Sexes are equal), they only try to pull men down to their "Oppressed" Mediocre level, by actively shaming them, and creating bs like "Male Priviledge". NO, we all have ups and downs for being who we are.
    LikeDisagree 2 People
  • Lightning8
    I will say larger ppl's clothes are way more expensive, so that is genuinely unfair imho
    Like 1 Person
    • no it isn't. Forever 21 and hm have larger closer at very similar prices. And yes Lane Bryant and Additionelle has prices at 50-100, but skinny people have to pay that much too at decent stores like Aritzia etc.

    • rjroy3

      When it comes to shoes the price is substantially higher lol. I've tested. I wear size 13 shoes. The difference in amount of material cost from size 12 and size 13 just not justify the price. They just put a higher price point on it because there are fewer people buying them. So he's right to say they are genuinely more expensive. Some places are cooler about it, but across the board prices are higher and not just because the cost of fabric.

    • @rjroy3 For girls, it isn't. I've done my research.

    • Show All
  • unomilkis1
    Goddamn bout time I read something alright here. Whole fat acceptance thing is so stupid.
    Like 1 Person
  • John_Doesnt
    Am I really a racist if I only want to be surrounded by beautiful Asian women? No, I'm just a pervert.
  • grega239
    inclusivity: less white, straight, male, fit, etc. and more of everything else. bcs i guess some people are just incompetent and need special treatemen to get anywhere in life
  • CharlieUnicorn
    "Instead of focusing on size, people should be focusing on health and telling girls to not compare themselves to models/celebrities/guys opinion."

    This was the best part. Now, this might be bit of "rigid male thinking" on my part but, I think this answers question 1. as well.

    If you look at companies hoping they might change society right, you are a complete failure as a leftist or progressive. A real one would want to diminish the influence commercials and companies have in our lives overall. Screw them all, and don't care when they flaunt something sexist, don't care either when they do some vapid "inclusiveness campaign".

    Let them have none of that influence, and you getting involved with what they do just make you a cog in their publicity campaign, no matter if you're angry or happy with them.

    We shouldn't even be influenced by them. That is the actual challenge.
    Like 1 Person
  • rjroy3
    I wouldn't say it's hypocritical. But I agree considering inclusivity a virtue is inherently stupid.

    To suggest that excluding anything is "wrong" I would argue is outright false. We exclude things all the time. The only question is how much exclusion is enough and how much exclusion is too much. I wear size 13 shoes. I understand that the bulk of the population isn't near my shoe size. So if i'm excluded from a lot of shoe designers sizing options without a special order, then I get it. There's a lot of shoes I wish I had access to, but realistically doesn't make business sense for a company to make baseline. They would end up going on clearance down the road and they would have wasted a ton of money on them, just to cater to the minority of individuals like myself.
    Like 1 Person
    But there are some attractive plus size girls and I really think so, their lack of slimness is redeemed by their charisma, I would say so )
  • montyblack
    Black people are only 12.6% of the population, but when was the last time you saw a billboard with four or more people on it that weren't a family and none of them were black? Not only is this move towards inclusiveness unrealistic, it is also fundamentally offensive to those who are considered the status quo. Skinny white heterosexual males/females are by modern standards not diverse, even if they come from many different countries and lead very different lives. If you are not ostensibly a part of some minority group, then your feelings, your rights and your opportunities, do not matter.
    Disagree 1 Person
  • Bro-ham
    The problem is that people use big words without defining their intent in detail
  • Ishtar6yyyt
    THE MATRIX IS A SYSTEM OF SILENCE... on youtube please watch it
  • malegender
    Well, you don't see men putting energy ans emotion into anything this dumb do you?
  • Secretgardenblood
    Good take
  • Anonymous
    Hard to say it, but I think you have some good points. Fat vs skinny needs to be about health, not looks. Period. That is legit the only issue with being bigger is health risks. That's also the issue with being too small. Health again. What needs to be realized too is some bodies require a lot more work to keep healthy than others, so patience with people is important. Let people come to realize on their own they MUST work to keep healthy. No fat or skinny shaming, just health encouragement, keep the talks balanced. I have good reasons why I never say much on looks. Because so easily they can change and people are often SO sensitive, whether I think somebody may be seriously at risk in health often but not always by being quite big, or they are actually uniquely kinda attractive, I stay quiet. A little opinion can go a long way on a psyche. It can make it better or far worse. A person can be a super model today and look completely different tomorrow so why bother to build their ego when they likely already have it a bit? On contrast, somebody super obese today can be a super model just a few months to a few years later, so no need to shame them, let them do as they please and only gently subtly speak of health as any little hint they intake could make their issues WAY worse. Patience on this is quite hard, but if we want a healthy world so badly, it's needed badly.
  • Anonymous
    We either have plus size models or very skinny tall models. Why can't we have a category for the average 5'6, 125 lbs woman?
    Like 1 Person
  • Show More (1)