ESC

Fatphobic Gwyneth Paltrow Deigns to Sell Clothes to Heavy People

Fucking Christ, Gwyneth Paltrow. How is it that I end up covering you for the second time this week? Do you never take a break from being a pretentious twit? No, actually, please continue because I need the details of your inflated ego to do my job.

This week in Gwyneth Paltrow news, Paltrow’s lifestyle brand, GOOP has decided to become more “inclusive.” Rather than just cater to the rich and skinny, GOOP has finally deigned to include the plus-size community as well! But only rich ones. Yay, inclusivity!

You see, this is a big deal because GOOP was founded in 2008.  That means it only took ten years for GOOP to consider that it might be a good idea to cater to people above a size 4. After all, it’s only fair that people of all sizes should have the opportunity to have GOOP’s ugly, useless, s**t marketed directly to them.

And lucky for the plus-size community they have five, count that five, options available for purchase. Now, they too can decide if they want to spend $200-$400 for each overpriced, amorphous clothing item. Seriously, all this crap looks about the same, and they all look shapeless and structureless. Thank you, GOOP, for this innovative shopping experience; I’m sure plus-size women have never found any giant, formless sacks for themselves in any other department store they visit.

I’m convinced that Paltrow’s investors put a metaphorical (or maybe a real one, what do I know?) gun to her head and said she had to start marketing to other body types. This was a real tough pill to swallow because we all know from years back that Paltrow is notoriously fatphobic and isn’t afraid to fat shame someone right to their face.

After being ordered to be more inclusive with her sizing or risk losing her investors, Paltrow gritted her teeth, chugged sixteen grey goose espresso martinis (these are real, for the record) and then presumably yelled at her staff to start making fat clothes before she cuts their pay.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments