KoV
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2009
- Messages
- 5,238
- Reaction score
- 6,939
I do think that tokenism would bother a Black woman, but I also know Black women are not some monolith of uniform thought. Anna Wintour has been who she is for decades, a famously difficult and elitist person. Vogue has been an elitist magazine for over a century and does not have a good track record with regards to diversity, though I think there has objectively been a huge improvement in that regards over the past decade. Anna's internal memo sent to the Vogue team and ALT's memoir didn't really reveal anything new, I don't think. So the women who were willing to work with Anna multiple times on Vogue covers and in some cases also appear at the Met Gala or at other events with Anna? I think they either believe she is not a racist and did not consider their appearance as an example of tokenism (likely, imo), don't care because they want a Vogue cover, or are willing to suffer Anna because they believe a greater good is served by them appearing on Vogue - young girls seeing a Black woman on such a prominent magazine, for instance. Cardi B, Ugbad Abdi, Adut Akech, and Simone Biles all shot covers in 2020 prior to renewed public interest in Anna's problematic ways, proving Anna's interest in presenting a diverse grouping of women in the magazine isn't merely a reaction to recent backlash. So why couldn't a Black woman, seeing that she would be the 5th Black women to appear on the cover of American Vogue so far this year (not counting several more who appeared on the April fold out print cover + their own digitial covers - all shot by a Black photographer), accept the offer of a Vogue cover with some level of confidence that she's not merely being used as a tokenism, to cover Anna's ***.
Anna loves repeat cover stars. You may interpret her multiple covers for Michelle Obama, Serena, Beyonce, Rihanna, Zendaya, and Lupita that way, but what about all the white women she repeats? Taylor Swift, Adele, Scarlett, Reese, Sienna Miller, etc. That's just Anna's MO, as I see it. She gets it in her head that someone is a Vogue Woman, and they get multiple covers, while many other arguably deserving women never make an appearance. I don't see how some Black women getting multiple covers is evidence of a plot of withhold covers from other Black women. It just doesn't add up, to me, within the context of all Vogue covers.
I believe I stated that "just about any model or celebrity" would want a Vogue cover, I didn't say that Black women specifically needed them for validation. Of course someone as accomplished, beloved, and successful as Michelle Obama, Oprah, or Serena doesn't *need* Vogue covers, I'm not claiming it was top of their bucket list and will be the highlight of their lives. However, in as much as any of them might value something as frivolous as a magazine cover, I believe they may value Vogue. Many accomplished and brilliant people have a strong appreciation for fashion and being on what is sometimes referred to as "the fashion bible" might bring them some joy. Michelle Obama did 3 covers, and was featured in other issues. That's more than a favor. Is it so crazy to think she enjoyed being on the cover? I am not putting words in the mouths of these women or pretending to know their motivations. I know Oprah was asked to loose weight for the cover. Oprah also very publicly endorses and makes tens of millions off a diet brand and has been very vocal about weight struggles for decades, so perhaps weight loss, the dramatic reveal of which would be in the form of a Vogue cover, wasn't unappealing to her or a source of shame? I don't know. I feel she's essentially done the same thing for O Magazine or on her show. Thandie Newton said, upon hearing that Conde Nasty had 20 meetings about putting Oprah on the cover (not sure if this is hyperbole or not) that she expressed her outrage to Oprah, who responded with "these things take time". It's awful to think a women as famous and accomplished and loved as Oprah was treated as though her appearance was a risk or that she was an unworthy subject, but it seems that may have been the case. She did the cover anyway, and probably brought about some long-term good. Or maybe she just thought she looked great? I don't know. Perhaps another barrier broken, less time, less "risk assessment" meetings for the next Black woman. It seems Serena had a very different experience from Oprah. Often when she posts a cover on instagram she'll just list the title of the magazine and tag those involved. For her most recent US Vogue cover, she captioned: "When I first saw this Vogue cover it brought tears to my eyes. All Vogue covers are special but to share this one with my beautiful daughter, also the youngest Vogue cover star, makes it moment I will never forget." I think that speaks for itself, and backs up my point somewhat.
That is not the subtext of my post. That's essentially the least generous possible way to interpret the subtext of what I wrote. I do not deny there are a variety of reasons a Black women might choose to appear on the cover. You seem to be denying that actually wanting a Vogue cover could be one of them, though. And my post was not only about Black women, either. There have been rumors of such-and-such celebrity turning down Vogue covers for a long time, which never seem to be backed up by evidence and are sometimes proven incorrect. That was my point. This narrative that a US Vogue cover is no longer a "get" has been alive and thriving since well before 2020. My point was never that Black women specifically couldn't possibly turn down Vogue, but rather that I find it unlikely anyone would turn down Vogue, and I listed several accomplished (to varying degrees) Vogue covers stars, some of whom were Black, to illustrate my point.
What I also find ridiculous is that if Anna puts a Black woman on the September issue or chooses a Black photographer for the September issue it will be tokenism. Nevermind the fact she's already had 4 Black women on Vogue covers in 2020, 2 of which were shot by a Black photographer. Isn't that a better diversity track record than Harper's Bazaar, Town & Country, UK Vogue, InStyle, Elle, and all the rest who are rushing to diversify for September. And they're getting nearly universal praise for it. Where is the charges of tokenism against each of them? If Anna chooses a Black women for US Vogue's September issue, some will say it's tokenism. If she chooses a white woman, some will say she is refusing to uplift Black voices and celebrate Black talent, that she's racist. She basically can't win if her goal is appeasing her critics. What she can do is prove, over the course of the rest of her career as EIC, that she's committed to Vogue representing a diversity of women. I believe that's what she's been doing for the past few years, and I believe it's what she'll continue doing, at an accelerated pace.
I apologize for such a lengthy post (rant) but hopefully that clarifies my standpoint on things.
Last edited:
