The Council of Fashion Designers of America is a not-for-profit trade association founded in 1962 that exists to support and champion American fashion — and thus, American fashion designers through mentorship, advocacy, education, and recognition.

The organization is perhaps best known for the annual CFDA Fashion Awards and, separately, the CFDA/Vogue Fashion Fund, which launched in 2003 as a response to the post-9/11 challenges facing young American designers. The program was created to provide funding and industry support to emerging talent and has since become fashion's most influential career accelerator. It’s a multi-decade initiation that I consider one of the most beautiful parts of Anna Wintour’s legacy.

Past winners and finalists include everyone from Proenza Schouler to Christopher John Rogers. Each finalist gains access to the kind of mentorship and visibility that can completely change the trajectory of a young brand.

This is an especially exciting moment because the 2026 CFDA/Vogue Fashion Fund finalists were announced. I’m on the Selection Committee every year, and this year I’m joined by Chloe Malle and Nicole Phelps of Vogue, Christopher John Rogers, Denise Magid of Bloomingdale’s, Eva Chen, Paloma Elsesser, Thom Browne, Steven Kolb and Yumi Shin of Nordstrom.

So while I usually spend Sundays waxing poetic (and occasionally cynical) about whatever is on my mind, I wanted to use this newsletter to introduce this year’s selected designers. Largely because they serve as a reminder that we are not, in fact, totally cooked. The future of American fashion is in very good hands.

Aisling Camps

First impression: Aisling is a super technical and talented knitwear designer. I’ve known of her work for a decade or so. She cares a lot about sustainability, and I’m impressed that she’s able to make sweaters from Isabella Rossellini’s sheep’s wool and still have them be relatively accessible price-wise.

Must have item: Reversible Round Pullover

Amir Taghi

First impression: Amir’s Iranian heritage is fused heavily into each of his collections, perhaps in ways that aren’t always totally obvious. I enjoy his pieces. My feeling is his default audience may swing a little older. That is a great market.

Must have item: Courtney Top in Satin

Terrence Zhou of Bad Binch TONGTONG

First impression: Terrence is really all about having fun. The shapes are interesting and very editorial. I think some of the fabric choices leave a little to be desired for me, but I’m hoping to fall more in love with his world as the competition progresses.

Must have: Cloud Ruche Midi Skirt

Emily Dawn Long

First impression: A very cool girl about town. The graphic printed vintage tees are next to impossible to get your hands on. I am very much a fan of some of the individual pieces she creates (the swans, hello!) but if I saw people walking down the street in a total EDL look, I’m not sure I know enough of the design cues yet to be able to pick up on that. I’m awaiting more context on who her girl is.

Must have item: Swan Halter Tunic

Jamie Haller

First impression: If you’ve been reading my newsies, you know I was in love with Jamie Haller’s trousers this past winter. I own many pairs. However, what the world knows her for are her iconic and super hot penny loafers. Jamie has a store in Montecito, a rapidly growing business and very chic but wearable POV in dressing.

Must have item: The Penny Loafer in Chocolate Suede

Julia Ferentinos of Juju Vera

First impression: You must be living under a rock if you haven’t seen Juju’s Petra shell necklace. It’s fabulous and everyone has it, and you’ve seen me wear it a zillion times. I’m loving her move into carved materials, like jade and lapis.

Must have item: Sienne Jade Earrings

Zane Li of Lii

First impression: Zane Li has a distinct point of view that feels both technical and physical. His collaborations with Nike are impressive. I’m interested to see how he does in the challenges.

Must have item: Back-Slit Top

George Inaki of Milamore

First impressions: This is a hard competition for jewelry designers to stand out in. I really appreciate his kintsugi work. The pavé ones are particularly impressive. He’ll need those to take off and become the next Eva Fehren ‘X’ ring.

Must have item: Kintsugi Victoria Ring

Claire Sullivan of Miss Claire Sullivan

First impression: The first time I saw Claire’s work was on Addison Rae at the VMAs. Pretty much everything she has is made to order. And while I’m the first girl to say ‘make something commercial for the people to buy so you can make more money and survive’ I think that I may be wrong here. I would love to see this brand lean more into bespoke pieces, particularly bridal.

Must have item: Dame Feather Bra

Zoe Gustavia Anna Whalen

First impression: I love romantic and bewitching clothing. The repurposed floral reupholstery, the quiet lace. Swoon. There are obvious questions about ‘how this brand scales’ but I’m also like, does it need to? I just want it to keep existing and flourishing in a way that the founder can stay her most creative and expressive self.

Must have item: Cotton Bloomers

So, what’s next? Being named a finalist is only the beginning of this competition, one that will last several months. Each designer will participate in mentorship and business-development programming with industry leaders because, while capital is important, it’s also important to understand what one should do with it. Fashion is a fickle business. Every mistake counts.

Good luck to all the finalists, and thank you for your talent and creativity.

As I mentioned at the very top of this newsy, I was one of the winners of the CFDA/Vogue Fashion Fund back in 2015. Looking back on that experience still feels surreal. If you're in the mood for a little nostalgia, this was a literal TV show on Amazon Prime, and you can revisit that journey below.

I went to Taormina with Net-a-Porter and Chloé, and it was truly a divine trip. The hotel, Villa Sant’Andrea, was equally divine. So for this week’s In Rotation, I thought it would be fun to pull together my entire Sicily hotel wardrobe and document it all in one place.

As always, if you’re here for mental exercise, I suggest leaving and checking back on Sunday. If you’re in the mood for aesthetic stimulation in the form of clothes and accessories, welcome to In Rotation, my twice-monthly ode to all the outfits I’m wearing, loving, washing, and repeating. It’s called In Rotation because, truthfully, I wear the same things over and over again. Scroll on for the looks I packed for Sicily.

Subscribe now

Some of the links in this newsletter are affiliate. If you happen to buy something I might earn a commission.

The recent discourse online about natural nails has been fascinating to read, and it’s got me thinking about my own relationship with beauty and the upkeep that is “required” to adhere to the unrealistic beauty standards of today.

I have always been a natural nail girl. This is a trait passed down to me from my own mother, who couldn’t be bothered with a manicure because her hands were constantly busy pursuing endeavors that filled her cup, like sketching and gardening. My frustration with manicures stems from my own relationship to color and color stories; it is difficult to commit to one color for a week, let alone two. (Save for Christmas time when a Chanel deep red feels appropriate.) But I feel about nail polish how I often feel about makeup. That it’s a necessary evil at times.

I’ve felt an immense amount of pressure to have longer, lacquered nails on red carpets, like Vanity Fair or the Met or while shooting Project Runway. And not for myself necessarily, but for awareness of the public gaze; a virtue signal that I have appropriately prepared and showed up for the events that I am privileged enough to be invited to. It feels almost disrespectful to show up with a bare face. Like I’m saying to the host or the brand that I couldn’t care less about their festivity, despite that (usually) not being the case.

But I’ve noticed that as I’ve become older and more financially independent and secure — I have started to care a lot less. That maybe it doesn’t matter if this person or that brand does not find me palatable enough, because I don’t need them. I don’t need a man either. What I do need is my friends and my community, and they’ve shown me time after time that the more I am myself, and the more I am secure in my faults, comfortable in my skin, radiant in my uncomfortable truths, the more license it gives them to be the same. We are all happier this way.

I’ve been in Europe this week on a trip to Venice with Dior, which has been incredible, and I’ve chatting with some of the women and thinking, still, about E Jean Carroll. And I’ve realized that the chicest women I know have allowed themselves the grace to age.

I think this realitzation, and the part that people aren’t saying out loud, is that the need to escape aging is a marker of either class or comfort. DVF has allowed herself to age, for example; she is both extremely comfortable in her sense of self and also extremely comfortable financially, and she hasn’t had to maintain a playability to the masses. Unlike Demi Moore, for example, who must stay preserved to remain relevant in her craft, where there are more movies that contain male characters named ‘Chris’ than there are women over 60. The need to stay youthful as an actress is a survival strategy, and it’s one that the very wealthy haven’t had to develop.

In my worst moments, I’ve looked at certain aesthetic enhancements — bleached blonde hair, eyelash extensions — as… sad. And wondering what kind of situation that person must be in that they feel the need to preserve or enhance their face. I guess I’m projecting, remembering who I once was and who, at times, I still am, because when I was younger I would be deeply agitated by older women who seemingly embraced their wrinkles. I guess because in my own uncomfortable skin, I couldn’t bare the idea that another woman could be that comfortable in hers.

But now I’ve realized that wrinkles are a well earned privilege if they come from confidence. They are also a privilege (of course) if it comes from obscene wealth. I feel bad for celebrities and the upwardly mobile aging millennial set chasing deep plane facials and bi-monthly Korean ‘spa’ trips. Clearly that’s because I see myself in them, too, while I sprint towards a future version of myself who will hopefully age into laugh lines and wrinkles.

Other things to read

• “They’ve Heard the Warnings. Gen Z Is Tanning Anyway,” The New York Times, by Kristy Alpert

• “Justice Dept. Is Said to Open Criminal Inquiry of E. Jean Carroll Over Trump Lawsuits,” The New York Times, by Glenn Thrush and Benjamin Weiser

• “Who Wants Kamala Harris to Run?” Vanity Fair, by Aidan McLaughlin

• Oh, and here is my Venice Spotify playlist.

More good going out tops, all floral (or floral-adjacent) and secondhand. Strapless and smocked Isabel Marant for $87; pastel purple from Brock Collection (RIP) for $94. When I think of florals, I do think of Brock Collection, in general. This Brock Collection blouse is also very good, and $130.

I get a lot of questions about tees, and my take on this is that vintage tees are always a lot more fun. I will never not buy a good tee when I see one at the flea, and I spend (many) hours combing Etsy in pursuit of more. Currently hearted: raglan acetate yellow from the 70s for $25; 70s cotton in brown for $42 (it’s got great sleeves); a McDonald’s Islington manager tee, a very rare find!; a blue and white V-neck for $37; another 70s V-neck, this one cropped, for $45; a mesh Robert Bruce tee from the 80s; a striped tee from the 80s for $57; this vintage Quebec ringer shirt is VERY fun.

And let’s talk more about belts. I’m wearing the Chloe Sea Treasure Shell Belt Bag which seems to be out of stock everywhere but this shell belt from Etsy is quite excellent if you prefer a pink tinge. I love a statement belt in general. This silver seashell belt chain from the 80s is great, too. And not secondhand but this Chan Luu option is excellent. Here is secondhand Chloe for $217.

Okay, a few more. This Dior Médaillon Belt is top of mind right now; this Conner Ives dress with its own built in shell belt is fab, and it’s on sale; fun tassel belt from Ulla Johnson; there is also this one which I have linked in this newsy before but I still wear and love; also this scarab belt buckle is amazing if someone feels like swapping out their existing buckle with a cobbler!

Almost done, promise, but this Anne Klein panther belt from the 80s and this nautical-themed St. John belt from the 80s.

The big thing to note here is that dressy feminine blazers are back, which I am excited about, personally. You may want to snag this secondhand iconic Dior Bar Jacket while it’s still available. This bow-embellished black and white Valentino is excellent.

Oh, and in case anyone is doing some background viewing: my precious snail lamp is Marzio Cecchi Dimensione Fuoco from the 1960s. Here is a vintage Tin Chi snail lamp from 1997 on Etsy; this one is $17. And oh look! A very rare find. And then this is the other version by the same designer, circa 1969.

Wearing the New Balance x Miu Miu sneakers. Have said this before but New Balance does a great job with their collabs, see: their collab with Staud, which is pretty wild to watch on the secondhand market.

One of the reasons I love this Suzie Kondi set so much — as evident by the truly unreal amount of times I have worn and posted and linked it — is the neckline of the sweater. It’s high enough that it looks polished but low enough for me to reinvent the look, if I want to, with the top of a crewneck tee poking through. In this case I’m wearing a green striped tee that contrasts really well (I think). This striped tee from Kule is quite nice, as is this one from Still Here.

Items I’m eyeing that aren’t on rotation quite yet but may be very soon…

Some of the links in this newsletter are affiliate. If you happen to buy something I might earn a commission.

I’ve been thinking about how much bravery is required on a person-to-person level in order to create a ripple effect, one large enough to actually change discourse around a subject. Mostly, discourse alone isn’t enough; there has to be a series of events occurring concurrently for there to be a splash big enough to shift culture in a meaningful way.

That said, Ask E. Jean premieres this weekend. I saw an advanced screening, and can tell you that it’s excellent. The reason it’s excellent is because E. Jean Carroll is a captivating, interesting, whimsical individual. She is known for putting pen to paper in a way that is immediately recognizable, and that translates well to the screen.

I don’t want to give spoilers because I want people to actually watch the film. I also won’t rehash the court case, or the massive win for E. Jean, but what I do want to discuss is my personal takeaway from the 1.5 hours of watching E. Jean and her team prep for a court case that would ultimately fall in their favor. (This case is also going to the Supreme Court and she is not allowed to promote it.)

First of all, I had no idea how much of a vibrant, cool, fascinating, great human she was. That kind of changes the experience of watching it, because how do you discuss the “takeaway” of a documentary when people haven’t seen it yet? But I think there’s a couple things here.

One: obviously Trump sucks. We know this. But I think watching this is helpful for people to understand the dynamics of what was going on in this case, because I did not fully understand them before watching. Two: despite spending decades giving women advice, E. Jean feels immense guilt. Guilt that the experience at Bergdorf’s happened in the first place, that she’s given women in situations similar to her own advice that she personally did not follow, at first.

The interesting thing here is seeing how different the reaction is when you actually experience something personally versus listening to other people’s experiences, and I think that trickles down into the fact that we’ve entered a news cycle where awful things don’t seem quite as “awful” anymore.

If this situation had happened to a presidential candidate even two decades ago, on such a public scale, involving a writer with this much merit and credibility, there would have been no contest in terms of how the public reacted. Decency has gone out the door. Watergate would be meaningless today. And the other thing is: you will be affected, and it’s all fun and games (a casual vote for the guy from The Hills) until it’s not.

The reason this documentary feels particularly poignant to me is because E. Jean is actually the exact type of person someone like Trump could attack based on stereotypes. She is not married, she doesn’t have children, she has written openly about sex, and yet despite this intrinsic part of her personality, she still doesn’t come forward immediately.

And what happens when this goes all the way to the Supreme Court? What happens when men are allowed to rob women of that joy with no real repercussions?

Women spend so much of our lives being programmed to want to be hotter, sexier, prettier, more desirable because supposedly the end goal is partnership and sex. So what changes in a woman when she decides — or when the decision is taken from her — that she no longer wants to center sex? And in E. Jean’s case, romantic partnership, too.

I think that’s what stayed with me most after watching it. Not just the legal case itself, but the questions the documentary asks about womanhood, desirability, intimacy, shame, and identity after something like this happens.

And honestly, another thing I kept thinking about is: when mistakes are made, or when crimes are committed, how much work is actually required to fix them? Does that work ever end? How much is this entire Trump mess going to cost us personally, culturally, psychologically? Will we ever fully clean it up?

And while it’s tempting to leave you on a note of curiosity, as I often do, I want to end this newsletter with a hunk of hope that has been lodged in my chest since watching the documentary. And that is: E. Jean Carroll is a phenomenal human being. She is an accomplished 80-year-old woman who has seen and experienced the world, and continues to find joy in it. Considering our culture’s fucked up attitude toward aging, she makes me happy.

And while she does have regrets, and I won’t go into details here because I think it’s important that you go see the film for yourself, she also has an incredible life. She is, to me, the definition of inspiration. She’s also on Substack. Her welcome verbiage is never let them steal your joy.

Other things to read

• “The Truth About E. Jean Carroll,” The New York Times, by Ivy Meerpol (who directed the documentary)

• “Donald Trump assaulted me in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room 23 years ago. But he’s not alone on the list of awful men in my life,” The Cut, by E. Jean Carroll

• “Why E. Jean Carroll, ‘the Anti-Victim,’ Spoke Up About Trump,” The New York Times, by Jessica Bennett, Megan Twohey and Alexandra Alter

This email is likely too long for your inbox. Sorry. PS — I’m now included wishlists at the very bottom of this newsys.

Lots of fun secondhand blazers out there, by the way. Case in point: Giorgio Armani for $130, silk (with tags!) from Magda Butrym for $543, blue silk and virgin wool sequins from Dior for $7,200, and a very nice cropped Chinoiserie jacket for $35.

Prada worked with traditional artisans in India to handcraft a limited run of these sandals. This is the difference between something being appropriated or not. I love when luxury brands work with artisans from specific communities to make a luxury version of something traditional to that culture. That said, if you want to save a lot of money and get a similar style, you can buy directly here as well. This darker brown version is also nice.

Subscribe now

Blue is the new white, i.e. it’s the most versatile hue in your closet if you allow it to be. Can be paired with any fabric (leather, suede, denim) and any pant (trousers, jean shorts) and won’t clash with any shoe.

Aquatically themed bags are one of my many obsessions right now. Some more fun secondhand finds: a Chloe crossbody for $1,075, a metal purse from Paco Rabanne for $685. I also might be into this fish top handle purse from Vin. Good, yes?

Items I’m eyeing that aren’t on rotation quite yet but may be very soon…

1. BALMAIN Tweed and silk-chiffon jacket / 2. Versace Pivot small leather bucket bag / 3. Moissanite huggies from Etsy / 4. Eres silk satin shorts / 5. Norma Kamali pedal pusher capris / 6. Juju Vera La Isla Tassel Lighter Pendant / 7. Valentino Bowow Calf Hair Pumps / 8. Dior lip glow butter / 9. COLLEEN ALLEN Paneled fleece jacket

Some of the links in this newsletter are affiliate. If you happen to buy something I might earn a commission.

My favorite Sunday tradition is going to the flea. This is likely not a surprise to anyone who knows me personally or has followed me on Instagram, but these Sunday rituals have become the anchor of my week. On a surface level, I imagine the takeaway from this tradition would be through a commerce lens: I leave with pretty things, and I put those pretty things in my home. But it feels much more similar to going to a museum and spending hours dissecting piece after piece of artwork. It’s meditative to wander through baubles, talk to different vendors, and discover things that are not net new, but may be net new to me.

Anyway: this is a very long-winded way of saying that the history and craftsmanship behind each object is what’s appealing to me, which is why, every Sunday, I post a minimum of one trillion stories on my Instagram. I’ve decided to continue that tradition there; on Substack, I’ll be doing a monthly flea find newsletter that goes through my favorites of the month. I hope you enjoy.

The above is a good example of treasures-you-find-at-the-flea-that-can-cost-a-fuck-ton-more-on-an-antique-dealer-online. In this case, nearly double. Furniture is tough because, of course, you have to consider transporting it to and from. But accent pieces like this side table are an excellent one to scavenge for because they can hypothetically fit in the trunk of one’s car.

Jewels and brooches are top tier at the flea, specifically clip-ons, specifically of the statement variety. Same goes for secondhand sites online. These Gianni Versace Medusa clip-ons from the 80s runway; these Juju Vera turquoise earrings are fab too.

On right: a necklace that feels quite special. This is a vintage William Spratling shell necklace in sterling silver. Before devoting himself to jewelry making, Spratling was a professor at Tulane, and his work helped shape what became modern Mexican silver design. Everything was handmade and eventually sold through major department stores in the U.S. Now, his pieces are scattered across secondhand sites and galleries, often with price tags to match. This is actually the same necklace (and same vendor!). She will give you a discount if you message her.

More fun shell finds: this maple wood yarn basket, a Tiffany & Co. perfume bottle, a 1950s hard clutch, a Victorian finger coin purse (v. cute), another very good handbag, a vanity set complete with a coin purse and scent bottle, and another tiny purse that looks like the one Emily Bode wore the Met Gala. Also this Timmy Woods clamshell wooden bag is an INSANE deal.

On right: a 19th-century Venetian carved walnut grotto style seat that is my harp stool at home.

To end this newsy on a little treat… whenever I post content from my house or garden, I get so many DMs asking about the playlist I have on in the background. I finally organized everything into one shareable playlist and I’m very excited to share it with you all.

Other things to read

• Screen People: How We Entertained Ourselves into a State of Emergency by Megan Garber

• The Resurrection of Michael Jackson. The Daily. How do we feel about Michael Jackson?

• Sergey Brin Moves to the Right, With a ‘MAGA Girlfriend’ by His Side. The New York Times. By Theodore Schleifer and Kate Conger

• What Does Tucker Carlson Really Believe? I Went to Maine to Find Out. The Interview.

Some of the links in this interview are affiliate. If you happen to buy something I might earn a commission.

Read the latest edition of my fashion newsletter, In Rotation, here. This email is likely too long for your inbox. Sorry.

Gala season is alive and well again in New York, and right now, the city is abuzz. Earlier this week, I attended a fundraiser for the Misty Copeland Foundation and the Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture, which carries historically relevant archives on Black life and is part of the New York Public Library system.

As I look at the discourse online year after year, I realized that perhaps it was necessary to back up a bit and offer context on the following question: how do Galas work? And how does wealth, politics and power contribute to them? Let’s start at the beginning.

Galas function as fundraisers for the nonprofit organizations they support. In my opinion, they’ve become increasingly important because it’s otherwise difficult to extract money from people when they get nothing in return, especially wealthy people. In many cases, a gala ends up being a “see and be seen” opportunity. Or, if you’re a more level-headed person, it’s a chance to catch up with fellow humans and support a cause you truly believe in.

In a high-functioning gala, each seat in that room is bought and paid for. Sometimes, individual patrons will buy their own ticket, and in others, major corporations will buy tables to support the organization and invite ambassadors, friends, or employees of the brand.

Depending on the event, full gala tables (10 seats) can range from $10K to as much as $1M. Your gala ticket is tax deductible minus the cost of the food served. Some galas price tables based on proximity to the stage. Others have flat pricing across all tables and seat guests according to preference. Some use a sliding scale depending on the buyer, with the thinking that those with more means should contribute more.

At fashion-related galas, designers are invited and may choose to bring a celebrity or friend of the brand as a guest. In these cases, the designer typically covers the cost for both. Exceptions include honorees or award recipients, who are usually extended a courtesy invitation.

Most of the galas I attend don’t hold an in-room auction, though many do. It’s a smart way to fill the room with a lower ticket price and then raise a significant amount the night of, but it requires guests willing to give in the room, which frankly terrifies me. I’m particularly impressed by the Gordon Parks Gala and Art Production Fund’s ability to do this well. (It’s also worth noting that much of the art auctioned in the room has a guaranteed minimum buyer secured beforehand, before an artist’s gallery will even allow the piece to go up for auction.)

As someone who has a deep love of the arts and supports several nonprofits, including one I founded and one where I serve as vice chair of the board, I enjoy attending a gala. I appreciate the programming that happens throughout the night, and believe in the importance of seeing an organization come to life in a room. You understand who the supporters are, who cares enough to show up, which corporations are philanthropic, and, noticeably, which ones are not. There are a lot of very wealthy people I have never seen in a philanthropic room. Ever. It’s sad.

Why is this important?

It’s hard enough to fundraise for a company where an investor gets equity in return, where significant financial gain is eventually possible. It’s even harder to fundraise for a nonprofit, especially in the racial justice sector, especially in 2026.

It pains me that during a tumultuous political time, the great work of these organizations is getting lost. Not only are we losing organizations left, right, and center, but a lot of major corporations are stepping away from supporting the organizations that need it most. And while organizations like the Metropolitan Museum will have unprecedented fundraising numbers this year, I’m not sure they are the ones most at risk right now. Just as conglomerates have taken over small businesses, so, too, have larger orgs begun to shrink the smaller ones.

Organizations like the Pledge and others working in racial equity and economic justice, like The Bail Project, Color Of Change, and Black Girls Code, have all had to navigate a noticeable pullback in corporate partnerships and high-net-worth giving as social justice work falls out of “trend” or favor. The results of one single night can meaningfully impact how the organization operates and whether, and how, we’re able to function in the year that follows. And when so many causes we care about are under attack simultaneously, donor dollars get spread incredibly thin. (That fragmentation, in many ways, was part of a broader plan conceived by this administration.)

There is also the takeaway that much of the press around the gala ends up being about the event itself as opposed to the actual work or the reason the mission was created. I enjoy having the block party at the Pledge Gala—that’s why I created it—so there could be some level of accessible, democratic celebration of the work. But I find the gala part really challenging, especially as people focus more on the red carpet, who showed up, and who felt left out, when the focus should instead be on which small businesses are being impacted and awarded grants, how we can show up as a community to celebrate and support them, or even who the generous donors are instead of the petty banter around who wore what or who sat with who.

When I started the Pledge, I was against taking money from high-net-worth individuals I didn’t feel aligned with. My perspective has since shifted. Emma Grede, who became chairman in 2021, played a role in persuading me otherwise. Capital is capital, and giving out millions of dollars in grants often means taking capital from places you wouldn’t have initially expected to. That was more of an issue in the pandemic. Now, the scarcity of capital for Black organizations is my primary focus.

I guess I will end this by saying that I am not against rich people, but I am against rich people who don’t give… taxes being no exception to that.

Other things to read

• Can the Costume Institute Survive Without the Met Gala? — Vanessa Friedman, The New York Times

• What Does Tucker Carlson Really Believe? I Went to Maine to Find Out. — The Daily

This email is likely too long for your inbox. Sorry.

I love spring because everything comes alive again. That reincarnation shows up in my relationship to clothing, too, and I find that I’m more inspired to breathe new life into the pieces residing in the depths of my closet, while also feeling inspired to search anew for pieces I’ll love and cherish for years to come. It’s a fun catch-22 in that way. Anyway. Here are some of the things I’ve been wearing.

I think the key to wearing sequins is making sure the sequins themselves are bigger, think pailettes over small sequins. Keeping the look tonal also helps. You can pair this secondhand skirt with a caramel sweater and huaraches, for example.

Fun tip when you’re bored of accessories in general… tie a scarf, fasten a clip, add a keychain. I wore this raffia tote a million times in a week (evidence below) but adding the flower made it feel fresh. And if you want a different option, I love this Chloe one and it’s currently 30% off.

Subscribe now

Fun tip: if you’re ever feeling shoppy but don’t want to commit to the bit (i.e. the scrolling and the driving and etcetera), the best little luxury to buy is a new set of underthings. A good bra goes a long way.

One-piece swimsuits as going out tops = genius. They have structure and boning and support, usually, so you don’t need a bra. More options to consider: Burberry x Hunza G (also comes with a matching hair tie), leopard from Nili Lotan, a bright green set that comes with a fringed pareo from Taller Marmo. Also, there are a million banging Pucci swimsuits in the capsule they did with MyTheresa. Run!

Something I’m thinking about, or obsessing over actually, is summer suedes and well-worn weather. The two go hand-in-hand in my opinion. The Brother Vellies nutmeg huaraches and this Dior bag are an excellent combo. You’ll be seeing a lot of the below in the coming weeks and months.

Brother Vellies Lace-up Huaraches in Nutmeg // Medium Diorly Bag Golden Saddle Suede Calfskin // Cartier Must de Cartier Watch (secondhand) // Saint Laurent loafers // Sezane Will Jacket // Isabel Marant Bekett Sneaker

Some of the links in this newsletter are affiliate. If you happen to buy something I might earn a commission.

I read somewhere that in times of economic scarcity, vampire media runs rampant in pop culture. The 1970s had Anne Rice, 2008 had Kristen Stewart. It makes sense. They represent power imbalance and a hunger for connection. My theory is that scarcity used to produce vampire media and now it produces spiritual and parasocial coping mechanisms.

What’s interesting about the age we’re living in is that while the imbalance of economic prosperity is greater than ever, social apps have us convinced that we’re all sort of… fine? There’s a lot of consumerist behavior being mimicked (I’m not immune to this type of posting, I’m aware), and in that sense we’ve been slightly deluded into thinking everything is okay. Kind of.

What I’m getting at is that the media that might have become more prevalent during a time like this hasn’t really had the chance to thrive because of how we use the internet, sometimes to talk to one another, but more often to form and foster parasocial relationships. And in effect, we’re craving more reasoning for why we feel the way we do. Horoscopes are a good example. Spiritual healing is another. Human bloodlust is rooted in money, yes, but also in understanding one’s own needs on a cosmic level.

~

I once dated a hypnotist. In fact, I dated a hypnotist for a very long time (within hypnotist dating frameworks), so I have a slightly niche experience in that space. When I heard about a spiritual healer recommended through a friend of a friend, I thought I’d try it.

My first session happened several months ago. His home was beautiful and covered in religious memorabilia: Jesus, the Virgin Mary, Buddha. There were also portraits of the cosmos. My second session happened last week.

The experience was intense in that I blacked out, or felt semi-conscious, for a large majority of it. We spoke for about an hour and a half and it didn’t feel forced. Sometimes, when speaking to my own shrink, every second feels like an eon. That was not the case here. This session was also quite physical and he touched pressure points on my stomach, for example. (I know that certain points are associated with psychological triggers, like how we store tension in our hips. That definitely proved true for me.)

A lot of our conversation revolved around whether or not I would have my own biological children, which is something I obsess over quite often. The spiritual healer said the spirit of this child was present in the room with us. I wasn’t sure I liked that, but as a whole, I enjoyed the session and left his beautiful home covered in religious memorabilia with a sense of clarity I hadn’t felt in a long while.

And I think the reasoning for that is: it felt like a relief to rely on someone else’s faith to restore my own. Faith, in this context, is a loose word. He didn’t have a specific religious affiliation so much as a broader understanding that human beings are connected to the cosmos, that we’re linked to something greater, perhaps to one another. That faith is stored in our own bodies and our own minds.

At a time where everything feels difficult—politically, the world is a mess, economically, the world is a mess, socially, the world is a mess—I left that session understanding why churches are becoming more and more full. To be clear, that’s a beautiful thing, but it’s also interesting, psychologically. It’s satisfying to put your faith in an institution and for that institution to reflect your struggles back to you in a way that feels solvable, or at least approachable.

~

Truthfully, the experience was undeniably confusing. I felt a sense of clarity but more specifically wonder that I hadn’t in a very long time. But in all honesty, I likely won’t go again. I’m going to attempt to put my faith back in myself. Let’s see how that goes.

Other things to read

• The Shreveport Mass Killing Isn’t Just About ‘Mental Health’ — Brittney Cooper, The Cut

• Lil Kim Fans vs. Me (Again) — Steven Kolb, Substack (For context: Every year Lil’Kim’s fans wage a full on war on the CFDA and Steven Kolb to demand she be named a fashion icon. His letter last week was great.)

Steven Kolb

Lil Kim Fans vs. Me (Again)

Dear Lil’ Kim fans…

Read more

2 months ago · 14 likes · 3 comments · Steven Kolb

• My Mother Gave Up on Love. Then She Met ChatGPT. — The New York Times

• The Doux Secures Minority Investment From VMG Partners — Kathryn Hopkins, WWD (Investment and funding for Black-owned brands and racial justice orgs has become much harder to come by, and I am happy to share my co-investment alongside VMG Partners in Maya and Brian Smith of The Doux.)

I love the idea of a book club but find that a book club would sort of drag out. Is there a world where we do “book club” in Chat but for some of the articles I’ve read and want to discuss?

Curious by Aurora James

In Rotation: #01

If you’re confused as to why this email is landing in your inbox on a day that is not Sunday, it’s because I have news, depending on your definition of the word. I love writing this newsletter but was getting increasingly frustrated trying to pack all of the thoughts, links, articles I’m reading, and thrift finds into something that ends up way too long…

Read more

2 months ago · 51 likes · 4 comments · Aurora James

So here it is, my first fashion-focused send. I’m calling these In Rotation because I tend to re-wear the same pieces. Is that title boring? You can let me know in the comments, I won’t be offended. The world would be a better place if we all listened to constructive criticism, probably. At least sometimes.

In Rotation #01

If you’re still here, hi. An essay (likely filled with more questions than answers, in classic Curious fashion) and flea finds will still be landing in your inbox. Candidly, I’m still working on titles for those segments, which is why I’m only soft launching them for now.

What do you want to see more of on Curious? More Chat? More Notes? I’m endlessly curious, ha, about how these newer platforms actually work in practice, and this is one I’m still very much figuring out. That said, I do really like it, and I want to lean in more.

Leave a comment

Some of the links in this newsletter are affiliate and I might earn commission if you happen to buy something.

When I heard that Jeremy Harris had been in jail, my immediate reaction was panic. I found myself thinking about my own experience, the three days I spent in jail years ago and how it did change me.

It was terrifying of course. (I wrote about it in my memoir, Wildflower, and you can read an excerpt of this particular experience in Vogue.) My court-appointed placement led me to Dress for Success, an organization that helps unhoused women find outfits for job interviews. The forced disconnect from the outside world followed by the ability to focus my energy on something specific and constructive was personally transformative. My rock bottom did, in a very specific way, bring me back to the right path. I know that outcome isn’t universal.

I keep coming back to that idea of the end of the road and the “rock bottom” that I experienced. My goal became to catch myself before hitting the floor. (There’s a moment, sometimes, where you can recognize the fall while it’s still happening. And if you can’t, sometimes other people catch you for you.) Whether that’s a 10-day escape to The Hoffman Process, four days unplugged over Easter weekend, or, in Jeremy’s case, 23 days in a Japanese prison, I keep wondering what that kind of intentional, or unintentional, disconnect is actually supposed to do.

In some cases, it’s obvious that for certain people—celebrities, like Martha Stewart—something as extreme as prison gets framed as “rehabilitative” in a way it just isn’t for everyone else. They’re able to come out of it with a narrative and a reset.

Things to listen to and/or read this week:

• Jeremy O. Harris Recounts His 23 Days Imprisoned In Japan, Vanity Fair written by Jeremy O. Harris

• The Alabama Solution, HBO Max

• The New Family Portrait Has Four Legs and a Tail, NYT written by Dorie Chevlen

• She Was a Famous Millennial Feminist. Her Polyamory Memoir Is Heartbreaking, NYT written by Michelle Goldberg

In my basket

I have no plans of getting married, probably ever because I already did it once and found the experience to be not great, but I do adore all things bridal and I’ve considered purchasing bridal gowns and having them dipped in color… ping below if you’ve had experience with this.

White shoes are all the rage for spring. Net-a-Porter has some killer ones though my personal faves are this pair from Chloe which I have already been wearing OUT.

Objects of Desire

Some of the links in this newsletter are affiliate. If you happen to buy something I might earn a commission.

I’ve always been fixated on what “rebellion” looks like, precisely because I was bad at it growing up. My mom did a lot of drugs in her youth and there was an expectation that I would do the same. Ironically, my version of rebellion was the opposite of hers. I followed, for the most part, a pretty straight and narrow path. She thought that was strange, even conservative, but it was my way of sticking out. It allowed me to differentiate myself at home in a way that was largely healthy (at least in regards to illicit drug use).

Lately I’ve been wondering what rebellion looks like for the AI age. There’s a connectedness to Gen Z that feels entirely unique to them; there is also a uniformity in how they grew up and experienced the world. That interconnectivity might make their rebellion more predictable. Frankly, to cut to the chase, I think the “thought daughters” might be here to save us.

I’ve been bombarded with videos dissecting a rise in intellectualism, a return to literature, to thinking critically, to spending time off your phone. The “thought daughter” is someone who reads for the pleasure of it, who aspires to know themselves and their communities more intimately. If this were a 90s sitcom, they’d be the stereotypical nerd who takes off her glasses and suddenly the room realizes she’s beautiful.

Ultimately, this “trend” is a signal that a return to one’s intellectual life, in prioritizing self-optimization in a way that doesn’t reflect as outwardly as external beauty, is rejection of systems that are filtering human experiences with the same consistent tone of Sepia. Because while AI can comb through everything that exists on the internet, there’s still so much the human brain is capable of that has yet to be documented or uploaded. We can still evolve in directions it simply can’t scrape. There is also the fact that AI cannot create third spaces for us.

Clubs have always existed, cultural and communal and identity-driven, but right now, many of the “clubs” and microcultures in America feel centered around products and brands. I don’t necessarily know if that’s new (today it’s Rhode peptide glazing while a generation ago it was Lancôme Juicy Tubes and Lip Smackers). What does feel new is that it’s becoming “cool” to be intellectual, in the same way it’s now slightly gauche to be overly online, as someone on Substack put it. And in this context, being intellectual requires human to human interaction. Yes, you can type away on a newsletter, but what gives the newsletter fresh meaning is that other people are responding to, liking, or reading it.

It’s the norm to demonize any trend that a majority of women participate in. It’s easy to dismiss someone like Dua Lipa as performative because she says she likes to read books. It’s also easy to assume people are adopting this trend to seem more cool. I hate that sentiment. It’s a criticism that I largely disagree with. Because more than anything, the thought daughter feels like a direct rebellion against AI slop. It is rebellious to be critical in a constructive way; it is rebellious to care, deeply, about quality.

In my basket

An FYI that florals for spring are indeed an excellent… “trend” is obviously not the right word, but perhaps uniform is. I am stubborn about celebrating seasonality, particularly in a place that’s as consistent weather-wise as LA.

This Taraji top is an excellent going out top as a baseline, by the way. Can be worn with denim or trousers or essentially any other thing in your closet. I know the debate on what constitutes a good going out top is dissected again and again on this app, but I am tossing my opinion in the ringer: structured, tight at the waist, can be worn with jeans and heels or a skirt, pending your preference. I don’t think it has to be that serious.

Jeans and a T-shirt are never a bad idea when the T-shirt in question feels like it has a history. The older, the better. Everyone defaults to collecting bags but I’d argue that collecting vintage tees is equally as fun. Pro tip: always buy a shirt at the concert.

Ways to support organizations you love = buying merch from their shop. My #1 favorite items to buy are baseball caps but tees are a close second.

Brother Vellies

Leave a comment

Some of the links in this newsletter are affiliate. If you happen to buy something I might earn a commission.

We talk about male loneliness like it’s an abstract and standalone problem. It’s not. In some cases, it leads to mass violence, and I’ve been fixated on the idea that the internet may be making this worse. It’s difficult to separate that from how much time teens are spending online. As much as I wish adolescence (in some ways) resembled my own, where free time was shaped by boredom, it doesn’t. Not anymore.

Boredom has been replaced by entire corners of the internet built around increasingly dark content, including gore forums and uncensored videos. I still think about a conversation I had with Ikhyd after he came across a violent video on YouTube at 14. It bypassed parental controls. He was shaken enough to come to me about it.

That moment has stayed with me as I’ve been touring college campuses with him. We place so much emphasis on teens attending, with the assumption that it will shape their futures. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn’t. What’s surprised me is how little I’m thinking about academics at all. I’m thinking about safety. It’s terrifying to imagine him in an environment that is far away from home. There is only so much protection parents (or bonus parents) can offer, but proximity can feel like comfort, even when it is not.

From there, it is difficult not to zoom out. The psychology behind school shooters has shifted in part because there is an entire internet feeding into it. These thoughts no longer exist in isolation. They can be reinforced, repeated, and escalated.

Girls are not immune to this, either. When I was younger, I struggled with anorexia, and what stands out to me now is where I went for support and, if I am being honest, reinforcement: online. Even then, there were spaces that normalized it and made it feel like an identity. Being part of a club is particularly appealing when you are struggling.

So what do we do in a world where so much of what we consume is built around other people’s worst moments? Where true crime dominates, where we know the names and the stories, where in some ways we are helping make these people infamous?

I keep coming back to policy, to the idea that these systems do not have to fail us. They are built this way, which means they can be built differently. And maybe the more uncomfortable question is whether we are, even unintentionally, part of the same system we are worried about.

Things to listen to and/or read this week:

• The 25 Happiest Countries In The World, According To The 2026 World Happiness Report, Forbes

• We Study Mass Shooters. Something Terrifying Is Happening Online, The New York Times

In my basket

Slightly off script this week in that there are no outfits. I’ve been rotating bags pretty consistently and have been intentional about what I’m putting inside at the beginning of each day pending what my schedule looks like. It’s been a fun little experiment to look at my day and decide what I actually need to bring with me.

Brother Vellies

Some of the links in this newsletter are affiliate. If you happen to buy something I might earn commission.

I’ve been thinking a lot about emotional regulation and the label of hysteria placed on women. Hysteria for being too emotional, hysteria for being too angry, hysteria for being too obsessed with themselves.

I’ve also been thinking a lot about the political climate from 10 years ago and how one of the most revisited “arguments” for Clinton’s presidential eligibility was the idea that, as a woman, she was predisposed to emotional volatility in a way that men are not. I truly cannot wrap my head around how anyone thinks this is true. Men are obviously the more emotional creature, as evidenced by things like, idk, war.

But I have been thinking about emotional regulation as it relates to the ecosystem within which women have to live. How many of us have seen films and assumed that the women who are icy, dare I say bitchy, are immediately signaled as higher up on the food chain? For some reason, the example I’m thinking of right now is Miranda Priestly in The Devil Wears Prada. (I just saw the trailer for film #2. Unsure how I feel about it. The shoes are not good.)

I take an SSRI. I started taking them two years ago during a particularly tumultuous romantic partnership, and since then, especially with Trump’s election and the championing of poor thought leaders as a result, I’ve decided to stay on them. Historically I’ve been someone who swings emotionally in a lot of different directions. I do feel like this has stabilized me. Sometimes I wonder if it has also dulled the sharper points that have actually been what I needed to cut through different areas of life. This is something I have to figure out for myself.

With that in mind, I do not think it is problematic for women to feel regulated. What I worry about is the overwhelming urge for women to look regulated. We are freezing, zapping, plucking, poking the emotions off of our faces. Smile lines, frown lines, moments of surprise.

A video I saw recently discussed how women are turning to the deadpan personality. There’s a clip of Charli XCX being asked to smile more, and that leads to her further shielding her emotions from the public. The result is stoic femininity, carefully considered personality curation. This quote really stuck with me:

“If numbness is a way to disengage from patriarchal expectations, then anger and rage is a way to break free.” Our rage is warranted and our sadness is valid. Masking it will not make the world a better place for us.

Things to listen to and/or read this week:

• A Man Stopped Gambling, Drinking, and Watching Porn. He Wasn’t Trying To. Ozempic Was, The Diagnosis

• Why the Biggest Oscar Party Is Cutting Its Guest List in Half, The Town with Matthew Belloni

• The Alabama Solution on HBO Max

In my basket

Brother Vellies

Some of the links in this newsletter are affiliate. If you buy something I may earn commission.

One thing I’ve always struggled with, especially when it comes to publications and influencer content over the years, is the whole “look for less” concept. So much of it is built on dupes and knockoffs. And as someone who has been designing for more than a decade, I’ve seen firsthand how relentless that can be. Many of my own designs have been copied repeatedly. You can Google it and find the articles.

From the outside it might seem harmless, but it can be incredibly damaging for small businesses. Personally, I think dupes mostly just… suck.

Dupe culture isn’t a new subject. It’s been around for a long time. But the responsibility for it is often placed squarely on the consumer, as if the entire problem exists simply because people want cheaper things. I don’t necessarily think that’s fair. A 17-year-old with no money might want a Chanel bag, and of course they’re going to buy something similar from Shein. That’s predictable behavior.

What’s more interesting, and perhaps more important, is looking at the ecosystem that makes this possible in the first place. Original creators, especially smaller brands, often have very little protection for the work they’ve spent years building. The question shouldn’t be, why are people buying dupes? I feel like that’s obvious. What we should really be asking is, why is the system structured in a way that makes copying so easy and protection so difficult?

This conversation gets especially strange when it comes to beauty. The scale of copying there is wild. Amazon, for example, doesn’t go out of its way to police dupes unless a brand opens its own storefront on the platform. If you don’t participate in the marketplace, copycats can run rampant. In effect, the system incentivizes brands to join Amazon simply to protect themselves. And with beauty, the stakes are higher than fashion because it’s chemistry. It’s a lot scarier in a lot of ways.

But stepping away from the structural issues for a moment, I’ve always thought there was a better way to think about consumption in general.

What I’m interested in is the feeling that a certain brand, product, or design gives me. The feeling is what I’m searching for. Because once you understand that, you can often find something more accessible that captures the same spirit without copying the original outright.

This is part of why I love vintage and flea markets so much. Sometimes the magic is simply finding something authentic before it becomes a trend. The lamp I posted on my Instagram Stories last week is a good example. I found it for around $3,000, which is obviously still a lot of money, but if you click through to a similar version on 1stDibs, it’s closer to $30,000.

Ultimately, this is why developing personal taste matters. If you know what feeling you’re chasing, you don’t have to rely on a direct copy of something else. You can find pieces that evoke the same mood or energy without being a knockoff. Sometimes that means vintage, sometimes it means discovering something early, and sometimes it just means looking in a slightly different place. But the point is that taste gives you options. And in a culture obsessed with dupes, having your own point of view is a much more interesting way to shop.

Things to listen to and/or read this week:

• “I Hired a Lab to Counterfeit-Test a Dozen Suspicious Beauty Products I Bought Online. Every Single One Had a Problem,” Wirecutter

• “The Uncomfortable Experience of Watching ‘America’s Next Top Model’ 20 Years Later,” The New York Times (obviously still fixated on this show and its aftermath)

In my basket

Brother Vellies

Some of the links in this newsletter are affiliate. If you buy something I might earn a commission.

I wrote this ahead of my third fibroid surgery. I’m not usually someone who shares the ultra-personal parts of my life but it feels significant that I share my personal health experiences as so many women have to embark on the same terrifying journey.

I am terrified of needles. I’ve always been terrified of that environment. As a result, my brain required more distraction this week. I’ve cleaned every surface of my apartment and rearranged every planted flower in my bathroom to create a semblance of control.

I’ve also been thinking about how I should look walking into my surgery and whether or not that will shape how I’m treated. I’ve long been fascinated, maybe horrified would be a better word actually, by attractiveness bias, and the way we subconsciously judge and assign value based on appearance. It’s uncomfortable to admit how deeply that belief system lives in all of us.

The devil on my shoulder is insisting that if I look good, they’ll be more careful. That my particular surgery will be taken more seriously. Isn’t that awful? Writing that makes me cringe. I felt guilty afterward, too. But then I recognized it for what it is: a grasp for control. When women’s bodies are policed, debated, and still routinely dismissed, the mind will look for leverage wherever it can find it.

The duality of it is fascinating. We are obsessed with women’s bodies yet do exceedingly little to protect or celebrate them.

It’s a bit insane that we don’t talk about fibroids more often. Women’s health in general is a throwaway topic even though statistics represent real flesh, blood, and intelligence. We talk so casually about atrocities like lack of paid maternal leave that the seriousness of the issue has become diluted instead of helped.

We all know the name of every skin laser on the market. Picosure, Fraxel, Clear + Brilliant. When are we going to start talking about the kind of technology required to treat the fibroids that 70% of women will develop in their lifetime?

Things to listen to and/or read this week:

• “Why You Should Look Closely at That Photograph of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor,” Vanity Fair

• “The Pentagon vs. Anthropic + An A.I. Agent Slandered Me + Hot Mess Express,” Hard Fork

In my basket

Brother Vellies: From Nairobi to New York

Some of the links in this newsletter are affiliate. If you happen to buy something I might earn commission.

I realize that hindsight is always 20/20, and I realize that an excess of nostalgia can be a dangerous thing, but it does feel like the 2010s carried a certain hopeful electricity. The internet was beginning to bloom and, with it, a more level playing ground where individual voices could catapult themselves onto your screen. And many of those voices were diverse.

Body positivity was chief among those “trends” though I truly hate to call it that. It finally felt like bodies that looked different from what we had seen on runways were getting their turn, and influencers became the faces of that change. With the Trump administration, it feels as though many things are winding backward, and body positivity is one of them. Even the early-2000s references we’re started pulling from now evoke a time when eating disorders were at an all-time high, when the dominant aesthetic was painfully thin, aspirational to the point of punishing, all Starbucks logos and Juicy tracksuits and Rachel Zoe-era “nothing tastes as good…” energy. That was the environment I was brought up in, and there was a lot of pressure baked into it.

Post-COVID, the messaging around body positivity has largely disappeared. Frankly, I don’t see it anywhere. I don’t really see it on runways, I don’t really see it on my feed, and I certainly don’t see it represented in more inclusive sizing across the luxury market. And the reason why is kind of sort of obvious but I want to talk about it anyway.

Obviously, GLP-1s. But also, I’m not sure that we’ve psychologically unpacked our post-COVID world, which has inextricably changed our collective psyche and obsession with longevity and mortality. That’s obvious when you look at the wellness economy. Yes, it was rising before COVID too, but the boom has been astounding. And the messaging has shifted from “you should accept yourself the way you are” to “how can you best optimize yourself?”

I’m conflicted about that messaging because, on one hand, it’s true. Our country is not set up in a way that makes it easy to take care of ourselves. Most of us are exhausted. We are overworked. There is limited time and limited money to prepare healthy meals and handle the mental load that comes with gathering all the ingredients necessary for that. Time is a luxury, and it’s one most of us don’t have. And yet, it is important. Care for ourselves should be baked into our systems, as it is in other countries. You get the entire month of August off in France. You should go for walks. You should be eating enough protein. You should be getting eight hours of sleep. Your body requires that.

On the other hand, I worry that the self-optimization messaging is completing a loop that brings us right back to heroin chic. Are we actually trying to actually optimize how we feel or is about how we look? Another status symbol where the resale value is less anxiety? Does this trend contribute to exacerbating unhealthy relationships with eating? I worry about the young people whose social lives have shrunk on account of pandering to the sleep score on their Oura ring. And I worry about a world in which everyone becomes even more obsessed with themselves.

Mostly, I worry that self-optimization will become a socially acceptable form of control. At one point, my personal eating disorder transitioned into veganism, which, for me, became another way to regulate, restrict, and feel in charge of something.

That’s why I’m wary of the current obsession with optimizing. Self-optimization can easily masquerade as empowerment when it’s really just another control mechanism. And in a moment where women’s bodies are once again being politicized and weaponized, that impulse feels particularly scary. What looks like discipline or wellness can quickly become self-surveillance.

Things to listen to and/or read this week:

• “Confessions of a Former Body Positivity Influencer,” The New York Times

• “Americans Love Thy Neighbors,” The Atlantic

• “It’s Time for America to Admit That It Has a Marijuana Problem,” The New York Times

In my basket

Brother Vellies: From Nairobi to New York

Some of the links in this newsletter are affiliate. If you happen to buy something I might earn commission.

I was listening to this Ezra Klein episode (“We Didn’t Ask for This Internet”) on incentives and how systems shape behavior. And I’ve noticed how warped the incentives online feel. What you have to do to “succeed” on the internet feels kind of sad.

One of the easiest ways to get attention right now is to be negative about someone else. We’ve seen versions of this forever. It started with early blog-era snark. And because of how incestuous the algorithm is, it works best when people are fighting within their own communities. If it’s something you’re adjacent to, whether a brand you buy from or a cultural moment you care about, you’ll click for the context. Immediate success for the poster.

The other night, I tuned into Love Story (the JFK one) to watch my friend Dree Hemingway play Daryl Hannah. I went in wanting to support a friend and left thinking about the machinery of celebrity obsession. The stalking, the tabloid economy, the way gossip metastasizes into sport. Watching it made me think about how that culture has tormented so many people in real time. I mean, it contributed to the death of Princess Diana.

We like to pretend that era was uniquely cruel because it involved paparazzi with telephoto lenses, but the digital version of that is a result of the same impulse. I would argue that it’s now worse because the scale is larger. Everyone gets to contextualize someone else’s life for engagement.

This incentive structure that Erza Klein talks about does reward outrage and how easily the spectator seat transforms into surveillance. The Big Brother is us.

Anyway. That’s where my head is today.

Things to listen to and/or read this week:

• We Didn’t Ask for This Internet, The Ezra Klein Show

• What the world can learn from Aussie kids and the social media ban, On Assignment

• Anthropic’s Chief on A.I.: ‘We Don’t Know if the Models Are Conscious’, Interesting Times with Ross Douthat

In my basket

Brother Vellies: From Nairobi to New York.

Some of the links in this newsletter are affiliate. If you happen to buy something I might earn commission.