Disability fashion: Stephanie Thomas is shaking up the fashion industry
Featured Articles
Stephanie Thomas, fashion stylist for disabled people, talks about disability fashion and the need for an inclusive fashion industry.

Credit:
Image courtesy Stephanie Thomas
Disability fashion: Stephanie Thomas is shaking up the fashion industry
I typically dread phone calls (helloΒ Social Anxiety Disorder). But in the two weeks leading up to my scheduled Skype interview with Stephanie Thomas, I was oddly excited. To me, sheβs a true innovator, and being the innovation junkie that I am, I spent two weeks inside my head trying to whittle down the thousands of things I wanted to talk to her about.
Stephanie is a Disability Fashion Styling expert, thought leader, and tastemaker. She invented whatβs known as the Disability Fashion Styling SystemΒ© (DFSS) in 2004. Itβs an inclusive and empowering styling guide for Disabled people and their dressers that helps them dress with confidence, dignity, and self-reliance.
In addition to being a disability fashion expert, Stephanie is also an entrepreneur. She is the CEO and Founder ofΒ Cur8ableΒ β a social enterprise specializing in dressing with disabilities. Back in 2010, there was no place online about dressing with disabilities, so she startedΒ Luv What U Wear β your go-to place online for dressing with disabilities, which was relaunched as Cur8able in 2015. Sheβs spent over 2 decades researching clothing and retail trends exclusively for Disabled people. Today, sheβs known as the go-to stylist in Hollywood for Disabled actors and influencers. Sheβs also authored/edited an anthology,Β Fitting In: The Social Implications of Fashion and Dressing with Disabilities.
Something not so secret about me? I tend to fan-girl over wildly accomplished women who do good in the world. So, by interview time, I have the kind of excited nervousness you feel just before you meet your favorite movie star. But, from the moment her webcam comes on, I already feel like Iβm having a Skype call with a girlfriend. We talked about hair and head scarfs in the first couple of minutes, like two homegirls would. What struck me most about Stephanie is she is incredibly real and authentic; she has no airs about her. Odd for the over-achiever that she is. She runs a company; sheβs written a book; she teaches a college class, and sheβs managing a slew of partnerships with the likes of Zappos and AirBnB. She was also on her way to the NAACP Image Awards that night.
Sheβs also incredibly comfortable in her own skin. She has the kind of confidence that comes from a place of complete self-love. βWe have to start defining ourselves and self-identifying in a way that empowers us,β she reminds me. βNot in a way that implicitly forces us to see ourselves through someone elseβs perspective.β
Thatβs why she really hates the narrative of Disabled people βovercoming challengesβ. That narrative is often captured in insensitive things that the abled say, like βPeople in wheelchairs have to go through so much. How do they do it?β Or, for Stephanie, when people notice she doesnβt have a thumb, βOh, itβs no big deal. I didnβt even notice.β She muses, βWhy? You donβt need to apologize for my thumb. This is the way I was born.β
And thatβs really the issue at hand isnβt it. That we view the world from singular perspectives. That there is an abled lens of the world and the features of our built environment. The abled accept certain things as fact: humans are bipeds, humans have two arms, humans have 10 digits, humans can see, hear, etc. And we design products and experiences for that singular prototype in our minds. So, for someone limited by the built world around them, for someone whose features donβt match the prototype that a product or experience was designed for, just existing becomes an act of achievement in the eyes of the abled. For Stephanie, this rings especially true.
It took her a while to shred the βovercoming challengesβ super-woman trope. As a child, dance teachers would comment on how well she danced, with the obvious parenthesis being, for someone born without toes. βLike, ballet teachers wouldnβt take me on seriously,β she remembers. βIβm unskilled in the professionalβs eye, but whenever I meet a professional they are like, βHow are you able to emulate so well?ββ
But now, she rejects the idea that her worth is measured by how well she navigates the abled world. βThe persona of overcoming challenges actually feeds the idea that Iβm different. When in reality, Iβm not different, Iβm Stephanie.β Thereβs no need to compare, she argues with a passion thatβs tangible β even through a Skype call 10,000 thousand miles away. βWell, hell, if I look at it from your perspective you donβt walk like I do so youβre like mind blown because you donβt do it like I do. Well, I was never created to do it like you do. I was created and this is my normal. I have one thumb on my left hand, so I snap like this. Thatβs normal for this hand. I have no thumb on this hand, so I snap like this. This is my normal. Itβs like being a black woman. This is my hair. This is not βIβm overcoming.ββ
If thereβs anything Stephanie has to overcome, itβs her own fierceness. Whoo, child. *snaps*
Because her disability is not immediately visible, she describes herself as living in both the Disabled and non-disabled worldsβ¦almost like a shape-shifting anthropologist. Having that experience, I wanted to know what she sees at the core of these seemingly lost-in-translation moments between Disabled and non-disabled people. Why do the abled still get it so wrong? Why do they say offensive things to and about Disabled people? She references her Woodbury College studentsβ response to assigned reading on disability etiquette. βMy students were like, βWhy didnβt I know this? Iβve never heard this,β Theyβve never been taught. No one knows because no one teaches it, and I am a firm believer in something that I espouse called education through interaction.β
Stephanie explains that, in the U.S., the lack of interaction between Disabled and non-disabled people can be traced back to βugly lawsβ that deemed it illegal for any person, who is βdiseased, maimed, mutilated or deformed in any way, so as to be an unsightly or disgusting object, to expose himself to public view.β While these started as beggar ordinances, these laws not only essentially criminalized disability, but created a culture of isolation. βI think thatβs why people with disabilities and people without disabilities actually donβt often know how to react because the etiquette is not taught. Weβre taught, βHey, donβt stare. Donβt look at them,ββ she reasons, βPeople with disabilities are erased.β
And erased they are: from movies, from advertisements, from our entire collective visual consciousness. But, weβve come a long way, she reminds me. I was ranting to her about how awful the current offering of disability stock photos can be (more on that later). Stephanieβs still optimistic, though. βThere wasnβt a prosthetic category before [when searching for stock photos]. Weβre on the trajectory to get there but weβre not there. The fact that weβre here and Getty Images is starting to acknowledge it, I think is pretty powerful.β
I donβt know if I feel as optimistic. There are an estimated one billion Disabled people on the planet. And economic estimates say they β along with their immediate communities β represent about $8 trillion in spending power. Yet I see campaigns on Twitter advocating forΒ Changing Places ToiletsΒ that are fully accessible. Like, itβs still not a thing that every public toilet is fully accessible. I find these kinds of juxtapositions really confusing.
βItβs really not complicated,β Stephanie says casually, in a way that lets you know youβre about to be schooled. βYou canβt market to or design for someone you donβt value, and you canβt value someone you donβt see as a fashion customer.β She goes on to point out that the market for pet products is valued at $16 billion. Yet, even though Disabled people and their communities represent $8 trillion of spending power, Stephanie compares, βyou have more clothing for pets than you do for Disabled people in stores. Itβs not market representation in the numbers, itβs the value. We see more value in a poodle, in a labrador, in whateverβ¦than we do in a fashion customer with a disability.β
'You have more clothing for pets than you do for Disabled people in stores ... We see more value in a poodle, in a labrador, in whateverβ¦than we do in a fashion customer with a disability' Stephanie Thomas @cur8able #CripFashion Click To Tweet
So, this is less about actual dollars than it is about what we value. Or, as Stephanie explains it, βitβs just attitudinal. Itβs not a magic pill. Itβs just attitudinal.β Itβs no different, she says, to women of color having a hard time finding hair care or the right shade of foundation. βThe bottom line is value, attitudinal changes, seeing people as a viable customer. When people are doing the marketing and the branding and theyβre sitting in there looking at demographics; when theyβre putting together the whole brand DNA, they are not including certain people and thatβs just a reality.β
Β
Read more:Β Fashion designers arenβt ignoring the disability issue: they donβt know it exists.
Β
In her decades-long work as an βaccidentalβ disability fashion stylist (Stephanie uses the word βaccidentalβ because she didnβt even realize she was styling), these attitudes are all too real. As a disability fashion expert, she styles Disabled actors and influencers, helping them to find the right looks for red carpet events. But, she says, βsome people donβt want their clothing on certain people. Iβve literally had people tell me behind closed doors, βWe donβt want our products associated with them.ββ
Iβm shocked to hear that, but then again, not really. The battle for more diversity in the fashion and media industries is not a new one. Weβve been collectively finger-wagging, shading, and shaming mainstream media for its lack of diverse representation for some time now. Ironically though, many of those conversations have excluded disability representation altogether. Stephanie agrees. βWhen it comes to diversity, the D in diversity β the disability in diversity β is always left out,β she says. βWhen it comes to body positivity, itβs always left out.β
Itβs almost like equal media representation is one big pie, and each under-represented group is fighting individually for its own piece. Still though, as siloed as the battle to be seen has been, we cannot deny the progress made over recent decades. Our visual, cultural landscape has expanded over time to include more representation for women, people of color, and for the LGBTQ+ community. I ask Stephanie if she thinks the Disabled community is facing a similar fight.
She definitely agrees, but she points out that, unlike the African American or LGBTQ+ communities, Disabled people have βno political move[ment] behind them.β And without that backing, she argues, weβll continue to see dick-ish moves like withdrawing funding for Disability programs (side-eye at Betsy Devos,Β the 11th United States secretary of education from 2017 to 2021. ) βbecause thereβs no machine behind Disability to say, βIβm going to need you to not do thatβ.β
For Stephanie, this lack of a strong political machine behind Disability comes down to the fact that βDisabilityβ in itself is an umbrella term, and that activism and affinities typically happen at a more disability-specific level. In other words, there are stronger movements behind Autistic people, or people with Cerebral Palsy, or people with spinal cord injuries, for example, than there are for the broader Disability community.
And that makes sense. While many may self-identify as Disabled, the needs being advocated for are varied. She points out that this is mirrored at the funding level too. Youβre more likely to see a fundraiser for Blindness than for Disability in general. βItβs so segregated. People donβt come together because theyβre all vying for the same money.β
βWe see more value in a poodle than we do in a fashion customer with a disability.β
Β
But, thatβs just one part of the answer to the question whatβs it going to take to get better representation for Disabled people in media or fashion?, according to Stephanie. The rest of it comes down to culture. What really needs to happen is for people to see Disability as a culture, she tells me with deep conviction. βThat ability to see Disability as culture would change everything,β she continues, βwhich is why I donβt use whack terms β and you can quote that β whack terms like βdifferently-abledβ or βall abilitiesβ.β
Yes, she said βwhackβ and I loved her from that moment. Like, I-want-to-tattoo-her-name-on-my-arm kind of love.
Those terms, she tells me, have βnothing to do with culture and how we exist in the world.β But once again, her optimism shines through. βI think weβre on a trajectory and I know you hear my passion and my angst. Iβm really optimistic though, because I know that this is not a race. Itβs a marathon. It is not a 100-yard, itβs not a sprint. Itβs going to take time.β
Which is why Stephanieβs work is so important. From teaching, to developing an anthology, to her work through Cur8able, she is using fashion as a way to create that culture. Sheβs making it clear that Disabled people are not simply viable as fashion consumers, but desirable.
A visit toΒ Cur8able.comΒ is a window into the world Stephanie was born to create. Bright, glamorous shots of Cur8tors fill the site. Cur8tors are style influencers invited by Stephanie to share fashion and beauty shots on Cur8ableβs social media feeds. The team includes an international fashion industry branding consultant, a disability thought leader, a disability advocate, several actors, a You Tube content creator, nail tech/wheelchair basketball player, body-positive advocate, and an award-winning TV producer/model. Scrolling through Cur8ableβs Instagram feed does not disappoint. The photos, the outfits, the magnetic poses with βIβm-the-shitβ attitudes all scream DISABLED IS DESIRABLE!
What does it take to be a disability fashion stylist for Disabled people?
Itβs also clear that Stephanie knows what sheβs doing as a stylist. I wanted to know more about her Disability Fashion Styling SystemΒ©.
βIn short, itβs Accessible, Smart, Fashionable,β she explains. These are the three guiding principles behind her styling system that govern the choices she makes when picking outfits for clients. First, she considers how easy it is to get in and out of the item. βIs this easy for you to put on and take off? Thatβs Accessible,β she says. Then thereβs Smart. As Stephanie describes it, βI want some clothing thatβs not stupidβ¦something thatβs medically safe. To me, clothing that makes you sick or nauseous, or that disrupts or causes body sores is not smart. Medically safe is smart. And then, fashionable is something that is going to work with your lifestyle. Itβs something that works with your body type, that is beautiful, and you love it.β

Stephanie styles one of her clients, YouTuber @itslololove.
Credit:Β©Brad Swonetz for Zappos Adaptive / Cur8able.com
Β
Clothing for disabled people can be accessible, smart, and fashionable
The Styling System is part of her broader Stephanie Thomas Styling Method that forms the basis of her work as a fashion stylist for Disabled people. The Styling System is a tool that everyone can use, however, whether youβre shopping for yourself or a loved one. Itβs also something designers can use to assess the accessibility of their own collection. That if theyβre standing in front of it, Stephanie says, βThey can say, βOkay, now, for someone that is seated [in a wheelchair], is this accessible, smart, and fashionable? For a little woman, would this be accessible, smart, fashionable?ββ
When it comes to working directly with her clients though, itβs not always so clear-cut. Stephanie describes shopping with her clients as an emotional process. Often because they may fall in love with an outfit that doesnβt meet the Accessible or Smart criteria.
Once a client makes a booking with Stephanie, she starts off with a phone call. βI just ask them what itβs like dressing, or what are their challenges dressing. Thatβs always a loaded question because most people donβt think they have challenges,β she explains. She tells me about a client who said he had no challenges dressing, even though it takes him three hours each time.
After discussing the functional or practical matters of dressing, Stephanie tries to get a sense for her clientsβ preferences. βThe next thing we talk about is what they like. Whatβs your aesthetic? How do you see yourself in your mind? Whatβs your image of who you are and how you dress?β
Next, they go shopping together. This is when the real work begins. Stephanieβs job is to find an outfit thatβs true to her clientsβ aesthetic, but still meets the criteria of her styling method. As she goes about describing this shopping trip, I imagine itβs like one of those wardrobe makeover reality shows, like TLCβs What Not to Wear, where thereβs always a heated battled between the style expert and the lowly fashion victim doing everything they can to hold on to that one flannel shirt.
So, I ask her if there are any tense moments when shopping with clients. She says thereβs definitely push back. βI get push back from my clients because they say, βI just like it. I just want to wear it.β I say, βI get it, but Iβm not going to change my policy for you. Because if I change my policy for you β if itβs not accessible, smart, fashionable β and then, Iβ¦or someone else is not there to help you dress, and youβre struggling to get in it, then, weβve just wasted our time and money. You should be able to have something that works for your body typeβ.β
For Stephanie, this isnβt just business. Thereβs a proven method and a mission behind her work. She wants Disabled people to dress fashionably for their body type and love what they wear, but not at the expense of their health, dignity, or independence. And so she will never let a client pick an outfit just to please them or get the job done. If a client insists on getting something that doesnβt meet the criteria, she tells them to either buy it another time, or buy it right then but without her consent. βI have to be honest about that because [what] if they say βstyled by Stephanieβ and it looks all whack?β Yes, she then said whack again.
Although sheβs tough about sticking to the functional criteria, she definitely lets her clients have the final say when it comes to aesthetic choices like color. βStyling is always co-creating and thatβs not a Stephanie Thomas Styling Method thing, thatβs [what] any good stylist [would do]. Youβre going to always co-create, you donβt bully people into telling them their own style aesthetic.β
While Stephanie may not dictate her clientsβ style choices, sheβs certainly dictating to the fashion industry that its future is inclusive. She refers to her styling system as βthe bridge between where the fashion industry is and where itβs going.β Her consulting extends to the business world, where sheβs hired by brands to help them meet the fashion needs of Disabled people in a variety of ways. The fact that some brands are concerned about this gives me some of that optimism that Stephanie has.
Disability fashion: where next for the industry?
So, where is the fashion industry going? We know that fashion labels like Tommy Hilfiger,Β Izzy Camilleri, and Zappos have launchedΒ adaptive clothingΒ lines. Can we expect to see more major brands introduce inclusive collections? And, what will it take to get there? Stephanie encourages clothing designers to start small. βStart with looking at what you have, put your toe in the water, get in a community, get the feedback, and then, go from there,β she advises. Sheβs pretty adamant that making more inclusive fashion isnβt a major design challenge.
βGet over the idea itβs a design issue,β she says, βOnce you discover where pockets need to be for sitting; once you discover how to make sure that someone can get in a pair of pants with braces or a leg cast, thatβs it. Once you figure out magnetic closures, hook and loop, those are the design issues.β This she refers to as aΒ universal approachΒ to fashion design. And there are already some brands that are creating clothing that is designed more universally. For example, as Stephanie explains, clothing with ββ¦very few fasteners. Or, itβs not complicated to get in and out for certain body types.β
But this all comes down to choice. Or, as Stephanie describes it, attitude. The path to inclusion ofΒ disability in the fashion industry requires an attitudinal change. It requires a decision to meet the needs of an entire market segment that is typically left out: those whoβve been told their bodies are βtoo differentβ to be included.
We have to get over the idea that this is difficult, because itβs not. This is a question of will, and the courage to ask, βWho did I leave out?β each time we create something. And, the bravery to ask ourselves why we donβt see value in a Disabled body.

Corinne Gray
Hi, I'm glad you're here! I started URevolution with my husband and sister-in-law in 2017 because I get excited by the idea of an inclusive society for people living with chronic illness or disability.