Very topical for me. I'm not a Sbux devotee - I usually bring a travel mug from home with regular old coffee in it - but I do occasionally hit a Sbux if the coffee isn't done by the time I leave my house. Such was the case today and I did order a 'skinny' vanilla latte mostly because I wanted to see if it tasted any different than the regular - it didn't (to me anyway). When I ordered I said the name 'skinny' instead of saying the drawn out no-fat, lo-cal (or whatever it would be) vanilla syrup, blah, blah... I reminded me of when they changed from small, medium, and large to the fancier short (remember the short?), tall and grande I used to make a point of not using the new size terms because I found them irritatingly grandiose and faux-European, but I got tired of the cashier taking my order and then yelling back to the barista with the approved Sbux size names. I suppose I could have kept it up as a matter of principle but it just seemed easier to bend to their empire - such as it is with the new skinny drinks.

I hate the term Skinny. That is the drink I have everyday at Starbucks but I would rather say "non fat, no sugar vanilla latte" than admit that I am watching my liquid caloric intake. I feel embarrassed to say it that way... really I do. Shorten the name of the order if you must, but don't refer to weight!

I just think it's an easier way for people to ask for the lowest calorie version of the drink. Plus, it points out how very very calorie laden some of their drinks are--which not everybody realizes. So, I don't get the people who are complaining--if you don't want to say "skinny"--say non-fat sugar free. Live and Let Live.

Some of the people on the inside don't like it either:
http://starbucksgossip.typepad.com/_/2008/01/a-barista-tells.html

I think the term is being taken out of context. Ordering a "skinny" is not by any means a new marketing concept. It's coffee shorthand that has been around since well before lattes overtook cappuchinos in popularity. It refers to Skim milk.

Back before the 15-adjective latte was common, you went to your coffeehouse and you ordered your espresso drink and specified whether or not you wanted it to ooze with froth. If you got really fancy, sometimes you'd specify if it was to be caffeinated or an extra shot. End of story. No flavors, no soy, none of that stuff. The assumption was ALWAYS that you wanted it made with whole milk.

So if you wanted skim milk, you had to tell them you wanted a skinnycap.

Now, this whole marketing thing of the Skinny Latte annoys me mostly because Starbuck's makes it sound like this is a revolutionary new concept. It isn't. The Skinny Latte is a nonfat sugar free tall latte. Nothing more. Sugar free syrups have been around for years. The marketing itself annoys me but using the word "skinny" doesn't.

In fact, it's sort of a relief that Starbuck's hasn't changed that name too since they seem to have developed the habit of changing coffee slang to suit their own needs (a cafe misto from Starbuck's anywhere else in the world is cafe au lait, for example).

My thoughts exactly, Marybeth. It's the coffee shop version of diner speak. It was originally just a way to quickly and clearly express skim milk in a loud, busy shop.
If you don't want to say it, don't, to each his own, but at the same time, it's not something created for the express purpose of shaming people about their order. In my world I see much more obvious and egregious attacks on people (esp. women) based on looks and weight that that's a battle I'm not going to pick.

I personally like the word "skinny" even though I'm not skinny myself. But since I normally order my mochas nonfat and no-whip anyway, I tried the Skinny Mocha... and it is gross. The sugar-free syrup has a really bad aftertaste. I go to Starbucks about once a week, and I'd rather just budget for the calories of the regular mocha... I couldn't even finish my skinny one.

I've ordered a skinny latte in the past (back when it was, as Marybeth pointed out, just a latte made with skim milk), and was told by a random manin line that I "didn't need to lose weight" (and thsi was before Napolian Dynmaite).

Ever since then I've felt self-conscious when ordering it, and will tend to go through the longer-winded version, perhaps because while ordering skim milk implies you're health-conscious, ordering a skinny implies you're weight conscious.

I think it's ok to be weight conscious, if you want to call it that, I think of it more as health conscious. If some man in line made a comment like that to me, I'd just tell him (not that it's any of his business anyway) that I was saving my calories for dessert later. Let's face it, some of their drinks have 400-500 calories...that's crazy bad for anyone, no matter how thin they are. And if that drink is an everyday thing, like it is with some people, I just don't get the squeamishness about asking for skim milk.

I don't have a problem with calling it a "Skinny Latte" (or whatever variation I'm asking for that day)... it's faster than spitting out "I'd like a tall, sugar-free vanilla, non-fat latte, please" and sounding like I was a high-maintenance pain in the arse. Simply saying "I'll have a skinny vanilla latte" is far less than I have to remember in the morning BEFORE I've had my coffee!

You're right that Skinny Latte doesn't have any deeper meaning than Diet Coke -- people are waaaay to sensitive. But it doesn't matter, because Starbucks' "skinny" drinks are AWFUL.