Mara Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 This just seriously pisses me off. Besides the Dove campaign, no one in the fashion industry seems to give a shit about "real" women and girls and what message their obsession with ultra-skinny sends. I dealt with an eating disorder (bulimia) for TWENTY YEARS, and am now paying a very high price, literally (about $16000 to get my teeth fixed. I destroyed them with all of the stomach acid from vomiting). I finally started getting help 10 years ago and am now 5 years without an episode. And the ironic thing? I was NEVER fat. I just thought I was, and it became a vicious cycle. Twenty years later and the societal problem seems worse, not better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeddysMullet Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 QUOTE (Mara @ Dec 9 2008, 06:58 PM) This just seriously pisses me off. Besides the Dove campaign, no one in the fashion industry seems to give a shit about "real" women and girls and what message their obsession with ultra-skinny sends. I dealt with an eating disorder (bulimia) for TWENTY YEARS, and am now paying a very high price, literally (about $16000 to get my teeth fixed. I destroyed them with all of the stomach acid from vomiting). I finally started getting help 10 years ago and am now 5 years without an episode. And the ironic thing? I was NEVER fat. I just thought I was, and it became a vicious cycle. Twenty years later and the societal problem seems worse, not better. Thank you for sharing that, Mara, and congratulations on 5 years. I know the territory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fridge Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 I've never understood this obsession with stick insect like women. Ask just about any man and if he is honest, he will tell you he much prefers a bit extra and us blokes like our women to have curves, so I don't really know who this is designed to appeal to. I remember my wife was a bit worried when she put on some weight due to being unable to excercise due to disability, but I just told her it meant there was more of her to love....... Most blokes go for the whole package. We're not going to say "well, I like her legs, but I wish she would do something about her backside" It's all or nothing, and ladies, in general we like you just the way you are..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Janie Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 QUOTE (Fridge @ Dec 9 2008, 05:54 PM) I've never understood this obsession with stick insect like women. Ask just about any man and if he is honest, he will tell you he much prefers a bit extra and us blokes like our women to have curves, so I don't really know who this is designed to appeal to. I remember my wife was a bit worried when she put on some weight due to being unable to excercise due to disability, but I just told her it meant there was more of her to love....... Most blokes go for the whole package. We're not going to say "well, I like her legs, but I wish she would do something about her backside" It's all or nothing, and ladies, in general we like you just the way you are..... I like you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostGirl Posted December 10, 2008 Author Share Posted December 10, 2008 QUOTE (Janie @ Dec 10 2008, 08:38 AM) QUOTE (Fridge @ Dec 9 2008, 05:54 PM) I've never understood this obsession with stick insect like women. Ask just about any man and if he is honest, he will tell you he much prefers a bit extra and us blokes like our women to have curves, so I don't really know who this is designed to appeal to. I remember my wife was a bit worried when she put on some weight due to being unable to excercise due to disability, but I just told her it meant there was more of her to love....... Most blokes go for the whole package. We're not going to say "well, I like her legs, but I wish she would do something about her backside" It's all or nothing, and ladies, in general we like you just the way you are..... I like you. He's definitely one of the good ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rushgoober Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 She's already extremely thin in the first picture - the 2nd just makes her look inhuman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mara Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 QUOTE (Janie @ Dec 10 2008, 09:38 AM) QUOTE (Fridge @ Dec 9 2008, 05:54 PM) I've never understood this obsession with stick insect like women. Ask just about any man and if he is honest, he will tell you he much prefers a bit extra and us blokes like our women to have curves, so I don't really know who this is designed to appeal to. I remember my wife was a bit worried when she put on some weight due to being unable to excercise due to disability, but I just told her it meant there was more of her to love....... Most blokes go for the whole package. We're not going to say "well, I like her legs, but I wish she would do something about her backside" It's all or nothing, and ladies, in general we like you just the way you are..... I like you. I have found that most guys DO think this way when it comes to personal interaction. OK, yeah, they drool and go gaga over the "That's It" thread, but women have their Chippendale calendars. . .(I don't - I have my Rush 2009 calendar ). Men generally do not expect, or necessarily WANT, someone who looks like a living Barbie doll. At least any man who is worth spending any amount of time with doesn't. Nobody likes to snuggle up to a skeleton with skin stretched over it; those bony elbows can inflict serious damage! And no man likes to take his date to a 5-star restaurant to watch her sip water and pick at bread crust (or know that he's going to shell out $150 for her meal and she's gonna throw it all up later). Now, how to get that message across to the general female populace? Because Glamour and Cosmo aren't helping, that's for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iluvgeddy05 Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 QUOTE (Mara @ Dec 10 2008, 11:14 AM) Because Glamour and Cosmo aren't helping, that's for sure. Not to start a magazine fight , but I do need to stick up for Glamour here. I've been a reader since I was in high school and the reason is that they are one of the female-targeted magazines out there that tries the best to feature women of all sizes, and intelligent women at that. Also, I've had (have?) my struggles with eating disorders and I can say their magazine has helped me think more positively about my body and being a woman in general. Is the magazine perfect? No, but they're definitely more female positive than others on the market. This said, I do have a bone to pick with them with putting Britney on the cover and I'm considering writing to the editor. They're known for featuring intelligent and accomplished women in their magazine (9x out of 10 I would say) and I'm upset they fell into the media pit with this one. The interview is rediculous and just showcases what a dumb bag of rocks she really is. This is an exception for I've seen women of all ages and sizes on their cover, such as Queen Latifa and Diane Lane. You won't see them on Cosmo. off the soap box... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbomb106 Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 I realize I don't speak for all guys here, but personally, I would opt for the (metaphorical) girl next door than the made-up women you see in magazines. I find them much more attractive, and it tells me they're not as high maintenance. In fact, when I'm out, I won't even consider the overly-gussied up women because they strike me as too high maintenance. I believe in keeping it simple - and unairbrushed. Just my 2 cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
treeduck Posted December 11, 2008 Share Posted December 11, 2008 When I look at pictures of me I can see that I'm in dire need of a hair brush rather than and airbrush... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaye Posted December 11, 2008 Share Posted December 11, 2008 QUOTE (treeduck @ Dec 11 2008, 10:15 PM)When I look at pictures of me I can see that I'm in dire need of a hair brush rather than and airbrush... Oh, I hear that, man! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edie Posted December 11, 2008 Share Posted December 11, 2008 QUOTE (treeduck @ Dec 11 2008, 11:15 PM) When I look at pictures of me I can see that I'm in dire need of a hair brush rather than and airbrush... Me too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
udanax Posted December 12, 2008 Share Posted December 12, 2008 QUOTE (Mara @ Dec 9 2008, 03:32 PM) I see they "slimmed" her thighs down in the second one by removing the natural demarcation between quads and hamstrings. I have that line and am rather proud of it. It means my legs are toned and in good shape. Or so I thought. According to these people, they're just fat. i have the same thing... i don't think it should be taken out either..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angua Posted December 13, 2008 Share Posted December 13, 2008 I found I'd inadvertantly been photographed and that pic has ended up in a magazine yesterday. Because I thought i'd avoided the camera I'm looking pretty relaxed (despite a hangover). If I'd have known that it was going to be published I'd have hidden a bit better! I need not so much the airbrush as the entire air decorating team! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theredtamasrule Posted December 13, 2008 Share Posted December 13, 2008 QUOTE (GhostGirl @ Dec 8 2008, 01:38 PM) Saw this on the Huffington Post... Even Jessica Friggin' Alba doesn't look good enough for the public. This is for a calendar, apparently. The original photo on the left had to be airbrushed into the unrealistic and ridiculous Barbie image on the right. http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gen/52490/original.jpg Because she looked horrendous in the original. I get so sick of this crap. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/08/j...t_n_149182.html The original looks far, far better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grapes_under_pressure Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 QUOTE (theredtamasrule @ Dec 14 2008, 12:35 AM) QUOTE (GhostGirl @ Dec 8 2008, 01:38 PM) Saw this on the Huffington Post... Even Jessica Friggin' Alba doesn't look good enough for the public. This is for a calendar, apparently. The original photo on the left had to be airbrushed into the unrealistic and ridiculous Barbie image on the right. http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gen/52490/original.jpg Because she looked horrendous in the original. I get so sick of this crap. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/08/j...t_n_149182.html The original looks far, far better. it's like playing spot the ridiculous difference! there's about 11 or so that i can see. like her knee. they made her knee more pointy. :-/ and made her whole body thinner. lol what a joke i like to hug someone and not feel like im being beaten up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yaoi_myantidrug Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 QUOTE (Grapes_under_pressure @ Dec 17 2008, 02:23 PM) QUOTE (theredtamasrule @ Dec 14 2008, 12:35 AM) QUOTE (GhostGirl @ Dec 8 2008, 01:38 PM) Saw this on the Huffington Post... Even Jessica Friggin' Alba doesn't look good enough for the public. This is for a calendar, apparently. The original photo on the left had to be airbrushed into the unrealistic and ridiculous Barbie image on the right. http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gen/52490/original.jpg Because she looked horrendous in the original. I get so sick of this crap. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/08/j...t_n_149182.html The original looks far, far better. it's like playing spot the ridiculous difference! there's about 11 or so that i can see. like her knee. they made her knee more pointy. :-/ and made her whole body thinner. lol what a joke i like to hug someone and not feel like im being beaten up! apparantly even the background wasn't hot enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garden Dancer Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 The more I see this, the more bewildered I am. They gave her boobs a lift... Carved her shoulder... Trimmed her (gorgeous) legs... Nipped in her waist... Shaved her hips down... Gave her a 'tan' Altered her neck... Changed the angle of her face... They made the light/shadow look, well, wrong... And what they did to her hair... yuck. Geeze people, why use her if you didn't want her? It hardly looks like the same woman. It definitely doesn't look real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
izzy Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 I just don't understand the point of using models if they're going to computerize it anyway... wouldn't it be a hell of a lot cheaper too just to computer generate models than pay them? Modeling is hardly a job anyway... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tick Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 I know one thing. You don't need air brushing G.G. Your a natural beauty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Sphinc-Tor Posted December 24, 2008 Share Posted December 24, 2008 I don't get what the big deal is. To me, all it means is that she isn't as beautiful in real life as in pictures...although she does nothing for me to begin with. It's kinda like lip syncing...there really is no talent there and it only makes the artist/model look bad when you get down to brass tacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garden Dancer Posted December 25, 2008 Share Posted December 25, 2008 QUOTE (Prince Sphinc-Tor @ Dec 24 2008, 09:06 AM) I don't get what the big deal is. To me, all it means is that she isn't as beautiful in real life as in pictures...although she does nothing for me to begin with. It's kinda like lip syncing...there really is no talent there and it only makes the artist/model look bad when you get down to brass tacks. The big deal is that this is the sort of unrealistic image that can crush a young girl's self image. The fact that an already slender woman has been nipped and trimmed and altered so much through airbrush and photoshop and whatever, to something that is not realistically achievable, then held up as the ideal beauty, THAT'S what the big deal is. What are women and girls supposed to think when the body in the mirror can never be the body in the magazine? We feel like we are failing, we feel like we are unattractive, and that leads to very dangerous choices. THAT'S what the big deal is. It's hard to see that kind of thing, every day, and not feel like "Well shit. This is what's beautiful, and I can't get there..." In our heads, we know. It's all a load of crap. But still, it gets to even the strongest of us. And yes, we know that most men out there want a soft, curvy woman. We know this. But still, when damn near every magazine out there is telling us "You have to look like this..." it still affects us. THAT'S why we are so up in arms, bitching and complaining. It's yet another example of the unachievable held as the ideal by some idiot with photoshop and airbrush. edit to add... She is better looking in real life... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mara Posted December 26, 2008 Share Posted December 26, 2008 QUOTE (tick @ Dec 23 2008, 02:34 PM) I know one thing. You don't need air brushing G.G. Your a natural beauty. She is very pretty. Any time I see pictures like this and start to feel even the teeniest bit envious, it is so easy to remind myself that it isn't even close to real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of a Rider Posted December 30, 2008 Share Posted December 30, 2008 QUOTE (Grapes_under_pressure @ Dec 17 2008, 04:23 PM) QUOTE (theredtamasrule @ Dec 14 2008, 12:35 AM) QUOTE (GhostGirl @ Dec 8 2008, 01:38 PM) Saw this on the Huffington Post... Even Jessica Friggin' Alba doesn't look good enough for the public. This is for a calendar, apparently. The original photo on the left had to be airbrushed into the unrealistic and ridiculous Barbie image on the right. http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gen/52490/original.jpg Because she looked horrendous in the original. I get so sick of this crap. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/08/j...t_n_149182.html The original looks far, far better. it's like playing spot the ridiculous difference! there's about 11 or so that i can see. like her knee. they made her knee more pointy. :-/ and made her whole body thinner. lol what a joke i like to hug someone and not feel like im being beaten up! The photo on the right may or may not have been airbrushed but to me it looks like a totally different pic from the one on the left. As a couple of people pointed out, there are subtle differences but I don't think airbrushing can account for all of them. If you notice, the angle of her head is different; you can see her right knee in the right pic where you can't in the left, the creases in the outfit are in different places, she's looking in different directions, the hair locks are in different places and you can see more of her left latissimus dorsi muscle in the right pic (the one towards the back that runs vertically under the arm. And yes, I had to look it up). Like a lot of guys here, I'm not drawn to the Barbie Doll types. I'm more of a Rachael Ray type than an Angelina Jolie type. I think Jolie is overrated. Sure, she's got a pleasing face but no ass or hips to speak of. Sorry, but if I can't find her in the dark then I'm not interested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garden Dancer Posted December 30, 2008 Share Posted December 30, 2008 But see? That's the thing! She doesn't look the same. Why bother with the model in the first place?!! Trust me, I've seen what airbrush and photochop can do. All of the differences can be done with those tools. Take more than one pic from the photo shoot (they never take just one...) and it becomes even easier. Take away the background, and you can do even more. A skilled "artist" can create the play of light and shadow, create the illusion of muscle, bone, fabric folds that are supposedly "more appealing" than the natural way the cloth falls or folds. I have seen some of these things done to even my yearbook pictures! I went in, rather sunburned, but unable to get another shoot before the deadline. They showed me all kinds of tricks, right there in front of me, I saw how drastically I could be altered. I told them to soften the redness, and nothing more, but for kicks, they showed me what else they could do. And that was some years ago. They can do more, ever more convincingly, now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.