Dear Anthropologie (and all other stores pertaining to this issue),
I love your store. I love the scent when you walk in, the feel of the material, and the creative way everything is displayed. I love the candles, the sweaters, the doorknobs, the dresses, the high-heels, the many patterns, and the painted dishes. I love getting the catalog in the mail and dreaming about a reality in which I, too, am able to pitch my tent in the tide of the Bahamas, just because it would be a beautiful sight.
I am not complaining because I am one of those curvy, big-bosomed women who never see anyone their size in a magazine. I am a tall, petite young girl who usually fits in a size small, does …
I love to see women who are comfortable and confident in their skin despite being a different size or shape than what our society markets as the ideal. I love seeing a woman who doesn’t lose her confidence or her great smile just because she has a blemish.
I don’t think we see enough of real women’s bodies (shapes, sizes, blemishes) in a positive context. Even amongst friends, we often hide what we think are our imperfections. I think that if we were exposed to more of what is real and natural, we would all be more comfortable and confident with ourselves
The women who participated in this project are women in my life who I find beautiful and who I knew would want to speak out on this topic. …
Retouching photographs of models in magazines and newspapers has been a point of controversy in the publishing industry ever since technology like Photoshop has become readily available. Most magazines, especially ones dedicated to fashion and/or celebrity stalking, have no qualms about retouching “imperfect” pictures. I think this practice is absolutely reprehensible.
There are instances when it’s appropriate to retouch photograph. For example, if a person in a photograph has red eye or some stray hairs, or the lighting isn’t good, or if there’s some other imperfection that doesn’t change the concept of the picture to a ridiculous degree, I don’t see a problem with that. I do take issue with pictures retouched to the point that the original subject is unrecognizable or completely changed, especially …
Endangered Species Summit: Our Generation and Body Image
The Endangered Species Summit – an international movement focused on improving the way women around the world view and treat their bodies, in the media and beyond – took place last month. There were branches in London, Buenos Aires, Melbourne, Sao Paul and New York. I was lucky enough to be involved with the New York branch thanks to the incomparable Courtney Martin, who is a goddess (and who flawlessly planned the NYC summit). I had the daunting task of representing our generation on the Intergenerational Panel, which also included such amazing women as Jean Kilbourne, Erica Watson and Rachel Simmons. So, you know. No pressure or anything.
Needless to say, it was an incredible experience, but more than talking about my impressions, I figured I’d share …
Ralph Lauren has created some seriously disturbingly photoshopped ads lately:
as many have already noted - her head is definitely bigger than her pelvis
Ralph Lauren’s defense? They released this statement:
For over 42 years we have built a brand based on quality and integrity. After further investigation, we have learned that we are responsible for the poor imaging and retouching that resulted in a very distorted image of a woman’s body.
Oh, hey, maybe an apology for basically promoting an anatomically impossible aesthetic would be nice? Anybody else feel like essentially they’re saying “Sorry you have a problem with it” …?
And then there are the reports that the first photoshopped model above, who is a size 4, was fired for being “too fat.”