PDA

View Full Version : ''No one wants to see skinny women''


Chad
13th October 2009, 10:58
<br>BERLIN (NS) -- "No one wants to see skinny women," a cultural writer was quoted as saying on a Web site yesterday.

"You've got gay fashion designers with their depraved lifestyles talking to reporters and saying, curvy models are not attractive," he continued, then added, "But no rational person cares what those creeps think."

Fashion is about "dreams and illusions," the writer said, "not starvation-nightmares and androgynous-horrors."


[NOTE: Source material corrected for truth.]

HSG
13th October 2009, 16:12
<br>That is a clever, size-positive rewrite of Karl Lagerfeld's offensive statement about curvy women (which, by the way, was obviously a P.R. stunt--which means that everyone who discusses his words, even to criticize them, actually plays into his hands).

It boggles the mind that anyone would heed what he, or what any of the "experts" and "elite" who run the fashion industry, have to say. Consider the source!

Think of the misbegotten characters who populate shows like <i>Project Runway.</I> <i>Those</i> are the types of people who end up running the fashion industry--the freaks who were the outcasts in high-school (and for good reason). Those warped individuals go from being the shunned fringe to being the cultural arbiters of beauty, dictating what is or isn't attractive to the rest of the society. How ridiculous!

One might as well select atheists to be priests. The orientation and tastes of these fashion adherents cause them to be <I>antagonistic</i> towards true beauty. They are predisposed to reject the wholesome, healthy look in favour of their own alien, unnatural standards.

And the fashion industry welcomes these deviants, gives them power, supports their perverted tastes, and enables them to keep timeless beauty down. Worse, society at large (and women in general) <i>listen</i> to their pathetic pronouncements, and conform to their sick ideals.

Would any voluptuous cheerleader in high school allow some social-reject classmate to tell her that she is too curvaceous? Not a chance. So why, years later, would that same well-fed beauty subordinate herself to the anti-feminine tastes of that former outcast, when the latter becomes influential in fashion--in an industry that resents womanly curves?

The above rewrite is absolutely correct. What no one wants to see is emaciated models with harsh, androgynous features and protruding bones. Curvy women, on the other hand, are most welcome.<p><center>* * *</center><p>One statement by Lagerfeld is correct, however--and ironically, it completely contradicts his own anti-plus stance. Fashion <i>is</i> about "dreams and illusions." But the emaciated, androgynous models that he and his cohorts employ do not personify "dreams," but famine-ridden nightmares. Those skeletons do not embody pleasant "illusions," but grotesque, inhuman horrors.<p><center><img src="http://www.judgmentofparis.com/forum/dream/nightmare2.jpg"></center><p>Rather, true dreams and blissful illusions are generated by the most gorgeous <i>plus-size</i> models, who bring to life the timeless ideal of femininity that resides in the human heart.

Just look at what dreams of beauty they are!

<p><center><img src="http://www.judgmentofparis.com/forum/dream/shannon.jpg" alt="Shannon Marie"></center><p>
<p><center><img src="http://www.judgmentofparis.com/forum/dream/kelsey.jpg" alt="Kelsey Olson"></center><p>
<p><center><img src="http://www.judgmentofparis.com/ko/kailee31.jpg" alt="Kailee O'Sullivan"></center><p>
<p><center><img src="http://www.judgmentofparis.com/forum/dream/christina.jpg" alt="Christina Schmidt"></center><p>
<p><center><img src="http://www.judgmentofparis.com/forum/dream/charlotte2.jpg" alt="Charlotte Coyle"></center><p>
<p><center><img src="http://www.judgmentofparis.com/forum/dream/katherine.jpg" alt="Katherine Roll"></center><p>
<p><center><img src="http://www.judgmentofparis.com/forum/dream/barbara.jpg" alt="Barbara Brickner"></center><p>
<p><center><img src="http://www.judgmentofparis.com/forum/dream/justine.jpg" alt="Justine Legault"></center><p>
<p><center><img src="http://www.judgmentofparis.com/forum/dream/lindsey2.jpg" alt="Lindsey Garbelman"></center><p>
<p><center><img src="http://www.judgmentofparis.com/forum/dream/marritt.jpg" alt="Marritt Pike"></center><p>
<p><center><img src="http://www.judgmentofparis.com/forum/dream/valerie.jpg" alt="Valerie Lefkowitz"></center><p>
<p><center><img src="http://www.judgmentofparis.com/forum/dream/yanderis.jpg" alt="Yanderis Lodos"></center>
<p>Lagerfeld and his ilk have nothing to match this.

Maureen
13th October 2009, 18:35
It boggles the mind that anyone would heed what he, or what any of the "experts" and "elite" who run the fashion industry, have to say. Consider the source!
Karl Lagerfeld used to be, not just "a budding Falstaff," as the Webmaster put it in a post about More to Love, but a full-blown one. His significant weight loss of a few years ago seems to have filled him with the fanaticism of the newly converted; he seems to be trying to atone for what he now perceives as his past "sins."

Mike
13th October 2009, 20:31
Looking at that emaciated creature in the first picture, I have to ask: What kind of industry makes a person to do that to themselves?

We ban illicit drugs because they are dangerous to the body. If we catch someone cutting themselves, quite often that person is committed to a hospital to get treatment so they can stop abusing themselves.

So, why isn't that poor girl in a hospital somewhere, being fed through a tube and getting counselling for what are obviously serious body-image disorders? What kind of industry promotes this?

Look, I'm not at all in favor of the "Nanny State" mentality of certain of today's politicians. But at the same time, people should not have to put their lives in that kind of obvious danger!

If a parent were to forcibly starve their own child to that point of emaciation, would said parent not be locked up (and rightly so), and their child placed in foster care? And would any sane person disagree with that action?

I hope someone who cares about this girl arranges an "intervention" sometime soon. It might save her life.

Hannah
13th October 2009, 22:46
The difference between that first, representative picture of a straight-size model and those stunning images of gorgeous full-figured models is staggering, just staggering.

Let's not mince words: Skinny models look like corpses. Why would anyone want to look at them? I am physically repulsed by that first picture.

On the other hand, the plus-size models who follow are indescribably lovely. They are like dreams; like living angels. They make you want to sing out loud. Just looking at them fills you with joy. Rays of sunshine, all of them.

After glancing at that horrid bag of bones above, I desperately need to look at those plus-size pictures to get the bad taste out of my mouth.

How could anyone who believes in "dreams and illusions" not prefer those soft, voluptuous goddesses to the wretched cadavers who pass for straight-size models? Plus-size beauties could create far more inspiring and glorious dreams than their underweight rivals ever could.

Graham
14th October 2009, 13:05
It's not just the model who needs an intervention. Rather, the people who run the fashion industry (the designers, the photographers, the editors) need an intervention - to show them just how anorexic the standard that they are promoting is. The model is just doing what she's been forced to do - starve to have a career in this degenerate industry.

It is absolutely criminal, literally criminal, that any industry could make its employees do that to themselves and get away with it. The steel industry used to require its employees to work, without masks, near blast furnaces, thus causing them to breathe in iron filaments which atomized their lungs and made them die of emphysema. That is now illegal. Likewise, regulations must be passed to prevent the industry from starving its models, potentially fatally.

It's so ridiculous to hear designers trying to justify the use of androgynous models by claiming that curves "distract" from the clothing. No - it's the corpse-like features and gaunt frames of straight-size models that are distracting.

The plus-size models, on the other hand, are breathtakingly beautiful. No dream of ideal beauty could ever match the gorgeousness of the models shown above.

Curvy women DO belong on the runway. It's Karl Lagerfeld, and the anorexics he promotes, who don't.

M. Lopez
14th October 2009, 20:35
The model herself can hardly be blamed for looking so hideous. The fault lies with the people who run the industry (the Karl Lagerfelds, and his type) for mandating such a cadaverous look, and with the government for allowing the fashion industry to get away with enforcing such a disgusting standard.

I'm sure that everyone has heard about the Ralph Lauren flap:

http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/fashion/article6874826.ece

The model was already an emaciated size 4, and was fired for still being supposedly too big.

What kind of warped minds are running the fashion industry when they think a size 4 - a concentration-camp size - is too large? It's criminal workplace abuse, plain and simple.

The only option for models is either to turn into the kind of walking skeletons seen above - and possibly die - or to lose their jobs. And there is no way that any industry should be allowed to force women to do that to themselves.

(Not to mention the crippling influence that this toxic standard has on the women who follow the fashion industry - which is to say, practically every woman in the Western world.)

The plus-size models shown in this thread satisfy every possible requirement of beauty; in fact, far more so than any malnourished waifs. Anyone whose aesthetic is so perverted as to opt for the walking skeleton, above, over the well-fed goddesses below should not be allowed to work in an industry that affects the public as much as fashion does.

Emily
15th October 2009, 01:57
The mistake is thinking that it bothers Karl Lagerfeld to have people outraged by his comments. That is a misunderstanding of the mentality that we're dealing with. People keep thinking of fashion designers in "business" terms, thinking that the "bad publicity" will worry them, as it would worry a corporation to get bad P.R.

But that's wrong. Lagerfeld and company don't care about bad P.R. They revel in it. They have the mentality of "modern artists" -- i.e., they want to scandalize the so-called "bourgeoisie," they want to be causing offense. It gratifies them to do so. It satisfies their inflated egos. The offense is the whole point.

These people are exactly like modern opera directors who take traditional operas and stage them in as "shocking" a manner as possible, with sexual perversity, racial antagonism, misandry, class hatred, etc. put into the productions (despite the fact that these elements have nothing to do with the operas themselves). They're like modern painters who put excrement on a statue of the Virgin Mary and call it "art." That's the kind of mentality we're dealing with here.

Also, it's particularly telling that in his statement, Lagerfeld didn't just slam full-figured women, but full-figured mothers. Motherhood is the bedrock of the traditional family, of a stable society with noble values, and it is something that is inimical to Lagerfeld and his type, both politically and personally.

Tamika
16th October 2009, 04:29
That photograph is horrifying and repulsive, and certainly not beautiful at all. Anyone who thinks so must be deranged.

Those curvy beauties, on the other hand, are the most beautiful women alive today and there is no doubt about that. Just look at their full features, soft feminine appearance...Karl Lagerfield's "vision" has nothing on those ladies.

Mike
18th October 2009, 01:19
The mistake is thinking that it bothers Karl Lagerfeld to have people outraged by his comments. That is a misunderstanding of the mentality that we're dealing with. People keep thinking of fashion designers in "business" terms, thinking that the "bad publicity" will worry them, as it would worry a corporation to get bad P.R.

But that's wrong. Lagerfeld and company don't care about bad P.R. They revel in it. They have the mentality of "modern artists" -- i.e., they want to scandalize the so-called "bourgeoisie," they want to be causing offense. It gratifies them to do so. It satisfies their inflated egos. The offense is the whole point.

I think you've hit it exactly. Like all modern artists, all they care about is their "vision", not whether anyone else wants to see their vision. In their minds, they know better than the public. (There are some similarities to modern politicians here, but we'll let that go for now.)

Kaitlynn
18th October 2009, 04:45
The comparison to sneering modern artists is apt. However, what makes fashion-industry proponents of the androgynous look even more contemptible is that instead of just ruining the culture, they are destroying people's lives- severely damaging both the health of the models whom they employ and require to look skeletal, and the health of women in general, who are brainwashed by their alien visions into accepting an unnatural, unhealthy standard of appearance as what is "ideal" and even "normal."