Agencies suppressing plus-size models
In pinpointing the culprits for the fashion industry's suppression of plus-size beauty, many have identified the designers as the ultimate problem, while much blame has also been levelled at magazine editors and photographers. Both groups are clearly guilty.
The designers personally choose which models appear in their shows; also, they control the size of clothing samples, thus physically dictating model size.
Magazine editors and photographers, on the other hand, decide which girls appear in their photoshoots. Since plus-size models have occasionally appeared in the pages of some magazines, it is clearly something that could be done more often. (Mode's editors decided which size girls appeared in the magazine's layouts. So did Figure's.) Editors and photographers clearly deserve much of the blame as well.
But it appears that not enough attention has been paid to the hand that modelling agencies have in this.
In the plus-size industry, clients such as Addition-Elle have gone on record as saying that their plus-size models aren't larger because this is the model size that agencies are providing.
But beyond that, it seems that modelling agencies are actively scheming to completely exclude plus-size models from the fashion world.
You think "scheming" is too melodramatic a word? In fact, it's the bald truth.
Consider this chilling revelation.
Can you believe it?
The idea that these agencies think of their anorexic, androgynous cadavers as "good girls" compared to plus-size models (who are the only type of models who are healthy or attractive) would be laughable if it weren't so disgusting and offensive.
But beyond that, this is clear and undeniable evidence that agencies are tampering with a designer's decisions as to which size models they should use. Agencies are strong-arming designers NOT to use plus-size models.
This is not subtle or implicit discrimination. This is out-and-out aggressive, targeted exclusion.
It is unthinkable that an industry could be so unregulated as to allow these kinds of business practices to exist.
Re: Agencies suppressing plus-size models
All of this, and for such a paltry return. The images from the Lake and Stars presentation feature a lone plus-size model tucked in among rows and rows of corpse-like, underweight models. I fail to see how that's any kind of inclusion; it barely even rises to the level of tokenism.
At least this incident shows the true face of the minus-size fashion industry, exposing just how hostile it actually is to voluptuous femininity (for all of its supposedly affirmative talk). This is the industry with the mask off.
And some people think that it would be any kind of success for larger women if faux-plus models (who are merely the size of traditional straight-size models) were to edge their way into this thin-supremacist industry? Why?
Rather, plus-size women should reject this curve-o-phobic industry for the disgusting spectacle that it is, an industry that does nothing but propagate eating disorders.
When you have plus-specific events, you see opulent size-20 models like Mayara Russi in FWPS, or size-18 goddesses like Katherine Roll in FFFWeek. You have whole shows with all full-figured models, i.e., waif-free, size-positive environments.
But when you have these pitiful attempts at "diversity," you see hordes of anorexic waifs, with lone faux-plus models tucked in somewhere in a corner, or at the back, physically symbolizing the marginalization of plus-size women.
There is no question that all-curvy events are the way to go, and that the best efforts are those that are directed at fostering the growth of a industry of our own, a plus-specific industry focussed on body love, on showcasing the larger female figure, and on using true plus-size models (size 16 and up).
Re: Agencies suppressing plus-size models
The situation IS disgusting. It's kind of scary too, to discover that an agency would engage in these kinds of behind-the-scenes shenanigans at all. You've got to wonder what other games they play when it comes to getting certain models included or excluded from jobs, whether in minus-size or plus-size modelling. Yeesh.
At any rate, the agencies in this case probably didn't want their walking cadavers alongside the plus-size models because they knew that by contrast with the gorgeously curvy girls, their waifs would look even more pitiful and malnourished, and everyone would prefer the beauty of the fuller-figured models.
Re: Agencies suppressing plus-size models
Indeed, the idea that the industry is allowed to continue such discriminatory practices is incomprehensible. We live in a world where tenuous claims of "exclusion" in most fields are treated with devout solemnity by the media, and are presented as acts of unconscionable heresy by the supposed perpetrators of such exclusion.
But the religion of "tolerance" is nakedly selective in terms of which groups are favoured and protected and championed, and which are not, and gorgeous plus-size women are emphatically not a favoured group. Rather, as we all know too well, the media itself discriminates against full-figured women, so why should anyone be surprised that it fails to take up the cause of plus-size models, even if such models are involved in a case of genuine, unconscionable exclusion?
When coupled with beauty, physical fullness in young women is still seen as an embodiment of privilege, in the traditional sense, and the levelling mission of the modern media is to trample on all groups or individuals seen as traditionally "privileged," and in turn to favour others at their expense.
Both the fashion industry and the media are shown to be crassly discriminatory in this incident--the fashion world for enacting this exclusion, and the media for failing to denounce it with the vigour with which it denounces discrimination against others.
However, M. Lopez's point that entry into the so-called "mainstream" fashion world isn't a desirable goal in the first place, given the corrupt, toxic nature of the size-0 industry, is well taken. Thus, in a case of "agencies suppressing plus-size models," the kind of suppression that is most troubling is not the anorexia-worshipping fashion establishment's exclusion of plus-size models from so-called "mainstream" events or publications, but the plus-size industry's own suppression of genuinely full-figured models (size 16 and up).
We have abundant evidence of this, to say the least. It is confirmed time and again in any interview that we conduct.
In our discussion with the marketing personnel from Addition-Elle, we were told the following:
When we asked a similar question of Nancy LeWinter, former publisher of Mode and current creative director of One Stop Plus, we received a similar answer:
And who decides which are the "top models"? The agents, it seems.
In our interview with FFFWeek's creator and CEO, Gwen DeVoe told us that her insistence on using true plus-size models is a source of tension between her and the agencies, who would prefer that she use their smaller girls:
And of course, we all remember Marina Zelner saying, in her interview with the Judgment of Paris, that she had to reject a model who had diminished herself due explicitly to agency pressure:
But most revealingly of all, in our 2002 interview with Mia Stringfield, the booker of the plus-size division at the former Irene Marie agency in Miami, which once had one of the top two plus-size boards in the city, the agent confessed the following to us:
Given that agents can have so much influence on a client's decision, and given that numerous clients complain that agencies are sending them models who are smaller and less plus-size than what they wish to be using, the cases of "agencies suppressing plus-size models" that really matter, when it comes to size celebration, are those that involve agencies favouring faux-plus girls over genuinely full-figured models, over a size 16.
There are notable exceptions to the rule, of course. Milk Management, for example, has been very supportive of luscious plus-size goddess Sophie Sheppard, a U.K. size 18, and the agency avows that it would never pressure her to diminish herself. Cases such as this are to be applauded, just as cases where agencies try to shrink the size of their models are to be condemned.
Let us hope that in the future, agencies will make their own contribution to size celebration both by representing fuller-figured models, and by using their acknowledged influence to help those models achieve success and visibility. Because true plus-size beauty is what the public wishes to see.
And in the case of agents that do not offer models who reflect customer wishes, clients need to politely but firmly stand up to them and insist on booking true plus-size models. It is to the public, not to the agencies, that clients are beholden, because it is customer support that makes the very existence of the plus-size fashion industry possible.
Gorgeous full-figured model Lindsey Garbelman, more opulent and beautiful than ever at a size 18, modelling for Belk, fall/winter 2011:
|All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:56.|
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.