View Single Post
Old 19th December 2009   #6
Graham
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 238
Default Re: Eleventh Anniversary

The thing to ask yourself is, "Over the last decade, has straight-size modelling become more like plus-size modelling, or vice versa?"

Obviously it's the latter. The sizes of the straight-size models have remained emaciated (or worse), while the sizes of the plus-size models have gotten smaller and smaller. Straight-size hasn't budged upwards. But plus sizes have gone down, down, down.

That should tell you which side is actually losing. The fact that plus-size models are getting more work in so-called "mainstream" magazines (which really means, completely out-of-the-mainstream publications that cater to an anorexia-loving fringe), actually shows that they're being compromised. Through body-diminishment or Photoshopping or both, they're becoming closer and closer in size to the waifs.

If the industry begins calling size 6s "plus-size models," then even more "plus-size models" will be in magazines. Size 4s, still more. But that's no success. Such models aren't even remotely close to being true plus-size models, truly full-figured, regardless of what they're called. The label has just been redefined. And actual full-figured models, like size 18s, are no closer to being in magazines than before. In fact, they're further away, because the industry can now dodge criticisms by saying, "What are you complaining about? We do use plus-size models." But they'll only be talking about faux-plus girls.
Graham is offline   Reply With Quote