Nude and Un-Photoshopped: Still Not the Answer.
In 2009, a light bulb turned on. (I sure hope it was a CFL.) Someone in mainstream media — new or old, internationally or nationally — an editor, an assistant, maybe it was a PR rep, realized that “Oh hey! Not everyone is a size 2, huh? All the other ‘beautiful’ people in this industry deserve a chance.”
Dove was, however, already way ahead of the game. Their Campaign for Real Beauty launched in 2004 and continues to empower girls and women of all ages and shapes. But last I heard, Dove doesn’t drive home magazine sales. Sexy things do. And naked sexy things will sell even more magazines.
And suddenly, we embraced the body — naked (or nearly so) and often un-airbrushed — while we also further embraced the plus-sized.
Glamour ran a spread of naked-and-not-insanely-thin models in November. You might remember that infamous picture of plus-sized model Lizzie Miller with tummy flab? (No! Not tummy flab!)
A couple months before that, model Natalia Vodianova bared all on the cover of British Vogue’s June 2009 Body Issue, an issue that vowed to look at how women — yes, even women thinner and more famous than you — felt about their bodies and how they, too, obsessively watch their weight and wished their butts were perkier. (But wait, if even the “perfect” feel insecure, is there hope left for the rest of us?)
And the trend continues on into 2010:
• Naked and un-airbrushed Jennifer Hawkins will grace the cover of the Australian Marie Claire in February.
• V magazine has dedicated its whole January issue, out on the 14th, to plus-sized models in all states of dress and undress.
If all bodies are beautiful, shouldn’t we focus equally on the thin and not so thin? The short and tall? The curvy and boxy? Despite the valiant efforts, we can’t assume that occasionally swapping out rail-thin models for those with some meat on their bones will, on its own, make 2010 the year the fashion, beauty and advertising industries suddenly changed their minds.
These women — underweight or slightly overweight — are still models. The images we digest are the results of teams of makeup artists, hairstylists, wardrobe assistants, lighting specialists and creative photographers that none of us “real” people have at our disposal. Fashion spreads, despite the model and her size, are still perpetuating parts of a beauty myth — the glowing, perfect skin, the undimpled thighs — and the message that you are not good enough the way you are. (And that products! They have all the answers!)
Designers’ samples are still size 4 … or smaller. Runway models are still hired as emaciated hangers that catch your eye and on which designers can hang their art.
Shedding light on the fact that different body types exist — sure, it’s a step in the right direction. But for maximum impact, to make the change that communicates my body and my self are awesome just the way they are, we have to be able to prove that a different message and image will make the industries more money than what they’re making now.
What sells the most — whether it’s putting women down or lifting women up — will eventually win in the end.
Main photo via NYMag.com
Center photo via Glamour.com
[...] previous version of this blog was originally posted at tallanna.com. Naked and un-airbrushed Jennifer Hawkins on the cover of Australian Marie [...]
Hey Anna!
The problem with modern day advertising is that cosmetics companies and clothing brands alike have the same task: sell the consumer something that they don’t need. If airbrushed photographs and cellulite cream didn’t make women feel somewhat insecure about the way that our bodies naturally look, those corporations wouldn’t sell a product.
Deep down, all of us want shinier hair, softer skin, fewer pimples, flatter tummies, longer eyelashes, fewer wrinkles etc. all because that flawless standard of beauty presented to us by the media is the one that makes us want to “better ourselves” by buying all of that shit that we don’t need. I must say, even though I quite like the “message” of Dove’s Real Beauty campaign, I can’t help but cringe every time I see Dove cellulite reducing lotion on the shelves at Walgreens. Yes, it’s true. They’re looking for a profit, too.
While this real beauty and non-airbrushing business is great, I think that unfortunately it is just a phase. If commercial photographers only photograph normal looking women and the “You’re beautiful just the way you are” message makes us feel satisfied with the way we are, then what will propel us to buy those image-improving cosmetics and clothes?
Oh capitalism–you were clearly invented by a male.
Women’s fashion is – as far as I can tell – largely run by and for women, after women stole the very concept of fashion from men in the 1800s.
The majority of men find a woman with curves more sexually appealing than the boy-like form sported by most supermodels, so the whole trend towards stick-thin has pretty much nothing to do with sex appeal as far as I can tell.
The spirit of appreciating real beauty is awesome. But while the linked-to article certainly features some impressively lovely women, they are NOT “plus sized”. They’re still below-average sized women.
Amy Lemons: http://snarkerati.com/galleries/index.php/Amy-Lemons/0004-Amy-Lemons.jpg?action=big&size=original (plus sized??)
And Jennie Runk actually PUT ON 20 POUNDS in order to do the “plus-sized” shoot. And was still pretty darn thin.
http://www.stylelist.com/2009/10/14/naked-plus-size-model-jennie-runk-glamour-photo-shoot/
Which all just goes to show that fashion has a long way yet to go to showcase women who are both of actual average or plus size – the men would certainly appreciate not just seeing “flat butts on this thing” to paraphrase Sir Mix-A-Lot.
Enjoy your post. Hope plus size cover ups source may assist someone there.
great post… got any sources for this article?