Vogue magazine editors pledge to use 'healthy' models - Polidicks

ITT facepunch rates models as though they would ever have a chance with any of them. [editline]7th May 2012[/editline] Hey broskis, all of these women are out of your fucking league, except maybe colognely

[QUOTE=thisispain;35864740]exhibit C: whole thread[/QUOTE] It's called teenagers with opinions man.

[QUOTE=mac338;35864811]It's called teenagers with opinions man.[/QUOTE] Teenagers tend to have some pretty shitty opinions, bro. There are, like, fascist teenagers on this website. Like, teenagers who actually walk around calling themselves fascists. There are also teenagers that like to suck piss off of girls' toes. If Elecbullet were in this thread right now I'd use him as Exhibit D.

[QUOTE=EmZajex;35848116]These comments make me hate my body and myself a little less. I love you guys[/QUOTE] This. I'm just below a 3 with smaller tits, because I prefer delicious food over being thin, despite the blow to self-confidence. Feelsbadman when people assume you aren't healthy just because you aren't thin, I do yoga every day and trained in kickboxing. You can't assume someone's health based on their weight and body type. Though I also looked at your youtube, EmZajex, and you really do have absolutely nothing to be concerned about. I'd say my goal "thinness" would be around yours (just with muscle as I'm into fighting, as I can't sing lol). But yeah, basically everywhere I go--Internet, magazines, movies, tv, any form of art--girls my size are really looked down upon. So seeing this thread and the majority reacting to 3 being acceptable rather than absolutely repulsive (as most would have said anywhere else I go) made me feel quite a bit better about my body. Anyway, people shouldn't judge people so much by their body type--this goes for men too, as they are subject to just as much scrutiny in their physical build as women are, though not in the same way. That's half the reason why I like the internet; you're allowed to focus on people for being who they are, rather than what they look like.

[QUOTE=mac338;35864811]It's called teenagers with opinions man.[/QUOTE] it's called missing the point the editors adjust and manipulate the models in order to suit their model of beauty. people in this thread go: "good here's my model of beauty!" in the end women can't be themselves anyway, so the whole things fucked and instead of having a conversation about society or something else there's a brain-dead "post who you'd fuck" fast threads posting chain. when i wrote [QUOTE=thisispain;35845434]hey this is a fashion magazine. people aren't looking at it for the "curves".[/QUOTE] instead of anyone asking the important question of why fashion magazines would manipulate models when fashion is about clothing and accessories, i get this stupid reply: [quote]What would you rather like to see nice clothes on?[/quote] followed by a picture of women with *no* clothes on, which basically translates to "who you'd fuck" because in response to that people posted pictures of their model of beauty. in fact we don't even get a who in that sentence, wtf basically get bent, this is why teenagers shouldn't vote and instead should have their opinions discarded.

[QUOTE=thisispain;35865025]it's called missing the point the editors adjust and manipulate the models in order to suit their model of beauty. people in this thread go: "good here's my model of beauty!" in the end women can't be themselves anyway, so the whole things fucked and instead of having a conversation about society or something else there's a brain-dead "post who you'd fuck" fast threads posting chain. when i wrote instead of anyone asking the important question of why fashion magazines would manipulate models when fashion is about clothing and accessories, i get this stupid reply: followed by a picture of women with *no* clothes on, which basically translates to "who you'd fuck" because in response to that people posted pictures of their model of beauty. in fact we don't even get a who in that sentence, wtf basically get bent, this is why teenagers shouldn't vote and instead should have their opinions discarded.[/QUOTE] What are you talking about? Teenagers shouldn't be allowed to vote because we express our feelings regarding what we find attractive and what we don't?

[QUOTE=RobbL;35865130]What are you talking about? Teenagers shouldn't be allowed to vote because we express our feelings regarding what we find attractive and what we don't?[/QUOTE] no because there is a deeper underlying issue here that instead gets replaced with post whatever made your dick hard. all that happened is a change in BMI, there's still the same dehumanization.

[QUOTE=thisispain;35865170]no because there is a deeper underlying issue here that instead gets replaced with post whatever made your dick hard. all that happened is a change in BMI, there's still the same dehumanization.[/QUOTE] Vogue announce they'll start using healthy models, and people here react saying that it's about time because they find anorexic models unattractive and that they prefer women with a bit more weight. What's the problem there?

[QUOTE=thisispain;35865170]no because there is a deeper underlying issue here that instead gets replaced with post whatever made your dick hard. all that happened is a change in BMI, there's still the same dehumanization.[/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure horny teenagers are a timeless thing, only the ideals for what a perfect body is has changed over time.

[QUOTE=mac338;35865282][B]I'm pretty sure horny teenagers are a timeless thing[/B][/QUOTE] Exactly, whining over that is a waste of breathe, energy and time. Ind the end, you'll just look worse than them.

hey guys nothing will ever change so let's all just act like shitheads did you guys just read the fountainhead or something The first step to addressing the problem is acknowledging that there is a fucking problem. As long as this "status quo is god" bullshit keeps up and dumbasses jump to the defense of misogynistic shits, then yeah, nothing will fucking change.

if you wanna know my issue you should actually read the post: [quote]instead of anyone asking the important question of why fashion magazines would manipulate models when fashion is about clothing and accessories, i get this stupid reply:[/quote] you shouldn't applaud Vogue because you find anorexic models unattractive, you should applaud Vogue because it's one step closer to reducing the dehumanization of women in media. simply saying you find anorexic models unattractive is basically saying you don't like the result but are fine with the mechanism which turns women into objects that are purely summed up by the relationship of their body parts. it doesn't mean anything positive for women by any extent and you'd have to be very narrow-minded to believe that "women with a bit more weight" translates to women being more healthy regardless of their composition, not that that anyone has expressed any concern of their health. it sounds like you just looked at one sentence and didn't bother reading anything else.

[QUOTE=Lankist;35865340]hey guys nothing will ever change so let's all just act like shitheads did you guys just read the fountainhead or something The first step to addressing the problem is acknowledging that there is a fucking problem.[/QUOTE] Hey man I never said anything of the sort. Why are you drawing such conclusions?

[QUOTE=thisispain;35865350]if you wanna know my issue you should actually read the post: you shouldn't applaud Vogue because you find anorexic models unattractive, you should applaud Vogue because it's one step closer to reducing the dehumanization of women in media. simply saying you find anorexic models unattractive is basically saying you don't like the result but are fine with the mechanism which turns women into objects that are purely summed up by the relationship of their body parts. it doesn't mean anything positive for women by any extent and you'd have to be very narrow-minded to believe that "women with a bit more weight" translates to women being more healthy regardless of their composition, not that that anyone has expressed any concern of their health. it sounds like you just looked at one sentence and didn't bother reading anything else.[/QUOTE] in short: it is still media deciding what beauty is. [editline]7th May 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=mac338;35865365]Hey man I never said anything of the sort. Why are you drawing such conclusions?[/QUOTE] You and the other broski are asserting that misogyny is "timeless." That's why it still exists. It's only still around because everyone pretends it isn't an issue, or it is otherwise unsolvable.

[QUOTE=mac338;35865282]I'm pretty sure horny teenagers are a timeless thing[/QUOTE] thanks for the pointless reductionist argument, as if i didn't know horny teenagers were a timeless thing. if horny teenagers are all they are then horny teenagers need not vote nor cast their opinion, i personally believe horny teenagers also have a brain that should be put to use.

You are all the product of four billion years of evolutionary success fucking act like it, people.

[QUOTE=l337k1ll4;35863680]That's a massive exaggeration.[/QUOTE] It's not, he's right. Size 10 is plus size when it comes to modelling. For example, America's Next Top Model has one plus-size winner. Whitney Thompson. This her: [img]http://antm411.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/seventeen_whitney04.jpg[/img] She's a size 10. That's the size I wear. And she is considered plus size. Another plus-size model that was on the show? Toccara Jones [img]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-2yGo0G6q_DA/T1ZbktKN1AI/AAAAAAAAAUs/chQJGm2LFgc/s1600/Toccara-Jones-936419.jpg[/img] She didn't win, but later signed with Wilhelmina Models as--guess what? A PLUS-SIZE model. Not a regular model. She is considered plus-size in the fashion world. It's not an exaggeration, it's reality. [QUOTE=thisispain;35865025]it's called missing the point the editors adjust and manipulate the models in order to suit their model of beauty. people in this thread go: "good here's my model of beauty!" in the end women can't be themselves anyway, so the whole things fucked and instead of having a conversation about society or something else there's a brain-dead "post who you'd fuck" fast threads posting chain.[/quote] Yeah, this thread is about models of beauty, so naturally people are going to say what they agree or disagree with. Besides, this thread has made several women, including myself, feel better about their body simply because of that. Yeah, it's sad that women's basic value in society goes no further than their physical appearance, but that's an inescapable reality, and people openly accepting "Type 2" and "Type 3" only helps women of those statures feel more accepted. [quote]instead of anyone asking the important question of why fashion magazines would manipulate models when fashion is about clothing and accessories, i get this stupid reply, followed by a picture of women with *no* clothes on, which basically translates to "who you'd fuck" because in response to that people posted pictures of their model of beauty.[/QUOTE] It's because fashion designers a) work with expensive fabrics, so creating smaller clothes means less material they have to purchase, b) it's easier to design for coat hangers than for women with curves. Believe it or not, it's much harder to tailor clothes to fit women who have curves than women who have a thin, boxy frame.

[QUOTE=thisispain;35865350]if you wanna know my issue you should actually read the post: you shouldn't applaud Vogue because you find anorexic models unattractive, you should applaud Vogue because it's one step closer to reducing the dehumanization of women in media. simply saying you find anorexic models unattractive is basically saying you don't like the result but are fine with the mechanism which turns women into objects that are purely summed up by the relationship of their body parts. it doesn't mean anything positive for women by any extent and you'd have to be very narrow-minded to believe that "women with a bit more weight" translates to women being more healthy regardless of their composition, not that that anyone has expressed any concern of their health. it sounds like you just looked at one sentence and didn't bother reading anything else.[/QUOTE] I don't see what weight models Vogue uses has to do with dehumanisation, and anyway, the fashion industry works the same way for both male and female models People don't usually look to the fashion industry for sexual gratification, it's a totally different thing your thinking of

[QUOTE=RobbL;35865416]I don't with what weight models Vogue had to do with dehumanisation, and anyway, the fashion industry works the same way for both male and female models[/QUOTE] that first part isn't even a coherent sentence. and no it doesn't, not by a long shot. you could make the argument that it's developing to become the same way but it's not even close.

[QUOTE=RobbL;35865416]I don't see what weight models Vogue uses has to do with dehumanisation, and anyway, the fashion industry works the same way for both male and female models[/QUOTE] Do I need to explain the concept of agency again. Men are not harmed by this because men have absolute agency in media, politics, and the world in general. Muscle-men are not a female sex fantasy, they are a male power fantasy. No woman is demanding men walk around showing their abs all day. That is a male fantasy. Women still play second-fiddle, especially in the media.

[QUOTE=thisispain;35865451]that first part isn't even a coherent sentence. and no it doesn't, not by a long shot. you could make the argument that it's developing to become the same way but it's not even close.[/QUOTE] rushed typing sorry [editline]7th May 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=thisispain;35865451]that first part isn't even a coherent sentence. and no it doesn't, not by a long shot. you could make the argument that it's developing to become the same way but it's not even close.[/QUOTE] I don't actually understand what your issue is here tbh, try being a little less vague and irrelevant

I just hope people won't start using this as an excuse to get overweight.

[QUOTE=thisispain;35865451]that first part isn't even a coherent sentence. and no it doesn't, not by a long shot. you could make the argument that it's developing to become the same way but it's not even close.[/QUOTE] It does. You will never see a man who isn't either a) muscular or b) thin and androgynous-looking, doing any professional modelling, commercial or high-fashion. The only difference is the prevalence, and that's simply because people prefer using women to sell product than men. So instead of having the fact that you'll never be considered attractive shoved in your face 24/7 (as for women), it's only occasionally, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist in an equally discriminating way.

[QUOTE=Lankist;35865408]You are all the product of four billion years of evolutionary success fucking act like it, people.[/QUOTE] Alright man, sorry. Could you calm down a little please?

[QUOTE=RobbL;35865461]I don't actually understand what your issue is here tbh, try being a little less vague and irrelevant[/QUOTE] The issue is that this is no real concern for the health of women. It is simply a publication when attempts to dictate "beauty" adding a few numbers to what "beauty" is arbitrarily, without addressing the real issues (body dysmorphism in young women, primarily) that they have caused. [editline]7th May 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=mac338;35865497]Alright man, sorry. Could you calm down a little please?[/QUOTE] I am calm, dude. This isn't me angry. I don't really get angry. This is just my rhetorical style when I am speaking to laymen. [editline]7th May 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=JurajIsNotPirat;35865489]I just hope people won't start using this as an excuse to get overweight.[/QUOTE] Exhibit D, RobbL. Nobody actually gives a fuck about women's health. They just want to get their rocks off.

[QUOTE=Lankist;35865507]I am calm, dude. This isn't me angry. I don't really get angry. This is just my rhetorical style when I am speaking to laymen.[/QUOTE] It's easy to get that mixed up on the Internet, the informalities and cursing made me figure.

Fit girls always have nicer legs. Also, is it bad that I fit into 00s? I can provide pics of me if needed.

[QUOTE=mac338;35865532]It's easy to get that mixed up on the Internet, the informalities and cursing made me figure.[/QUOTE] I have discovered that one-liners have a great propensity for either convincing people or pissing them off. Either way, it works. Pissed off people actually take the time to read your words when they're trying to prove them wrong.

[QUOTE=Ultra Violence;35865413] Yeah, this thread is about models of beauty[/QUOTE] like i said this is vogue, there's no particular emphasis on bodily beauty [QUOTE=Ultra Violence;35865413]so naturally people are going to say what they agree or disagree with. Besides, this thread has made several women, including myself, feel better about their body simply because of that. Yeah, it's sad that women's basic value in society goes no further than their physical appearance, but that's an inescapable reality, and people openly accepting "Type 2" and "Type 3" only helps women of those statures feel more accepted.[/QUOTE] it's not an inescapable reality, it's a social construct. people accepting your "type" is different from an issue in media and it would be just as tragic if healthy models who are naturally and healthily thin would have to adhere to a standard portrayed in the media that is unhealthy for them. [QUOTE=Ultra Violence;35865413]It's because fashion designers a) work with expensive fabrics, so creating smaller clothes means less material they have to purchase, b) it's easier to design for coat hangers than for women with curves. Believe it or not, it's much harder to tailor clothes to fit women who have curves than women who have a thin, boxy frame.[/QUOTE] sure, but i think for the sake of people's health it's worth it the effort.

[QUOTE=The Worm;35865539]Also, is it bad that I fit into 00s? I can provide pics of me if needed.[/QUOTE] That depends upon your metabolism and your general health. If you have to delve into malnutrition, yes. If you just have an extremely petite frame and an abnormally fast metabolism, no. The point is that the constructs of universal beauty are dangerous. People who don't fit into the purely arbitrarily defined "type" that they want will sometimes sacrifice their health for their appearance. That is a very bad thing for corporations to be encouraging and profiting from. Someone who has a vested interest in making you feel shitty about yourself so you buy their products is what we in the business call an "asshole."