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

[QUOTE=Lankist;35866931]They're both selling shit by making it seem "manly." There are a hell of a lot more similarities than that. The cover attempts to validate manhood to encourage you to purchase. [editline]7th May 2012[/editline] Also single-shots are very difficult to explain in terms of submissiveness with someone who is not literate in media agency, visual culture and its accompanying vocabulary. So I'm gonna do your thing and just say I'm above explaining it.[/QUOTE] No, album art isn't selling shit. It's made to portray the music. Album art for metal is obviously going to be "powerful." How about Justin Timberlake album art? [img]http://www.freecodesource.com/album-cover/41H6KQ2AJVL/Justin-Timberlake-Like-I-Love-You.jpg[/img] How about Justin Bieber album art? [img]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_zjVydElJEho/TPmbYKJc8yI/AAAAAAAACnc/szb-LXM9n2Q/s1600/Justin%252525252BBieber%252525252B-%252525252BPray%252525252B%252525252528FanMade%252525252BSingle%252525252BCover%252525252529%252525252BMade%252525252Bby%252525252BChaystic.png[/img] And yes, I understand marketing, "visual culture" and yes, I understand words. But I like how, after explaining what I meant out of necessity, you're going to pretend I didn't and say you're "above" me (once again, backhanded insults to my intelligence rather than actually debating the subject at hand), and not "explain" what I already understand.

Album art is selling the fucking album that's sort of why it's on there. on the front. where you can see it. in the store. [editline]7th May 2012[/editline] They aim for demographics FYI Beiber is for young christian kids who haven't discovered the gospel of tupac, and timberlake is somebody. I don't really know who, but he's got a demo.

[QUOTE=Lankist;35867032]Album art is selling the fucking album[/QUOTE] And again, disregard my entire post for one point. No, it's not selling a product in the way models sell a product. Album art is meant to represent the band. Fashion photography is NOT meant to represent the model.

[QUOTE=Ultra Violence;35867052]No, it's not selling a product in the way models sell a product.[/QUOTE] Album art is meant to represent the music and the product, not the band. It is an advertising tool. You've got to be fucking lobotomized to argue it isn't. [editline]7th May 2012[/editline] I ignored the rest of your points because you said "album art isn't designed to sell the album."

[QUOTE=Lankist;35867032]They aim for demographics FYI Beiber is for young christian kids who haven't discovered the gospel of tupac, and timberlake is somebody. I don't really know who, but he's got a demo.[/QUOTE] No shit? I'd be glad you revealed that little known secret to me, but I don't know what the word demographics means so I guess it was all in vain. No really, you actually believe people don't understand marketing towards a specific audience? That was the entire point of my post. Are you blind? Do you struggle with reading comprehension? I just don't understand how you can read my posts, and then take this ridiculous shit away from what I wrote.

[QUOTE=Ultra Violence;35867075]you actually believe people don't understand marketing towards a specific audience?[/QUOTE] [quote]No, album art isn't selling shit.[/quote] Yes.

Sanius, Thisispain, and Lankist seem to be the same exact people to me at this point, with self superiority complexes and a raging boner to chastise people. I'd also say Zeke but he's dead, was actually funny, and less loathsome. But that's unrelated as is this bullshit discussion going on now. What Vogue is doing is good, the models weren't even skinny, they were horribly underweight, and it is plainly obvious they were unhealthy. Hopefully this can influence more women not to starve themselves.

[QUOTE=Lankist;35867064]Album art is meant to represent the music and the product, not the band. It is an advertising tool. You've got to be fucking lobotomized to argue it isn't. [editline]7th May 2012[/editline] I ignored the rest of your points because you said "album art isn't designed to sell the album."[/QUOTE] The band is the product. And that's quite mature of you. I'm just going to be done with this, you're obviously so entrenched in your views that you can't even see that people aren't even discussing said views in the first place.

[QUOTE=Ultra Violence;35867094]The band is the product. And that's quite mature of you. I'm just going to be done with this, you're obviously so entrenched in your views that you can't even see that people aren't even discussing said views in the first place.[/QUOTE] [quote]No, album art isn't selling shit.[/quote] Dude I stopped taking you seriously a while ago.

i make album art and usually its to depict a theme in the label/title of the album, or just what the artist asked for why is there an argument on album art now

[QUOTE=Bobie;35867138]i make album art and usually its to depict a theme in the label/title of the album, or just what the artist asked for why is there an argument on album art now[/QUOTE] Because it's an identical expression of the male power and sex fantasies as the supposedly derisive portrayals of male models being equivalent to the portrayal of female models. Last I checked there weren't all that many male models being hospitalized for extreme malnutrition.

[QUOTE=Bobie;35867138]i make album art and usually its to depict a theme in the label/title of the album, or just what the artist asked for why is there an argument on album art now[/QUOTE] Because thisisspain compared it to male modelling, stating they were the same, and then Lankist decided to take 1 sentence out of an entire paragraph and focus on that in a last bid at assuring his superiority and insulting my intelligence based on irrelevant topics.

[QUOTE=Mr. N;35867093]Sanius, Thisispain, and Lankist seem to be the same exact people to me at this point, with self superiority complexes and a raging boner to chastise people. I'd also say Zeke but he's dead, was actually funny, and less loathsome. [/QUOTE] we don't even believe the same things and you're chastising me right now i'd compare you to someone but i don't insult people whom i know nothing about (pro-tip to you)

[QUOTE=Ultra Violence;35867167]Because someone compared it to male modelling, and then Lankist decided to take 1 sentence out of an entire paragraph and focus on that in a last bid at assuring his superiority and insulting my intelligence based on irrelevant topics.[/QUOTE] You completely contradicted yourself. That deserves a little bit of a spotlight.

[QUOTE=Lankist;35867166]Last I checked there weren't all that many male models being hospitalized for extreme malnutrition.[/QUOTE] That's because the male ideal physique is muscular, whereas the female ideal physique is thin. That doesn't make the pressure to achieve an impossible body type any different.

[QUOTE=Ultra Violence;35867167]Because thisisspain compared it to male modelling, stating they were the same, and then Lankist decided to take 1 sentence out of an entire paragraph and focus on that in a last bid at assuring his superiority and insulting my intelligence based on irrelevant topics.[/QUOTE] hey both of you were just flinging insults at one point now say sorry to each other and shake hands

[QUOTE=Ultra Violence;35867202]That's because the male ideal physique is muscular, whereas the female ideal physique is thin. That doesn't make the pressure to achieve an impossible body type any different.[/QUOTE] So the male ideal is impossible, even though it's wholly attainable and doesn't hospitalize them. Right okay.

[QUOTE=Lankist;35867176]You completely contradicted yourself. That deserves a little bit of a spotlight.[/QUOTE] I didn't contradict myself at any point. But yes, keep trying to prove how stupid I am by insulting me for things that aren't there.

[QUOTE=Ultra Violence;35867202]That's because the male ideal physique is muscular, whereas the female ideal physique is thin. That doesn't make the pressure to achieve an impossible body type any different.[/QUOTE] Not to mention the ideal for a male model is still very unhealthy. "Healthy" muscles aren't well defined - strong men in circuses are huge because they're really strong, not because they have defined muscles. It's a combination of fat and muscle strength.

[QUOTE=Ultra Violence;35867220]I didn't contradict myself at any point. But yes, keep trying to prove how stupid I am by insulting me for things that aren't there.[/QUOTE] "Album art isn't selling shit" "Album art is selling the band" Somehow I don't exactly see the point in discussing a topic with someone who is simply going to flop around their own argument at any given moment.

[QUOTE=Lankist;35867213]So the male ideal is impossible, even though it's wholly attainable and doesn't hospitalize them. Right okay.[/QUOTE] For some it is, for some it isn't. It's not "wholly" attainable. The original point I was trying to make is that males and females both struggle with fitting the ideal of beauty, nothing more.

[QUOTE=Protocol7;35867228]Not to mention the ideal for a male model is still very unhealthy. "Healthy" muscles aren't well defined - strong men in circuses are huge because they're really strong, not because they have defined muscles. It's a combination of fat and muscle strength.[/QUOTE] Uhm, healthy muscles are well defined. An extreme lack of fat isn't exactly good, but it isn't directly harmful either. As long as you maintain the proper diet for the regimen, you don't need fat calories. Muscles look defined through a combination of strengthening and through the lack of surrounding fat tissue. You are confusing "definition" with "grotesquely huge." [editline]7th May 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Ultra Violence;35867236]For some it is, for some it isn't. It's not "wholly" attainable. The original point I was trying to make is that males and females both struggle with fitting the ideal of beauty, nothing more.[/QUOTE] And both ideals are defined by men.

[QUOTE=Lankist;35867235]"Album art isn't selling shit" "Album art is selling the band" Somehow I don't exactly see the point in discussing a topic with someone who is simply going to flop around their own argument at any given moment.[/QUOTE] I believe I said, it's not selling product in the sense that album art is. It's not "selling product," it's simply a depiction of the band's image. In that sense, it could be seen as "selling the band," but someone browsing a music store isn't going to buy that album simply because the art apparently makes them feel "powerful," they buy based on liking the music. The music is selling shit. The album art is secondary by "selling" the band's image, not the music. But continue being selective and ignoring context.

ur all wrong, the ideal male isnt muscular or skinny, its [I]based[/I] [img]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-CJk6hRTduwk/TWUuBeXW0vI/AAAAAAAAAD0/mHhN_g03kmc/s1600/lilbcentaur.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=Lankist;35867249]Uhm, healthy muscles are well defined. An extreme lack of fat isn't exactly good, but it isn't directly harmful either.[/QUOTE] [IMG]http://puu.sh/twQV[/IMG] This is healthy to you? It's not. It's just as hard to attain as unhealthily thinness.

[QUOTE=Protocol7;35867294][IMG]http://puu.sh/twQV[/IMG] This is healthy to you? It's not. It's just as hard to attain as unhealthily thinness.[/QUOTE] hey look who didn't read the thread from Ultraviolence w/ love. [img]http://www.banglads.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/calvin-klein.jpg[/img] This is the image we have been discussing. Wholly attainable with diet and exercise, not at all dangerous to reach save for rare medical conditions preventing it. But hey, if that orange dude is your ideal, you've got other issues aside from this thread.

[QUOTE=Lankist;35867313]hey look who didn't read the thread[/QUOTE] No, I'm asking what you define as healthy. You don't have to be a cunt to get your point across.

[QUOTE=Lankist;35867313]hey look who didn't read the thread from Ultraviolence w/ love. [img]http://www.banglads.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/calvin-klein.jpg[/img] This is the image we have been discussing.[/QUOTE] To portray that men have been sexualized in modelling the same way women are. Not to discuss unhealthy models. I never discussed women being hospitalized for modelling. So that image has nothing to do with our current line of discussion. [editline]7th May 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Protocol7;35867334]No, I'm asking what you define as healthy. You don't have to be a cunt to get your point across.[/QUOTE] Yes, he does. In fact, that's the only thing he's done in his entire participation of this thread.

[QUOTE=Ultra Violence;35867340]To portray that men have been sexualized in modelling the same way women are. Not to discuss unhealthy models. I never discussed women being hospitalized for modelling. So that image has nothing to do with our current line of discussion.[/QUOTE] Again. Not even close to the same way. Not submissive. NEVER submissive. Always in control. Always affluent. And the being hospitalized thing is the primary concern. Body dysmorphism. That is what the portrayal of [I]women[/I] is causing. That simply is not happening in men. There is a reason for that. It's because men made both ideals. [editline]7th May 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Ultra Violence;35867340]Yes, he does. In fact, that's the only thing he's done in his entire participation of this thread.[/QUOTE] Funny, because I'm the only one here who hasn't engaged in any personal attacks, but have attacked the argument directly without ever once focusing on its author.

[QUOTE=Lankist;35867356]Funny, because I'm the only one here who hasn't engaged in any personal attacks, but have attacked the argument directly without ever once focusing on its author.[/QUOTE] Are you sure I can point to a post not even 5 posts back that states I probably have issues.