You're making the assumption that all fashion designers and clothing manufacturers are working off the same sizes to begin with. First we have the country-wide systems, where a size 10 in the US may be a size 47 or a size 8 or a size 14 somewhere else. Then we have the fact that different stores simply measure their sizes different to others. Look in the wardrobe of any woman, thin or fat, and you will find a mix of sizes around one central average size. Say she is normally a 12 - she will have items in sizes 10, 14, maybe even an 8 or She hasn't magically changed body size to fit in all those different clothes differently.
Because the sizes have been given different numbers in different countries does not mean that the design process is any different!!!!! The basic technique for creating garments and sizing them up is consistent. It makes no sense to do it any other way. The torso mannequins which are used to create the samples are the same. What you see in stores and so on is irrelevant. Those are post-production clothes. Those are not the ones that need models to fit into the one of a kind samples that they are trying to get the industry buyers to make orders for.
Models are required to be skinny so that they fit into pre-production clothes. Why not change the stereotype of the male action hero to be a little less suicidally brave? All the fashion industry is doing is encouraging women to be thin. The action movie industry is encouraging men to risk their lives to pander to the unrealistic female desires and expectations. Where's the street-wise Hercules to fight the rising odds? Isn't there a white knight upon a fiery steed? Late at night I toss and I turn and I dream of what I need "I need a hero I'm holding out for a hero 'til the end of the night He's gotta be strong And he's gotta be fast And he's gotta be fresh from the fight" - Bonnie Tyler.
First rule of opnion pieces is that they are opinions Thats the blooming point Second rule is that they are not necessarily written by the ABC, as in this case. Yes ABC staff do contribtue a significant portion of the peices but i doubt it would be close to a majority. Anyone can submit a piece, you just need an opinion it need not be mainstream. Much like th fahsion shoes you speak of, the opinions propses here in the drum may be one of a kind, Once the opinion struts down the thoughtwalk you then get all sorts of zies and varitey commenters are free to agree or disagree with it free to agree or disagree with each other.
But 'in theory', communism works. If 'anyone can submit a piece', why do the pieces that make it never diverge from the PC nanny-state ABC narrative? C'mon - that's laughable. Do you think that the entire industry decided one day they were all going to go off and buy smaller mannequins to do their designing on? If it's your view that issues around eating disorders are 'laughable' that's your business but I've seen them first hand and it's not cool.
What's laughable is the idea that models haven't changed in 50 years. Compare the 'thigh gap' on the photo for this article with a fashion spread even a bikini model from the 60s or 70s and judge for yourself. It does not exist to sell copy unlike fashion mags. It exists to further science relating to eating disorders, hardly 'laughable'. If you have evidence it's wrong submit a correction to the journal and they'll correct their article. It's how science works. Science corrects itself when vested interests come into play. What's actually laughable is the suggestion that models are the same size and shape as 40 or 50 years ago.
Check out the legs on the photo at the top of the page and ask yourself where you ever saw a 'thigh gap' on a 70's bikini model. Bikini models are a different kettle of fish entirely. The main issue there is low amounts of body fat so that the material doesn't 'dig in' to the flesh and make it look uncomfortable. Sizing doesn't play as big a part. Furthermore, I realise where your misunderstanding might have come from about the mannequins. You would be talking about display mannequins that appear in shops.
Those are designed for post-production clothes. They have nothing to do with the design process that creates pre-production clothes for use in runways and often in magazine advertising although sometimes magazine shoot will be post production - products like shoes for example. The torso manequins used for design remain unchanged. Yes, ML, they did. Her name was 'Twiggy'. She became a phenomenon in the 's and 70's. Prior to that the curvy movie stars were the models that most young women tried to emulate. Too bad for those girls who were not well endowed, but many a cleavage was enhanced by the discreet placement of folded handkerchiefs or tissues.
Well after her death, it was discovered that even Marilyn Monroe used similar strategic placement of padding. Women's clothes used to be designed not just to fit around curves but to enhance them. This required more skill and artistry than making a simple straight shift dress, therefore a higher cost of production.
But then, this was in a society that valued quality workmanship, not one with a throw-away mentality. As the latter generates repeated profits it came to dominate in the marketplace. Sadly, the people who embrace this model can only do so by the exploitation of the labor of other women in poorer countries.
Skinny models are the direct result of profiteering by the fashion industry. Marylin Munroe was a size Fourteen So yea the industry does sort of collude on this sort of thing, really it's what sells though so we the market place is part of that collusion. We have whole genres of chic lit on this doesn't anybody remember Bridget Joneses diary? The question is why are woman being this market place I don't get the Kardashians at all but Kim has her constant weight battles, so is it about a sort of access to the glamour that keeps the market place invested in this.
There was a great skit on the TV show Miranda where Miranda hart walks up to a plump plain woman and does a reverse Trina and Susannah asking her if she likes her clothes if they are comfortable and practical etc. Marilyn Monroe was not the equivalent of a Size 14 by today's standards. This is a complete myth. An actress who was given roles because of her embodiment of the then-current notion of attractiveness.
Not much different at all, ML. Unless one wants to suggest that current high fashion catwalk models aren't attractive. Not only do hourglass, chubby women not look good in the shapeless dresses that skinny models wear, but skinny women themselves are often not flattered by dresses that attempt to show off one's curves - because they don't have any. Why, then, are all clothes based on how skinny women look, and then "sized up"? Tall women and short women look better in different things - should all clothes be designed for short women and then "sized up"?
And thus another model is required at short notice to fit the doll clothes. That doesn't make it above criticism. There's a lot of criticism to go around, in both industries. Buying new clothes doesn't make you feel good unless you feel you have a need for them. Fashion marketing engineers that need. Please, we know perfectly well how marketing works and the fashion industry is a textbook case of making a product and then convincing people they need it, instead of the other way around. Once again, Ann, you make the mistake of assuming that the industry in question wants to make "chubby" women an element of their market.
It does not want to. Many top fashion labels to not make their clothes in larger sizes. Victoria's Secret, for example, does not make products in larger sizes the largest bra size they make is an 18E and does not want to. They only size things up to a certain point before they get to sizes they simply do not want to cater to. Once again, reaver, you've have missed the point that an industry that insists everyone pay attention to it, but only deigns to "speak" to hot, thin, young things, is just asking for criticism.
Not to mention, sorry but the top ten flagship brands are not the "fashion industry". Older women actually spend a lot of money on clothes. Who do you think buys haute couture? There are tons of brands and stores out there that target them, and they still dress up thin young women as their models. You know who shops at Myer? It's not year-olds with their first credit cards. That's a fail, ML. The very existence of the fashion industry is indefensible regardless of how many people it employs.
It is completely and utterly unnecessary and produces nothing of any real or practical value. It promotes the worst excesses of useless, conspicuous consumption, not to mention completely unrealistic body images to vulnerable young people. Anorexia probably wouldn't exist if not for the monster that is the fashion industry.
We do not need business suits or evening gowns that cost thousands of dollars, and the vast majority of people - those who live outside the fashion bubble - don't want them. We only need clothes that protect us from the elements. The industry is built on a foundation of vacuum and has ZERO merit. Value is a subjective measure, Greenkiller. The fashion industry only cares about the value judgements of those considering buying their clothes.
You are clearly not one of those people so your value judgement will be worth nothing to them. You do not think they have merit and they do not care. We are making the value judgement that over-consumption is a death sentence for this planet and in the short term always ends in an economic crash.
Skinny models and our obsession with appearance
Fashion can't bring together any facts to refute that, so it just cowers under "post-modern socio-cultural relevance" and other such fruity nonsense. If they do not care about your opinions, Ann and Greenkiller, then they will not change their behaviour based on your opinions. You want the industry to change based on your opinions, but give the industry no reason to take your opinions into consideration. Your implication is that expressing my opinion regarding the fashion industry is futile. More and more people are waking up to what the industry represents, and rejecting it, because of public opinion.
France - the capital of which is virtually synomynous with the industry - has already acted on one of the dangerous elements of the industry. Others could well follow. And to clarify, I don't want the industry to change. I want it to cease to exist.
As we consume more finite resources and as the population increases, useless endeavours such as fashion will inevitably end. Can't agree with any of your assertions. There are no excuses at all for extremely tiny samples - NONE - grading is irrelevant in this context.
People don't enjoy seeing an extreme minority of females paraded as walking clothes hangers, we do enjoy well designed clothing that is either inspirational or buyable. The influence the industry has is huge because all fashion shows, release of Pantone colors for the seasons etc are watched - and all we see from the fashion industry is TOXIC nonsense.
Actually - people DO enjoy it. If they didn't, the industry would have changed already. The Victoria's secret show is massive for example. New York, Paris and Milan fashion weeks are going from strength to strength. Fashion websites are hugely successful. Most people in this world do not care about the PC politics you are talking about. They just get on with their lives and enjoy it. For most people fashion is a bit of fun that they enjoy.
Perhaps you should take this industry, and yourself, a little less seriously. You are forgetting an important principle when it comes to contemporary media and event spectacles, ML. The principle states 'What appears is good. What is good appears'. When people are making their way into and up the industry, they perpetuate the ideals presented by the current 'winners' in order to be noticed and successful themselves.
Observers, from casual to paid, notice which ones become successful again and again and assume that what the successful teams are doing has the 'it ' factor. On the contrary Applaudanum, it is the companies that do something new and capture the zeitgeist that really make an impact and make the transition from pretender to performer.
PR is only effective if they have something new to talk about, after all. Making your products look good and desirable is important in any industry. Now, cars do not get photographed in front of garbage tips for a reason Coke cans are photographed in ice buckets so they look cold and refreshing. Laundry powders are photographed in pristine impeccably clean laundries that probably don't reflect the state of average laundries we would find in the general population.
Neither are clothes put on frumpy, overweight women. The look of the environment ie. It's pretty simple marketing. Except this is in the context of the French government's plans to regulate the use of skinny models by fashion designers. Which I doubt is an outcome of whatever opinion the author holds. Observing people who are extremely fat or thin, extremely rude or negative, extremely negative, extremely pedantic or opinionated are experiences we all encounter at times and most of us feel disturbed by the extremism.
There is a difference though, in respect to thinness. The causal evidence is all around us in the advertising and the movies. If you are thin and sexy, then as a woman you know that you will be treated as special and favoured by male teachers, bosses, lecturers, colleagues and generally by most males in society. The research is quite clear about the benefits of being sexy. Hence, women and men increasingly spend significant amount of their time investing in their curves and looks.
The cosmetic surgery industry is now substantial and growing every year. Of course, the ultimate look is to be very youthful looking and slim. The ultimate shape of sexiness and desire.
Skinny models and our obsession with appearance - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
So some women go to the extreme and become too thin being driven by their obsession to look desirable. A few women who are anorexic are unable to control their condition but they make up a very small minority of the obsessively thin women, who are not victims, but know exactly what they are doing. See, there's part of the problem right there - you say "if you are thin and sexy". Furthermore, "you know that you will be treated as special and favoured by male teachers, bosses, lecturers, colleagues and generally by most males in society" is almost certainly untrue.
As referenced elsewhere in the comments, studies and there have been many show that men prefer women that are curvier. You clearly subscribe to the theory that women clamour to appeal to men, yet what men actually want is quite distant from what women in your view perceive men's desires as. Women who are thin look more youthful and sexy and desirable particularly for older men who are more relevant to this discussion because they have more money and power than younger men.
Please provide the references that show 'men' prefer curvier women to slimmer more youthful looking women. I cannot find any references to your claim. Not fat, not skinny, but just right, like Goldilocks bed. The industry is wanting to sell the clothes, not the girls, Helvi, so it only matters whether the clothes look good. It is shameful that the fashion industry presents such a narrow view of 'beauty'. There are some women who are 'just right'. Women who are too fat or too skinny do not qualify.
That is not the fashion industry, Doublethink, that is biology. Too fat and too skinny do not qualify as "just right" when it comes to the common perception of beauty because of millions of years of evolution, not because a handful of snooty fashion designers one day just decided it. Okay reaver how do you explain the fact that women from South East Asia are very skinny as compared to 'just right' Europeans. Why do skinny Asians persist, even outnumber, 'just right' Europeans in the face of this evolutionary imperative?
I'd urge general caution against pinning such definitive conclusions on a pop-science evolution 'studies' you may have glanced at on-line. I was referring to making a product attractive to sell. You seem to be promoting the sale of an entirely different product. We're not on the same wavelength, Pete. As I was sitting at the doctor's, waiting to renew my prescription for Viagra I happen to glance through a Vogue magazine Sept. I was so shocked, not just by the emaciated look of the models but by their cranky looks.
So unhappy, scowling, so depressed and unhappy looking. I nearly lost the will for anymore Viagra and thought of giving it all away and concentrate on my stamp collection. In September "cranky looks", "unhappy", "scowling", and "depressed" were just on the cusp of coming into fashion - the magazine, by my reckoning, seemed to have picked the latest trends from the Canberra pratwalk perfectly. You'll be pleased to know the March edition has the models all wearing cap-and-bells with dribble stains down their fronts all rushing around bumping into one another - once again the magazine seems to have its finger on the nation's fashion pulse.
I seem to remember reading in a magazine in that promoting very thin women as an ideal of beauty was an anti-feminist ploy to make women feel less sure of themselves. Well, many of these models are still children, so it's not surprising that they're skinny. If the fashion industry want to put their clothes on underage females, and only stock up to size 12, then no wonder so many fashion firms go to the wall.
If their directors had a brain, they'd be catering to the baby boomers. Try finding clothes with sleeves, elastic waists, and the like that aren't cheap imports. It seems its taboo to say 'too fat', but trendy to say 'too thin' For every 'eat a burger' comment made, we should also hear 'go on a diet fatty'.
The difference between the "Eat a burger' comments and the "Go on a diet, fatty" comments, AstraNaut, is that the former represents a view that only those like the commenter hold and the latter represents a view that society at large holds. It must cut far deeper knowing that a disparaging comment represents the majority instead of a bitter minority. For anyone who wants to debate whether society at large judges thin women less harshly than fat women Yes, fat, not "big boned" or "big, beautiful women". Let us at least be honest about the matter ask yourself how many movies have a fat women as their sexy leading lady.
At the end of the day whether the matter at hand is selling high end clothes, selling movie tickets or something as simple as deciding who to ask out, biomechanics stemming from millions of years of evolution beats social engineering. How many movies have an anorexic woman as their leading lady? Actresses are not models, although sometimes they like to moonlight across industries.
Also, if we're cool on socially judging people for not being evolutionarily fit enough, we can shower all our scorn on small men for not living up to our standards, yes? Also men who aren't well-endowed, and men who aren't athletic? I sure hope you don't fall into one of those categories or you might just be open to scorn There have been far, far, far more movies with thin women as their sexy leading lady than movies with fat women as their sexy leading lady, Ann.
Keira Knightley has far more chance of being cast as the sexy leading lady whether or not the role is a romantic one than Rebel Wilson. From an evolutionary perspective and thus from a reproductive perspective men are judged differently to the way women are judged. Many people like to think that all of this is a result of society and that it can be changed by social engineering schemes, but it is not and cannot.
Evolution has formed society and it will take for more than trying to force fashion houses to hire fat models and movie studios to hire older actresses for society to effect evolution. Alas for you , I think you'll find just by reading the comments here that it's not solely the commentator's view.
The analysis of evolution's view that you propose, is confounded by countless studies showing otherwise. Where you are correct, is that society admires sexy. Where you are wrong, is that sexy does not necessarily equate to thin. The fact that the fashion and movie industries don't reflect that, is somewhat the commentator's point.
And I do agree with your point about calling a spade a spade - but being larger than a catwalk model doesn't make someone fat as opposed to big-boned etc. A curvy or athletic woman will be judged as more beautiful than both a thin and a fat women, but a thin women will be judged as more beautiful than a fat women. If you were to survey average people on the street as to whether Keira Knightley, Christina Hendricks or Rebel Wilson is more beautiful most would say Christina Hendricks, the majority of the rest would say Keira Knightley and very few would say Rebel Wilson.
This is not a result of society, it is a result of evolution. When a woman is being judged on physical beauty fashion modelling, for a directly relevant example, being entirely visual they are subconsciously being judged on the evolutionary imperative to reproduce. Obese women are at far higher risk of gestational diabetes, preeclampsia, infection, thrombosis, overdue pregnancy, serious labour problems, miscarriage and stillbirth than thin, curvy or athletic women and millions of years of evolution have programmed people to find fat women less beautiful based on that fact.
Part of the argument, reaver, is that we aren't seeing the Christina Hendricks types on the catwalk despite them being seen as 'most attractive' to more people than the other types. The advertisement for the soft drink with a young Elle Mcpherson on the beach in eye catching swimwear was very effective and she had a normal and healthy figure. I still remember the advertisement although the said soft drink is long gone.
Perhaps they should have kept playing the ad. What is all the fuss about anyway? Anorexic models walking down catwalks don't seem to be influencing millions of young people. Everybody thinks they look ridiculous and I suspect that the fashion houses use them to make people look harder at what they're wearing.
If young women want to look like that and make a lot of money before they get too old, 25? Although I must admit that a few years ago I saw a young couple, around 18 or thereabouts, as anorexic as each other wearing clothes that showed a total lack of body fat and protruding hip and shoulder joints. Their clothes did appear to be expensive, but both the boy and the girl looked wholly ridiculous.
Everyone I saw looking at them were either greatly amused, or shocked or dismayed. And, come to think of it, what the jump is a "healthy body image"? Isn't an actual healthy body more important than the impression image of one? In other words if healthy is the goal what does appearance have to do with it? Maybe the French ought to make them all do chin-ups and wind sprints to decide who gets to be a model. There is no obsession with appearance. There is no culture in human history that has not celebrated beauty. I am not beautiful but I do not begrudge other people their beauty.
But some culture's ideal of beauty is more psychologically or physically harmful than others. Lead and other poisons used to be used for make-up all the way leading back to Greek times. Is the cultural "celebration of beauty" worth poisoning yourself? To the Japanese, women were supposed to be childlike and innocent and a little bit simple, leading to physical beauty being synonymous with powerlessness and subservience.
Other cultures have had similar concepts of "beauty". Is that "celebration of beauty" worth an entire gender bowing to the pleasure of the more powerful gender? Fat is beautiful in some cultures. Women shaving their hair to enlarge their foreheads is beautiful in some cultures. Not to mention foot binding or neck rings. Pale skin or tans?
Depends on culture and point in history. Peter is right that beauty is celebrated but what that actually looks like is very different from place to place. It's about time the Body Mass Index was given the heave-ho anyway. Now I have a BMI of But according to the BMI I must lose between 7. It's a fair measurement for people who aren't serious exercisers. Especially for women who are less likely to have a ton of muscle mass.
It creates unrealistic expectations about male body image which lead to the victimisation of other, 'normal' men. See what I did there? Yes mike, you made me feel guilty and I might adjust my lifestyle by putting coke in my scotch instead of just water to partially compensate. What with this "our obsession with I don't know whether it is humility, or the complete opposite of humility, that leads you to the assumption that it is anyone else's obsession. Well, I've read all the comments so far.
I,too,have wondered about barbie dolls. I've 2 little girls and my wife was wholeheartedly but as it turns out,half-arsed against them due to their overly overt skinniness. But we were 'gifted' about 50, and my wife has even bought more!?!??! This 'article' lacks any insight and is hardly a worthwhile contribution to the debate. For me it encapsulates all that is 'wrong' with consumerism, as opposed to capitalism. We are fed this diatribe by the marketing specialists, an the gullible amongst us get bent.
I feel genuine pity for those who feel compelled to chase this marketing nirvana. I buy nothing, fair dinkum - nothing - because of the brand. My style of consumeristic activity is to enjoy the exploration, the hunt for what I can actually enjoy, for what it is, not for what I am told it is. Fashion is like fast-food. I haven't bought a Coke for decades, and a Mac for not much less, because they are, in my humble opinion, junk food, with unnatural flavours and textures. I do consume rubbish, but it's rubbish I enjoy for what it is, not for it's brand.
That is indeed a great quote that demonstrates Dr Rosewarne's delightfully dry sense of humour. It is a pity then that it occurs in yet another in a long line of articles that points out attention toward something that Dr Rosewarne is suggesting we don't pay attention toward. Provide feedback about this page. There's a problem loading this menu right now. Get fast, free shipping with Amazon Prime. Get to Know Us.
English Choose a language for shopping. Amazon Music Stream millions of songs. Amazon Drive Cloud storage from Amazon. Alexa Actionable Analytics for the Web. AmazonGlobal Ship Orders Internationally. Amazon Inspire Digital Educational Resources. Amazon Rapids Fun stories for kids on the go.
- Replacement Parts.
- Churchills Promised Land: Zionism and Statecraft (Yale University Press).
- Top Stories.
- N.B. (album) - Wikipedia.
- Navigation menu;
Amazon Restaurants Food delivery from local restaurants. ComiXology Thousands of Digital Comics. East Dane Designer Men's Fashion. In an attempt to escape, the teenager punches through the wall, entering the rooftop with Bedingfield and the backup dancers. Bedingfield is then sitting in a chair and when an eclipse occurs, hence the line "in the darkness there's light. Back at the work building, the employees watch Bedingfield's performance via the LG Voyager cell phone.
The video at this point features the child still drawing his picture and covering his ears, blocking out the sound of his parents arguing. The child walks out of the house he drew, when the camera shows Bedingfield meditating on a large lotus flower, while a group of belly dancers dance around her. As the child walks up to her, Bedingfield opens her eyes.
The end of the video shows the lotus flower rising up, while Bedingfield sings the final lines, then looking at the child.
- Mr. Changs #2 (a fantasy erotica voyeurism and seduction story) (Mr. Changs Candy Shop).
- Conformed To His Image with The Servant as His Lord: Lessons on Living like Jesus.
- Pocketful of Sunshine - Wikipedia.
- Lighting Digital Field Guide;
Future Dance Central choreographer Nick Demoura appears in the video. Despite the fact Bedingfield herself licenses a lot of her songs to video games this song has yet to appear in a Dance Central.
- From Poets to Protagonists.
- The Grey Cardinal Part 4.
- Similar authors to follow.
FreeTime ; a music video was also made using the game and portraying Bedingfield as a sim. Bedingfield performed the song on the season finale of the Canadian television series Degrassi: In the fall of , "Pocketful of Sunshine" was used in the promotional campaign for the syndicated launch of the television series Lost. The song is also featured on Audition Online.
In the United States, the escape-themed song's chorus portion was used in a television commercial to promote Pechanga Resort and Casino in California. It was included in the soundtrack album Music from Degrassi: The Next Generation It was also featured in the end credits of the film Igor The animated series Planet Warriors has the song as Sun's transformation song.
Credits adapted from the liner notes of Pocketful of Sunshine. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. This article is about the song by Natasha Bedingfield.
For her album of the same title, see N. An second sample of "Pocketful of Sunshine"'s chorus. Retrieved 23 April Archived from the original on 10 December Retrieved 28 April Retrieved 29 April