More often than not, models do crazy things to make themselves smaller. Normal people don't. Making it a blanket ban just makes sure that these girls stay healthy (healthier...) and not go too far. But the picture makes a fair point. It might be better to have a physical done by an impartial doctor to make sure everyone is fit and healthy.
I agree. I'd rather have a not dying of hunger model but I'd also not want to see an obese one either. Healthy weight is important especially for models.
People might start getting all fussy about having everything tailored to their specific measurements even though that might not exist. Anyways, many clothes are much cheaper than men's suits because they've been standardized within the company and can be mass produced easily. What a theoretical clothing FDA could do is put a standardized blanket on sizes over all companies at least in the US. It can still be produced easily, and no one will be mad about companies making something with the same size label two different sizes. And giving a number or identity (s/m/l) to sizes also makes it easier to place orders. Like... "We need some for these bigger people, slightly less big people, in between people, and small people."
Just because the clothes are made to specific sizes does not mean they are tailored to a person's specific measurements, off the rack mens suits sizes come in 2 inch increments. It's no easier to standardise to defined sizes than it is to associate an arbitrary number with the exact same thing, but it would completely eliminate the ambiguity; a 32 inch waist will always be a 32 inch waist, but a size 6 can vary from size 2 to size 10 depending on the company that assigns that arbitrary number to it.
I think the point was that 'normal' models often develop eating disorders in the course of their career to achieve/stay at an unhealthy size, whereas 'plus size' models tend to already be 'plus size' before they become models.
Does it matter when they become plus size? They're unhealthy, just like the extremely thin people (and I'm talking about the ones who got to the place they are unhealthily.) If we accept them but refuse the others, we're essentially saying it's okay to be fat but not okay to be thin, when as long as you're healthy it should be okay to be either (yes, you can be a bit thinner than usual and healthy or a bit fatter than usual and healthy.)
"we're essentially saying it's okay to be fat but not okay to be thin"
No, we're saying that it's not okay to be anorexic. Anything more and you're reading too far into it.
1
deleted
· 9 years ago
Not everyone who's a size 0 is anorexic, but a blanket ban's been put onto size 0s.
That paper does not provide any evidence to support it's hypothesis; the entire thing is a long "what if?" which fails to take into account any other possibilities.
It is mainly based on the very questionable assumption, there was a fixed difference between the "ideal weight" (whatever that may be) and the actual weight of a group of persons. In which present society do people try to look "above" a certain set standard?
Yeah, it looks like it's more of a proof-of-concept study to encourage further study.
1
deleted
· 9 years ago
I must have interpreted it wrong, sorry. I was more taking the plus sized models encouraging people to be overweight from anecdotal evidence, because I hear a LOT of girls talking at school about how if models can do it it must be fully healthy and okay. I guess my entire point is just that it doesn't seem fair that one end of the scale gets banned, whereas the other is allowed to continue being unhealthy.
"I guess my entire point is just that it doesn't seem fair that one end of the scale gets banned, whereas the other is allowed to continue being unhealthy."
The first guest in this string of comments explained this, but I think I know where the miss communication is. The ban isn't meant to protect people who are influenced by models (though it probably does that to). The ban is meant to protect the models themselves. A lot models have to basically starve themselves to remain competitive. They essentially have to give themselves anorexia in order to stay in their career. This is what the ban is aimed at stopping. Plus size models don't have to constantly binge eat in order to stay competitive, so it just not as much of an issue.
1
deleted
· 9 years ago
Ohhhh.....okay. My mistake, that makes more sense.
Uhm... do a google picture search for "anorexic models" and compare the results to "obese models". And then just get a grip. One shows countless examples of potentially bad influence on millions of girls with self esteem problems, one shows a few examples of queer fetish stuff that actually hardly concern anyone. Guess which is which. If you can, cause... well, if you had any sort of clue, you would probably not have made this trainwreck of a meme in the first place
I wear a size 0, but not every time someone's a size 0 or other small size does that mean we are skinny because of our eating..I run cross country and horseback ride, doing something almost every day. Some people just are little (I'm 5"1 and not growing anymore at 15, and others are just little by nature like me) and excersise a lot so it's hard to gain weight back.
No, we're saying that it's not okay to be anorexic. Anything more and you're reading too far into it.
Such as being racist to white people and sexist to men
The first guest in this string of comments explained this, but I think I know where the miss communication is. The ban isn't meant to protect people who are influenced by models (though it probably does that to). The ban is meant to protect the models themselves. A lot models have to basically starve themselves to remain competitive. They essentially have to give themselves anorexia in order to stay in their career. This is what the ban is aimed at stopping. Plus size models don't have to constantly binge eat in order to stay competitive, so it just not as much of an issue.