I happen to be a 5’7" 140 lb woman. There is no way I’m fitting into my size 6s at 140 pounds. I fit in eights or tens. If I weight 160, it would be tens or twelves. My max weight, before my doctor calls me overweight and has me dieting, is 150.
Amy has real woman breasts and a real woman body. But at 160 she is not a “standard” six - not even an eight. She is however, definitely the smallest woman in the list.
I was a size six dependably at 120 pounds before I had kids.
I know it’s a catchy phrase but most people don’t have to “manufacture” being outraged (if a sniffy instagram post can be described as outrage) about being called fat, excuse me “plus sized”. Yes she riffs on not being a thin Hollywood beauty but that’s still not the same as making it into the plus size issue.
I was a size 6 at 5’2" and 125 lbs. I think my waist was 29 inches at the time.
“Women”? The fact that you can only manage to shrink the “age window difference” down as small five years by including the two years before an actress even reaches legal majority reveals how ridiculous this comparison is.
[QUOTE=Ellis Dee]
Jennifer Lawrence is only 25 right now, but has had a pretty good career as a leading lady for a while now. Her first leading role, not as a love interest but as the actual main character of a feature film, was eight years ago.
[/quote]
You mean The Poker House where she played an abused 14-year-old? :dubious:
No, showing young actresses playing children doesn’t count as part of their “window” for leading lady roles on a par with leading man roles. FFS, if they did then you’d also have to say that the “leading man window” starts at 12 or thereabouts with Daniel Radcliffe’s lead role in Harry Potter. :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=Ellis Dee]
Compare to Brad Pitt, who was already 28 when he got that bit part in Thelma & Louise, started getting leading roles in his 30s and is currently aging out of leading roles now at 53. Or George Clooney, who was 33 when he got his first major role on ER.
[/QUOTE]
Note that Pitt is about to appear as, guess what, the leading man in the 2016 romantic thriller Five Seconds of Silence, while George Clooney is still going strong in leading-man roles at 54. Harrison Ford, of course, continued to play leading-man roles into his 60s, even if you don’t count his recent Star Wars reprise. So I’m quite skeptical of your “aging out” claim about male actors in general not being viable leading men after 51.
Moreover, plenty of actors start their leading-man roles younger than 25, such as Robert Pattinson at 22 (even if you don’t count his schoolboy role in Harry Potter three years earlier, which I’m guessing you would if he were an actress), and Leonardo diCaprio at 23.
So a more realistic but still quite conservative version of the “leading role window” would be something like 24-56 for men, and 18-38 for women: i.e., 32 years versus 20.
Would you prefer “females”?
Yes, I do mean Poker House. Then there was Winter’s Bone two years later, when she was 19.
Yes, it really does. The difference is that it’s extremely difficult for adolescent boys to transition into leading man roles, while it’s quite normal for adolescent girls to transition into leading lady roles.
Daniel Radcliffe isn’t transitioning into leading man roles at all, pretty much.
Brad Pitt got his first leading role 22 years ago, at the age of 31. Which is how old Scarlett Johansson is right now, 13 years into her career as a leading lady.
Again, his leading roles started 22 years ago at the age of 33. By comparison, Keira Knightley’s leading roles started 13 years ago, and she’s still only 31.
I’m unconvinced Pattinson has or will be able to make the transition. DiCaprio is an excellent example, though, analogous to Meryl Streep as an outlier.
I’d prefer that when comparing women actors to men actors, we restrict the term to women who are actually, you know, legal adults. Comparing “teenage girls and women” on the one hand to “men” on the other is not even-handed.
[QUOTE=Ellis Dee]
Yes, it really does. The difference is that it’s extremely difficult for adolescent boys to transition into leading man roles
[/quote]
Nonsense. Not every young male actor lands a major role in his teens, but there are plenty of lead actors nowadays who started getting name recognition when they were quite young. We’ve mentioned DiCaprio, and there’s also Joseph Gordon-Levitt who was in 10 Things I Hate About You at 18, and Christian Bale who starred in Empire of the Sun at 13, and Jake Gyllenhaal who played Donnie Darko at 21, and Jonathan Rhys Myers who had a lead in Velvet Goldmine at 21, and Ryan Gosling who starred in The Notebook at 24, etc. etc. etc.
[QUOTE=Ellis Dee]
DiCaprio is an excellent example, though, analogous to Meryl Streep as an outlier.
[/QUOTE]
Outlier-shmoutlier. There are many other male actors whose careers indicate that the typical “leading-role window” for men starts way earlier than 30-something.
Face it, what you’re trying to build here is a false equivalence. The average shelf life of male actors in leading roles is indeed a lot longer than that of female actors, not just a measly five years or so.
I’m not blaming male actors for that, or going on a wildeyed radfem rampage about how all male actors therefore deserve to be castrated, or any nonsense of that sort. But it’s not striking a blow against social or cultural gender inequality to try to fake the numbers or handwave away clear evidence of such inequality that actually exists.
I thought she was comfortable being a fat celebrity?
Now she gets butthurt about it?
Sigh…
It’s possible to cite particular actresses and actors endlessly concerning the age they did their most popular work, but that’s just anecdotal evidence. Here’s a news story about a survey on the average age that actresses and actors get the most money for their work. Actresses peak in pay at 34 and actors peak at 51. Actresses in their 20’s actually make more than actors in that age range, but then actors pass them in pay. Here’s also a second news story showing that actresses tend to win Oscars at a younger age than actors:
Here’s a smaller survey (and thus a less definitive one) about the fact that after age 35 actors tend to get cast against much younger actresses:
http://graphjoy.com/2015/08/the-hollywood-gender-age-gap-part-1/
If someone has more definitive surveys, I’d like to hear about them (and not about more anecdotes).
I love that Schumer went out of her way to delicately craft a message that essentially says, “if this is what magazines consider plus size, that seems kind of messed up” and the reaction has been that the fat pig should be glad to be getting any attention at all; kind of making her point.