I’m not overly concerned about this one example. It is yet another badly distorted representation of what a healthy woman should look like. It reinforces the distorted images of women in magazines and ads. Runway models in fashion shows are an example of women trying to meet these ideals. Basically it all comes from a graphic artist’s absurd interpretation of the human form. Partnered with the fashion industry that worships women on the verge of anorexia.
I think taken as a whole, there should be some concern. Magazines, ads, and store mannequins send a confusing massage to early teen girls struggling with the changes in their body.
btw. the store’s defense of those mannequins is total bs. They used skin tight pants on that mannequins . They are like a second skin. Ease of dressing that mannequin is not their concern. Otherwise they’d use a size a little bigger that actually fits a real, breathing person.
The real girl in that picture has thicker legs and especially thighs than many teen girls.
IOW …
The mannequin almost certainly doesn’t represent the 50th percentile leg size; it’s too thin.
The real teen almost certainly doesn’t represent the 50th percentile leg size for non-overweight teens; it’s too thick.
*Should *the mannequin represent the 50th percentile of healthy-weight people of the target market age?
*Should *the mannequin represent the 50th percentile of actual obesity-epidemic British (or equally US) people of the target market age?
If it should, who *ought *to enforce the should?
Seems to me it’s all just part of advertising. Everything about advertising is an improved shinier-than-true version of reality. In 50+ years I’ve never been as cool as the guys I’ve seen in ads directed at me. Doesn’t matter if I was 5, 10, 15, or 55 years old. Neither has the stuff I’ve bought very often been as cool as it was advertised to be.
Nothing to see here but Recreational Outrage fodder for the easily ROed crowd.
Because guys rarely walk past a mannequin and say ‘wow, I wish my junk looked like that guy’s junk’.
But honestly, I think females (especially younger females) are just much more susceptible to body image disorders than males. When males start wishing they looked like the guy in the CK ad, maybe there will be some discussion. And with that, guys in ads tend to be muscular, which involves eating well. Female models tend to be thin (see the OP) which can lead to unhealthy eating habits.
<shrug>My wife and I raised two wonderful daughters. I still recall the daily crises when they noticed some weight gain, puffy faces, big butts. You name the body part and they worried about it. Self image was a big deal to them at that age.
I lost count of the dozens of times that I gave the “honey you look wonderful and we love you” pep talk. My wife and I remained positive and supportive. Thankfully today they are both at healthy weights. I’m so thankful it never got worse than teen angst for my daughters. Many families aren’t so fortunate.
As a male teen, I looked in a mirror a few times a day to comb my hair and check my nose for boogers… I never paid any attention to a tummy bulge above my belt line or my face looking puffy. My thighs and butt were never too big. Etc. I just never gave my appearance much thought. I was a guy and looked like one. I can’t explain why I had that mindset. It was just my natural view of myself. Sure, for a date I shaved extra close, wore nice fitting clothes, used mouthwash. But never once looked to see if my butt looked big in my jeans.
The function of store mannequins isn’t to make women feel good about themselves; it’s to show off the clothing the store is selling. Saying that stores should have to display mannequins that are larger in size simply to avoid possibly offending people is, in itself, pretty damned offensive. It’s telling insecure people that they’re right to be insecure; telling the young and impressionable that freedom of expression, insofar as it expresses ideas running contrary to the hippy-dippy feelgood position of the cultural pendulum, is bad and must be censored; tells both those groups that having their self-esteem determined by the actions of others is normal, healthy, and ‘as it should be’; and tells stores that, regardless of the sizes of clothing you sell, you need to spend time, money, and space validating the feelings of strangers who probably won’t buy anything you sell anyway, since it doesn’t fit them. The only group that stands to gain is, as LSLGuy mentioned above, the Recreational Outrage crowd, who’d get to feel good that they accomplished something.
Cheryl Tiegs Sears catalog from maybe the late 1970’s?
I had quite a few daydreams about this lady in high school. Even in a retouched commercial photo they didn’t make her look under weight. It is an appealing photo designed to sell clothing. I’m pretty sure her Searsclothing line was quite successful.
Photoshop has made it too easy for graphic artists to reshape bodies. I barely recognize today’s models as real, breathing human beings. They are almost a caricature of a human being.
I’m not among the outraged at the mannequin, but I personally wouldn’t say that that girl has thick legs. They seem average/slender to me. And the mannequin’s legs honestly do look anorexic.
I agree outrage is not needed in this example. The mannequin is just one example of many issues with todays fashion industry and their view of women.
Nothing will change unless consumers speak up. Make it known anorexic (looking) models are not some ideal of great beauty. Being that underweight is a symptom of a potentially life threatening illness. Fashion will change their advertising if enough consumers demand change.
I’d be happy to simply see healthy models. Women of normal weight or maybe just a few pounds under. Basically what the 1970’s models (Cheryl Tiegs,Cindy Crawford, Kathy Ireland, and Paulina Porizkova) looked like.
You know, it seems like I’ve there has been massive outrage at the fashion industry for the too-skinny models and photo manipulation since I was a teenager, which was 20 years ago. Has anything improved?
I’m quite surprised a social media campaign hasn’t been organized. Basic consumerism 101. Hit them in the pocketbook and apply public pressure. Ultimately they will tailor their ad campaigns, magazines and store displays to maximize sells.
Changing images in our culture will take longer. It will take time to convince people that being drastically underweight isn’t attractive or an ideal to aspire to. Hopefully a change in fashion will eventually change our culture’s ideals of beauty too.
It seems to me that the biggest thing that has changed, that I have noticed, is that a lot of girls who are heavier, and some who are obese, don’t try to hide it so much. When I (thought I) was fat when I as a teen, I never would have worn a lower cut shirt or close fitting t-shirt. Or indeed anything with any shape at all. At my son’s high school, I see a lot of overweight teens dressing quite fashionably. Sadly, I also see a lot more overweight and obese teens than I remember from when I was a teen.
So while we (as a society) still hate the fashion industry, fashion models, and Barbie for making us hate our bodies, we are also more accepting of overweight teens.
I just never gave my appearance much thought. I was a guy and looked like one. I can’t explain why I had that mindset. It was just my natural view of myself. Sure, for a date I shaved extra close, wore nice fitting clothes, used mouthwash. But never once looked to see if my butt looked big in my jeans.