Glamour's "Shock" Photo Wins Praise From Women
It was a tiny picture tucked away on page 194 in Glamour magazine (US edition). But, it was responsible for hundreds of grateful emails to the editor, newspaper articles across the world, and setting blogs and Twitter ablaze.
So, what was so shocking about this photo? It showed a normal, healthy looking woman.
Lizzie Miller, the 20 year old model in the photograph, is 5ft 11in and weighs 175lbs - giving her a healthy BMI of 24.4. The photo can be seen here. The Guardian describes her as:
A beautiful, creamy-skinned naked model... with a small roll of stomach fat.
It's that little roll of stomach fat, very familiar to me and probably to most of Diet Blog's female readers, that has rocked the world. It's also reopened discussions about the airbrushing of models, which Diet Blog has covered in the past.
Lizzie herself explained that:
Pretty much every picture in a magazine or ad is airbrushed... I don't think the public understands how much smoke and mirrors are involved in making women look like that.
When every wrinkle, every fold of fat, and every blemish is photoshopped away, we're being sold a vision of perfection which doesn't exist. Why? Advertisers want us to feel bad about our own bodies, and want us to pay for expensive creams and lotions to "fix" our perfectly natural and healthy looks.
Two of the things that have shocked me most about this story are:
- Lizzie is considered too big to be a "plus-side" model, despite being smaller than the average American woman, and at a "normal" weight on the BMI chart.
- Whilst most comments on blogs and news articles have been positive, some have been extremely critical about that little roll of belly fat. To me, Lizzie looks like a beautiful and normal woman. It's healthier to carry a little fat, than to be underweight like most models.
So what do you think? Do you prefer magazines like Glamour and Vogue to show a glitzy world of models which you know full well is photoshopped. Or, do you want to see real women on the pages? And what does all this fuss over a perfectly normal photo suggest about the media and our expectations of fashion magazines?
17 Comments
Add Your Comment
ADVERTISING
New
- FROM DIET BLOG
- On-Off Fasting: Does It Work?
- 400 Calorie Fix
- 5 Factor World Diet
- Quick Giveaway: Powerhouse Weight Loss Game
- FORUM
- Low Carb Atkins Diet- Tips to Cut the Carbs.
- How Can I Gain a Healthy Weight and Keep it?
- How Do I Eat Healthy at University?
- Starving Myself and Exercising, But Not Losing an Ounce?
Categories
| Body Image Celebrities Diet Pills Diets Exercise |
Fast Food Funny Stuff Success Stories Teens and Kids Tips and Tools |
RSS Feed
Follow @DietBlog on Twitter
Yes, this has been all over the fitness blog world. Personally, I can't believe that this model is too big to be a plus size model. That tells you something right there because she is not huge by any means. Almost all of us have that roll & the fact that magazines do not use real pictures has always been a negative to me. I think all this perfection in ads & mags is what leads young girls & women to push so hard & they end up with eating disorders, depressed because they can't live up to this crap & more. I do wish there were more average people in the mags.
I have entered myself numerous times as an older, in shape, active & healthy eating "reader model". I have never been chosen. I think it is the need to have "what is the norm" in their mags. Very discouraging!
ReplyI, too, wish that more average women showed up in magazines but that goes with just wishing that not everyone in your average magazine was white.
I really doubt, though, that a lot of those with eating disorders are influenced by magazines. The culture of being thin has helped to set the stage, but eating disorders existed long before models were supposed to be 5'11" and weigh 117 pounds. I've never read fashion or celebrity magazines except for buying back issues to cut up for scrapbooking, nor have I ever watched any sort of fashion or celebrity gossip shows, but I still have an eating disorder.
Magazines glorifying thin women may lead to excessive dieting, but only a small group will ever end up with disordered eating, let alone an eating disorder.
ReplyI also wrote about Lizzi on Nutrition Unplugged, and I'm thrilled to see the response from Glamour readers and the discussion this has sparked. I give Lizzi a lot of credit and I'm hopeful that the fashion world will take note.
ReplyCute face.
Hmm, this is a wobbly territory. Not EVERYONE that reads magazine feels like sh*t when they see people in better shape than themselves. That is a ridiculous generalization.
I know PLENTY of people who look at these air brushed pictures and get motivated like crazy. They get this fire under their a$$ and are like "THAT! I'm going to do what it takes to look like THAT!"
I know I was one of them. A beat up magazine photo rested on my wall... not because I was in love with that no-name dude but because it was inspiring to see someone who had the diligence, intelligence and will power to achieve a result only a few are capable of.
Airbrushed pictures should stay. They can co-exist with the plus sized models, there is no reason to choose between the two.
ReplyBut what's the use in getting "fired up" to look like a person who doesn't even actually look like that? Whose body may, in fact, be physically impossible to achieve without doing major damage? "Airbrushing" is putting it lightly - many photos are photoshopped to the point of unrecognizability.
Leaving fit, attractive people in magazines as role models is great - but show people who are truly fit and attractive, and show what their bodies really look like, so that people can be realistic in their expectations.
ReplyI think that if you saw a before and after of an airbrushed or photoshopped photo, you'd be shocked to learn how far removed magazine photos are from the originals. They aren't just removing blemishes or improving skin tone-they widen irises, whiten the whites of eyes and teeth, they add shine to lips, add catchlights in eyes, elongate legs, narrow waists and thighs, move eyes further apart, and on and on...it's rare to see a woman who is that truly 'perfect' in real life. To have young girls look at these photos and think they're real isn't right. Magazines should make it clear to readers that EVERY photo that appears in their magazine has been altered. Even the one of Lizzie, I guarantee has been enhanced-it's not the original as photographed.
ReplyMeh. This is more of a PR move than anything else... 99.9999999999999% of photos in these magazines are and will remain tall, white, blond, thin women.. because that is what sells magazines. People dont read these because they want to see themselves in the photos.
ReplyI don't buy any fashion magazines, I'd rather read a good book to be honest. However, I am very aware that I do not want my young daughter seeing photos of women that are not real and look nothing like the people we see and know. The pictures of these people in mags are fake and I wish the mags wouldn't pretend otherwise. I am inspired by real people.
ReplyAny time I read those fashion mags, I'm never really "motivated" by the high-fashion models because I don't aspire to look like a beanpole. Those women have legs that could snap in half. Plus, they're airbrushed/Photoshopped like crazy to look perfect. So yeah, I don't really think twice about those pictures when I see them. I do kind of get motivated by the fitness models I see in fitness mags because most of them have lots of muscle tone and are actual people instead of models. They're probably airbrushed, but at least they have more realistic body types.
ReplyShe is a very beautiful woman but - yes, the belly roll is unattractive! There`s nothing wrong about that, most of us have it (or cellulite, or sagging boobs, or all of it...) I guess, if she was sitting in the bedroom, waiting for her man, she would have hidden the belly between a shapely thigh or strategically placed arm. I don`t however know the content of the story her picture was illustrating so I cannot comment on whether the picture was appropriate or not.
ReplyI'd have to disagree... if she were "waiting for her man", I hope she wouldn't be paranoid about him seeing her tiny amount of tummy. I'd hope she'd know anyone who loved her wouldn't care about that, she's beautiful. Let's try not to be crazy.
ReplyIt doesn't look like a "roll of belly fat" so much as a small panniculus, the stretched skin that results from weight loss. Was this woman ever 40 or so pounds heavier than she is now?
A woman with a small amount of belly fat doesn't have it hang over in that way, unless she's lost weight, or worn very tight pants during an extended period of weight gain.
ReplyI agree. Her belly appears to be loose skin rather than fat.
ReplyIt's so crazy, just it not being airbrushed makes a big difference...
People don't realize that not even the perfect models look like the perfect models without the makeup, lighting, good photographers showing them how to pose to look their best, and then airbrushing on the top of it!
At 5'4, I'm a size 2 and 14% body fat according to hydrostatic weighing and I still have some bulges/chunk, especially in certain positions. I still have some roll where the tummy was stretched out from pregnancy. It's NORMAL and its HEALTHY and the fact that some people think this woman is fat or that having a bit of jiggle is unattractive only highlights how badly the normal state of thing distorts people's perspectives.
ReplyThe thing I've never understood about underweight models is that they aren't even doing their job properly... They're supposed to be selling me clothing, right? But seeing a pair of jeans on someone who's a size 0 with no hips tells me absolutely nothing about what they will look like on my size 12, small-waisted, big-hipped body. Useless! It seems like using a range of sizes and shapes would help them sell the clothing more effectively, which is the point of hiring a model in the first place.
ReplyWhat I have heard from the industry is that when they are looking for models, especially for the runway, they are pretty much looking for a human coat hanger...
That is to say, someone who can model the clothes without altering their natural shape due to breasts, bulging tummies, hips, thighs, and so forth.
ReplyI have read so many uneducated responses about this Glamour spread ... one woman chided these models for "whining" about how the industry rejects "their kind" because in the commenter's mind, these women should all hit the gym and tone up those flabby abdomens. These women do hit the gym, and I think that's obvious.
ReplyWe are all born with genetic traits that are hard to work against. I come from a mostly over-weight family, and I have dealt with body issues since childhood. I have battled anorexia and bulemia, and I too have that belly roll. I am 5'7'', and I currently weigh 140 lbs, and no, that is not quite where I want to be, but it is within a healthy weight range for my height. I work out as much as I can, but I am a working journalist applying to graduate programs and running an independent business, not to mention day-to-day house work and a social life! Even when I weighed 115 lbs and worked out like a woman possessed, my massive weight loss (from around 210 lbs when I was 13) has created sagging skin on my belly.
I'm so disgusted by the ignorance ...
I'm fine with seeing thin women in magazines; I've trained myself not to covet how models look, because it's their bloody job to look good. I also acknowledge that they have probably never had to fight against genetics the way so many of us have.
As long as we are healthy women, to hell with what the idiots say.