


I completely agree with Glossed Over’s critique of this Harper’s Bazaar feature:
So, a size 8 is only OK if it’s fake? The point is to feature models, etc. who actually ARE above a size 0. Taking an unhealthily skeletal-looking woman like Rachel Zoe and adding “curves” to all of the right places does not a healthy body image make.
I’m not sure what’s worse: only featuring stick-skinny size 0 models, or featuring stick-skinny size 0 models who have been Photoshopped to APPEAR like size 8 or 10.
If this kicks off a trend in Photoshopping, I am going to revolt. Who’s with me?
| krrobi | I with you! Seeing these
Posted Fri, 08/22/2008 - 11:10
I with you! Seeing these two big-boobed-bimbos on the magazine cover makes me ill. Gag. Puke. Is this what we should strive to be? I dooon't think so, and...oh, don't even get me going. :)
|
| margaret | yes! yes! yes! i totally
Posted Fri, 08/22/2008 - 14:48
yes! yes! yes! i totally agree, how FREAKING ridiculous! (and here's where i divert from radical feminism to lipstick feminism:) except everyone on glossed over hated the shoes. i love them, mk wore them on the cover of sept's uk elle - they're stella mccartney!
|
| BCBlogger | I am sooooooooo late in responding to this,
Posted Thu, 09/18/2008 - 19:47
but it's taken me days to make my way down the page. I flipped out when I saw this disgusting display, too. I was like "Pffffft! Did they even make her an EIGHT? She looks like a nice SIX to me." Rachel Zoe makes me sick, anyway. Despite the positive PR spin they gave her, the accusations of her and a a group of Hollweird starlets abusing prescription asthma drugs to keep those bones still linger. That article was nothing but fluff piece. I actually ripped the pages out of my mag and threw them in the trash. #1 - because I am not a fan of Rachel Zoe; #2 because I'm a SIX and I don't think an EIGHT is all that "big." Good lord.
|