- Joined
- May 14, 2005
- Messages
- 12,862
- Reaction score
- 2,846
- Location
- A Small Town in Germany
- Website
- www.sharonmaas.co.uk
I've actually been talking about "the whole Hollywood/modelling industry using skinny ladies" among other things.
I don't know if this is another cultural thing, maybe things are different where you live, but here in Finland at least when, for instance, you see women's underwear ads on shop windows, the models are mostly of the skinny catwalk type. Now I don't know about you or anybody else, but if I had a daughter, I'd hope she'd rather be like Jillian Michaels than like Stella Tennant. Even if we forget about aesthetics for a moment, I would venture a guess that a person who eats healthy food (and enough of it) and keeps themselves fit would be healthier too. And trust me when I say that one doesn't truly appreciate good health until it's gone. That I do know from personal experience, unfortunately.
By the way, if you type "male model" on Google's image search, most of the dudes look like this, this, this, and this. If you ask me, all of those guys look really fit, don't you think? Now, if you type in "female model," do you really see a comparable level of athlethism? Which group (male models and female models) do you think are generally healthier? Not to mention that if you are fit, the number of activities you can enjoy multiplies exponentially.
An example: we went indoor climbing with our boxing team a week or so ago, men and women together, and I guess she'll smack me upside the head for saying this but I was damn proud when K. Trian climbed four walls all the way to the top. She was the only girl who succeeded in that and only two of the fittest guys managed the same. Now, if she was just skin and bones or noticeably overweight (meaning lots of fat, not muscle), she wouldn't have experienced the joy of conquering those walls.
Yeah, I know, I know, different strokes for different folks, not everybody enjoys physical activities (although the friends we have managed to drag along have suddenly realized how much they enjoy training). Just note that I'm talking about my personal opinion here, not declaring the gospel truth. I just feel a little uneasy every time I see media that promotes less than healthy values since often the target audience are (relatively) impressionalbe youngsters.
That, obviously, depends on who you ask. I've just noticed that a lot of people go "daym!" (and not in the good way) when they first see a picture or video of Cris Cyborg. Same goes for some female swimmers who have broad backs, muscular arms, and flat chests. I have a pretty vast circle of friends but perhaps guys who don't find muscular women aesthetically pleasing gravitate towards me for some reason (and I'm not even being sarcastic here).
I agree. Health, fitness, capability, usefulness, sexiness, beauty, and attractiveness are all very different things. In particular, being physically fit does not necessarily equate to being healthy. I know at least one person who'd trade in physical fitness to magically erase metastatic colon cancer.Whether it's judging people because they are skinny and so (in your opinion only) could not do X even if they could, or skinny people aren't healthy and muscley (that you prefer) women are and could do that stuff (perhaps they could. perhaps not, because while being fit is good it is not the be all and end all of what people can do)...
True .... But none of those words, with perhaps the exception of hot is currently used as an exact synononym for beautiful. Erotic means exactly what it says, and cute is just, well, cute. Like a bunny!
This is an interesting thread to me because a few years ago I took a uni course that concerned beauty ideals, standards, etc.
My course project was something along the lines of representations of ethnic beauty in Toni Morrison's The Bluest Eye.
When I did my research, I came across this little book, Ain't I a Beauty Queen. It was interesting, a window to a world completely disregarded by me previously, what with me being white and from a very demographically homogenous culture/country.
The further I read and googled, I found interesting instances when celebrities have played with some ethnic stereotypes; Cindy Margolis, Christina Aguilera, Lil Kim, Katie Price. This is a rather interesting little article about some ethnic makeovers though it's written more or less in jest.
I've often wondered like has Lil Kim thought about Caucasian stereotypes when bleaching her hair and wearing blue contacts, or did she just want to try out something new.
I'm a natural blonde, being a Finn, but I've dyed my hair from black to dark brown and back again ever since I was 17. At first it was because I was something of a metalhead, but later on I realized I was envious of my father's jet-black hair and green eyes combo, or the looks of some other relatives from his side of the family, most with black hair and huge brown eyes. So in a way, I must've also strived for a branch of beauty that isn't mainstream in Finland (it's blue eyes and honey-blonde hair, I think), that to me looked so appealing and even exotic.
If you haven't read Nalo Hopkinson, I recommend her fantasy book The Salt Roads. It had enticing descriptions of the beauty of her female characters.
So, so sad about Lil Kim. Just look at her gorgeous, gorgeous skin in that first pic. That's what I'm talking about: being pressured to hate beauty that is very obviously there if we can take our cultural blinders off.
K Trian, I think muscular women are a good example, too. I don't agree that it's a 'better' body type, but it certainly is one, and there is nothing at all wrong with being strong.
I think that's absolutely true
Thing is 'healthy' comes in many shapes and sizes, the problem comes when one is lauded over the others. If, say, muscley women, or Rubenesque women were suddenly the hottest things on the planet, I'd be screwed - it's only very recently that I've been able to put on weight. God what I wouldn;t have given for boobs in my teens! lol. Even when I trained at the gym (and hard) I never put on more than two pounds - I just toned up. A lot. To get muscley as per that boxer chick mentioned earlier (and let's face it, that's not a usual body shape for many, many women, it's like saying Brock Lesnar is usual/desirable in all men) I'd have to shove a load of those protein things down my neck, and/or take testosterone and I don't think that would be healthy for me. The pressure would still be there, just the other way around, and perhaps on different women(those who are not naturally whatever shape is 'in')
Now, if it could be accepted that as long as you weren't in extreme shape, (ie way over your BMI, or under it), then that can be sexy, well, now we're talking! For instance I think it's great that say Nigella Lawson is lauded as a highly attractive woman, despite not being sylph like. Or that China (a very muscley woman who was in the WWE for a time) got regular marriage proposals from guys who thought she was the sex bomb.
It reminds me of a blog post I saw not long ago, a woman saying she 'wasn't like those girls' ie she wasn't like the girls the media portrayed in shows like Sex and the City etc. She didn't like shopping, or many supposed 'girly' things. Thousands and thousands of women commented etc - saying they, too, weren't like that. If we and the media can encourage people to be themselves, that would be a start. Because it was when I started to think that I was okay as I was that I started being happy.
PS: A friend of mine would probably love your number Backslash - he loves Valkyrie types! Because not all men are as the media portray them either - they don't all like very slender women with massive boobs.
Way to completely miss the entire point of my post (and rant about something I said I especially wasn't commenting on)
My point:
You are still judging people by how they look. Whether it's judging people because they are skinny and so (in your opinion only) could not do X even if they could, or skinny people aren't healthy and muscley (that you prefer) women are and could do that stuff (perhaps they could. perhaps not, because while being fit is good it is not the be all and end all of what people can do)..
you are still judging women buy how they look. Not for them, as women or people. But by how they look to you.* ?
And that is a huge part of the problem. It is, in many ways THE problem. Women are to be judged purely by what they look like (in many different contexts. yours is only one)
Muscley = good and not muscley - bad is just as bad as only skinny is sexy. All you are doing is changing terminology or what you, especially, find attractive. Everyone has their own preferences - that doesn't mean that anyone who falls outside that is not sexy,or competent or whatever
*I could go on here, but I won't. I want to, but I won't.
You equate not-muscley or slender with inferior capability (also, less physically capable of what?). See how that looks?uckily nobody here has said anything like that but I know quite a few people who do think like that and there's probably a (ludicrous) reason why modeling agencies, movie producers etc. favor... well, less physically capable women.
I think that's absolutely true
It reminds me of a blog post I saw not long ago, a woman saying she 'wasn't like those girls' ie she wasn't like the girls the media portrayed in shows like Sex and the City etc. She didn't like shopping, or many supposed 'girly' things. Thousands and thousands of women commented etc - saying they, too, weren't like that. If we and the media can encourage people to be themselves, that would be a start. Because it was when I started to think that I was okay as I was that I started being happy.
.
I don't really like when other women say that about other women who are feminine though. Like myself. Feeds into internalised misogyny and basically throws those other women under the bus because 9 times out of 10 it means 'I'm not like one of those girls.... I'm one of the boys'.
Actually this came up with my son not too long ago, the concept of 'lady like behaviour' and how it's historically been used to stop women from, well, doing the things they want. My answer? I am a lady, therefore by definition my behaviour is ladylike.
I'm sorry, but from my perspective your tone seems somewhat frustrated, perhaps even a bit hostile. I'm not saying that's how it is, only that that's how it appears to me (please do correct me if I'm wrong).
I know that sort of a thing is an accepted mode of conduct on some other forum, but I think AW is such a great place and a real well of information that it's well worth the effort to go the extra mile and keep things polite and friendly even if something someone says may appear aggravating in some way.
I don't see it that way. I consider myself a feminine woman. Curvy, big bosomed, soft natured. I love babies and was a stay at home mom. But there's nothing about being feminine that means you have to be obsessed with clothes, cosmetics, shopping, and shoes, and I don't see why the media has to assume that's part of being female, and constantly feed that stereotype. You can take care of your looks, try to look your best, without being vain, materialistic, and narcissistic and I think that's what the women in the post above were objecting to. Can't say; I haven't read the blog referred to, but it's what I immediately thought.
I just don't understand why a sportier, more muscular woman couldn't be used as a model in a perfume/hair care/lingerie ad etc (unless she's a celebrity).
I think here it would've helped to elaborate on what he means about physical capability. Here, afaik, he kind of like draws parallels with the representations of female beauty in the mainstream with those of men, i.e. the functional male models whose bodies reflect an ability to lift iron, run the famous 400m dash under a minute, save cats from trees and babies from burning buildings, wrestle a bear, etc. while the very thin or, conversely, very plus-size, do not necessarily reflect this kind of functionality. But as pointed out, there're always people like Mr. Fibble who, despite having been (and still is) a slender woman has kicked big men's asses in bar fights and sparring (I so wish I could say that for myself; got my ass handed over to myself just yesterday when boxing with a 90kg dude ) and there're also those somewhat robust female olympic athletes whose weight hasn't compromised their, well, functionality (athletic functionality?). This topic was covered on one of my university classes as well, the functional male vs. the decorative woman. It's a broad divide, yes, but those were pretty much the ying and yang of it.You equate not-muscley or slender with inferior capability (also, less physically capable of what?). See how that looks?
Yay, you just said what I was gonna sayLadylike was more a matter of classism than sexism. If I've got this right, Ladylike and Gentlemanlike were references to the manners of the British upper classes. So acting in a ladylike or gentlemanlike fashion was being mannerly.
There were and are sexist elements to that, but the focus is classist.
I think it's a different thing to say someone has a warped view and someone's post conveyed a warped view ("please revise your words if this is not what you meant").Yea I agree with Mr Flibble on your warped view of non-muscely women.
Hmm, not hostile*. Maybe a little frustrated but this was one comment among several made me think as I did:
You equate not-muscley or slender with inferior capability (also, less physically capable of what?). See how that looks?
* also, being frustrated with your words isn't always the same as frustrated with you.
Wow a man using the tone argument on a woman...
http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Tone_argument
never heard that one before.
Yea I agree with Mr Flibble on your warped view of non-muscely women.
T. Trian said:So I'll do my best to correct this misunderstanding:
I'm not saying skinny women are somehow inferior to athletic women, nor am I saying that more robust women are inferior to athletic (or skinny) women.
I will now do away with the word "healthy." It was a poor choice, sorry about that.
What I did mean was that I don't like the fact that in general the more high profile media (such as ad campaigns for clothing e.g.) appear to favor men who do not look emaciated or over-fed but, rather, the athletic (but not in an excessive, steroid-fueled bodybuilder-like way) models "ooze" the type of sporty, active lifestyle that's portrayed as desirable and healthy (I'm sorry but I feel compelled to use that word here) e.g. in many hit tv shows (e.g. The Biggest Loser), while female models in catalogues, on bus stops, and huge posters behind shop windows most often look very thin, which has more connotations to anorexia than to an active, strong (and not just physically), sporty life style.
I just don't understand why a sportier, more muscular woman couldn't be used as a model in a perfume/hair care/lingerie ad etc (unless she's a celebrity).
I'm also talking about the general trend in media like fashion magazines and product adverts. And I do believe that the predominant beauty ideal (the one conveyed by the aforementioned media) is not conveying a positive image to impressionable people (especially children/teenagers).
In fact, if you look at what they are doing in TV shows like The Biggest Loser, it isn't about getting skinny. The competitors are taught things about nutrition that aims to make their bodies stronger, help build and conserve muscle mass, and minimize health hazards such as visceral fat and diabetes without starving the competitors. It seems the key to reach a desirable lifestyle is then the right kind of exercise: the coaches take into consideration the limitations some competitors have (e.g. if someone has bad knees, they are taught to exercise so that they avoid worsening the state of the competitor's knees and still get a good full-body workout).
Now if this is the desired goal for men and women alike, why are muscular women so under-represented in mainstream beauty circles while the current mainstream beauty ideal for men is the product of a "biggest loser"-kind of a lifestyle?
Judging functionality by looking at someone - judging some one by their looksI think here it would've helped to elaborate on what he means about physical capability. Here, afaik, he kind of like draws parallels with the representations of female beauty in the mainstream with those of men, i.e. the functional male models whose bodies reflect an ability to lift iron, run the famous 400m dash under a minute, save cats from trees and babies from burning buildings, wrestle a bear, etc. while the very thin or, conversely, very plus-size, do not necessarily reflect this kind of functionality.
Sad to say, but the idea of whiter skin has been prevalent before white people arrived in Asia. I found this out listening to some lectures from a professor at Berkley where he listed the beauty standards from a Chinese POV. Amoung them was no freckles because it equals X personality trait and also lighter skin, because darker skin==you can't trust them.In countries in Asia and Africa companies like L'oreal market skin whitening creams to PoC they are quite popular. I know this BB cream I bought from a seller in Hong Kong has a bleaching agent in. It's not much. http://susanbagleydotme.wordpress.com/2012/02/27/ethnic-skin-whitening/
I'd say that the way bleaching creams in Asia and Africa are marketed and the attitudes about lighter skin amongst PoC is completely different to the way white people tan. They are not comparable to me or on the same level. You just have to look at L'Oreal skin bleaching adverts.
Judging functionality by looking at someone - judging some one by their looks
Ok. I went by what he actually said. (and he should answer, not you.) Nt what he meant - though I will grant that perhaps it was phrased badly in which case HE should come and clarify, not send you.