Fat models

[Ghost]

The past few days, the news media has been running stories about a model that was fired by Ralph Lauren because she is too fat. She is 5'10" and weighs 120 pounds, about 55 kg. Link to story here.

On the TV news, they just stated that RL stated that the model gained weight to the point that she no longer fit in the clothes they provided. Now, I've heard that the anorexic models are used because the designers feel that clothes hang better on super thin models and that normal women don't look as good in their clothes. My opinion is that a good designer would be able to design clothes that would hang well on women of any size and that if they are only good enough to design for only super thin women, they aren't very good and should be replaced, especially since the majority of women in America are curvy or larger.

Maybe the public should start pointing this fact out to the designers.

Opinions

[Sarah]

I imagine everyone agrees with you.

[Lucretia]

My opinion is that a good designer would be able to design clothes that would hang well on women of any size and that if they are only good enough to design for only super thin women, they aren't very good and should be replaced, especially since the majority of women in America are curvy or larger.

Maybe the public should start pointing this fact out to the designers.

Opinions

I think that sometimes, clothes can "hang" better on slimmer women. I don't mean that slimmer women always look better AT ALL, but I do believe it is easier to "sling" clothes on if you are much slimmer. I think slimmer women are easier to use as clothes horses.

Also, it depends on the figure as a whole. You can be slim and have really unfortunately-distributed body fat. Larger models may be large, but their body fat tends to be perfectly-distributed and in proportion. So it doesn't really reflect real life anyway. "Fat" or "thin", they're still models, and chosen for their good looks!

Also - [cynical business hat] designers are "selling a dream" when they sell clothes. You look at lithe, young, blonde things, it works subconsciously. "I want a piece of that." It's a business thing, for better or worse. It SELLS. And always will. [/cynical business hat]

I find it really disturbing that modelling is held in esteem as a career. Tyra Banks says that you have to have a good personality to be a model. Er ... no. Naomi Campbell? I know lots of people with hearts of gold who don't have a hope in hell of being models. I was also intrigued by a model on a show who cried after she was told that she would have to lose weight and claimed it was "out of order." IT'S YOUR JOB TO LOOK GOOD. If I worked in a bank, and forgot how to count, my boss could quite rightly bring that up as a fault. Same with modelling - there are requirements, and a designer has a right (I think) to dismiss you if you do not fit into his clothing or meet his requirements.

It is the "requirements" we should be questioning though. Who drives them? Demand. The public. It's our perceptions. Not the designers.

I should add that I find the extremely thin look beyond disturbing and do not agree with it. And the high street should cater more to larger ladies, definitely.

Please don't hurt me.

[Ghost]

This model's BMI is 17.22. Anything less than 18.5 is considered underweight and unhealthy, yet she was fired for being to heavy.

Maybe it's because I am a guy who considers dressing up as making sure my socks match, but when I buy clothes, I want clothes that look good on me, not the steroid abusing moron in the catalog. If the clothes designers can't make clothes that look good on me, why should I buy from them.

As far as who decides what the requirements are, it is the designers, the industry. Very few people actually like the anorexic look. What do men like? Most of us like boobs. How many fashion models actually have boobs?

[Sarah]

If I were as "fat" as that model, I'd weigh 114 pounds, and everyone who saw me would assume I was suffering from a wasting disease.

P.S. According to the article you linked to, Ghost, the model is the only person claiming she was fired for being fat. Let's hope she was lying.

[Lucretia]

This model's BMI is 17.22. Anything less than 18.5 is considered underweight and unhealthy, yet she was fired for being to heavy.

Maybe it's because I am a guy who considers dressing up as making sure my socks match, but when I buy clothes, I want clothes that look good on me, not the steroid abusing moron in the catalog. If the clothes designers can't make clothes that look good on me, why should I buy from them.

As far as who decides what the requirements are, it is the designers, the industry. Very few people actually like the anorexic look. What do men like? Most of us like boobs. How many fashion models actually have boobs?

I can't really argue, m'dear. It is unhealthy. And I swear I am not advocating an unhealthy weight at all.

I think I was just trying to argue from a devil's advocate, "this is never going to change" perspective.

I would contest your view that the industry decides the requirements, but I think we may be arguing from the same hymnsheet, in that images of what is an ideal beauty are totally fucked.

I think there is a very narrow range of what is considered a "good" shape for a woman, and uppermost in my mind a lot of the time is whether I fit into it.

[Lucretia]

If I were as "fat" as that model, I'd weigh 114 pounds, and everyone who saw me would assume I was suffering from a wasting disease.

P.S. According to the article you linked to, Ghost, the model is the only person claiming she was fired for being fat. Let's hope she was lying.

I understand Sarah, apologies if I annoyed or upset. I am not trying to be provocative.

[Ghost]

That article was a little vague about Ralph Laurens' statements, but the TV news reported that RL stated that her contract stated that she needs to fit in their clothes and that she no longer fits them.

[JupiterAmy]

Who drives them? Demand. The public. It's our perceptions. Not the designers.

I strongly disagree. It's often said that we're a consumer-driven culture, but we're not at all. We may be driven by consumerism, but consumerism is a producer-driven culture. Producers create demand for the products and services they're already making so that they can continue to make money with a minimum of expense. Actually catering to consumers is wholly unprofitable.

I'll use reality television as an example. Reality shows are produced because they're much much cheaper to make than scripted dramas. People then watch those shows because they're the only thing on. (And what are you going to do, not watch television? Ha!) The producers of said shows can then use "consumer demand" as an excuse to make more reality shows. I mean, people are watching them, so it must be what they want to see, right? But consumer demand is not what's driving it - it's the fact that the shows are cheap to produce. Consumers may desire alternatives, but providing alternatives must be cost-effective for the producers because consumer desire is otherwise irrelevant.

Clothing designers like skinny models because it's easier (read: cheaper) to make clothes for them. They feed the public the idea that they're trying to serve a cultural standard of beauty rather than the bottom line because it puts the burden on our collective psyche rather than their greed. Our perceptions are by-products of the producer-driven market.

I mean, if you'll notice, no one is saying that the model's weight is a problem because it's gross*, they're saying it's a problem because it will cost them money.

*except Karl Lagerfeld.

[JupiterAmy]

My opinion is that a good designer would be able to design clothes that would hang well on women of any size and that if they are only good enough to design for only super thin women, they aren't very good and should be replaced, especially since the majority of women in America are curvy or larger.

Actually, I've been saying this for years.

Although, as a separate issue, I want to stab something every time "curvy" is used to euphemistically mean "overweight." They are not the same thing, goddamn.