Skip to comments.Magazine editorial reveals shocking disparity between sizes of models and real women
Posted on 01/12/2012 8:24:46 AM PST by US Navy Vet
A size 6 is now plus size in the fashion world, and most runway models meet the physical criteria for anorexia, according to a report that offers shocking insight into the disparity between models and the real-life women they are purporting to represent.
In the January issue of PLUS Model Magazine, plus size model Katya Zharkova and a straight size model are seen in the nude in an attempt to open the minds of the fashion industry," which is stepping further away from reality, according to PLUS founder and editor-in-chief, Madeline Figueroa Jones.
Photo courtesy of PLUS Model Magazine.
The magazine reveals that some of todays plus size models are wearing the same size as models Christie Brinkley, Paulina Porizkova and Cindy Crawford at the height of their fame in the 1990s. Zharkova, 28, wears a size 14
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Call it whatever you want, but in post 14 she looks damn good.
Sounds like something Al Bundy would say...
Feel good marketing is right — but it drives me nuts.
I have never figured out sizing for women’s pants. I might own 2 pair. Because I don’t wear pants when I decide to “dress up” I pretty much stick to jeans and only wear men’s. Far easier to buy by the waist and inseam.
I totally agree with you about how they have changed the dress sizes, but totally disagree with you about what sizes were and now are.
I'm 5'10 and 115-125# and have always wore a 10. As I explained in another post, I now wear a 6, which compared to an older 10 is practically identical.
You are completely correct, and other posters are wrong. The dress sizes changed, but in the direction you say they changed. The reason for it is that as American women become more and more overweight, dress sizes grow with them, in order not to make them feel bad.
Your wife is in a minority. She is a normal person in a nation that has become fat. 2/3 of American women are overweight.
It is funny how the fat people are lashing out at models, that they are not “real” (= fat) like them.
It’s just a frickin’ number!
We males have to know ACTUAL MEASUREMENTS to buy clothes!!
Exactly. I guess males can deal with reality better, they don't need a feel-good number...
There’s like 4 pounds of silicon in those “curves”.
You need to look at some old photos of ordinary people of average and below average income from the 1920s. The women were all sticks until middle age and the men were all sticks until retirement age. Children under 15 looked like concentration camp victims. I’ve got dozens of old family photo albums going back to the late 1800s. Up until about 1960, young girls were all so skinny, their knees were the biggest part of their leg. In the 20s, puberty appears to have STARTED around age 16(FOR GIRLS!)...the age when they typically began to marry. My great grandmother married at age 14 to a 30 year old share cropper circa 1900. This was not unusual back then. All of her children that lived were skeletons with skin and hair attached until well past age 20. My own mother was just as skinny until about age 17.
EWWWW, she's so FAT!!!!
blf...there are bound to be pics...
Thus I have to relearn how to shop for clothes in order to protect the self esteem of others.........Got it.
I've known this - but I don't have to like it.
My 2 cents worth - most fashion designers are gay men, and they are attracted to young boys - therefore they like women who look like sticks, rather than real women with curves.
The ideal woman changed drastically with the advent of the first super model-—Twiggy. That was the Marxist/homosexual takeover—this egalitarianism-—to make women the same as men—interchangeable. Androgyny was promoted. This body type was also embodied in Audrey Hepburn and swept all model agencies. The Jane Russel/Marilyn Monroe ideal became too “fat” by the late 60’s, when sodomy rights and man-haters came out in droves.
Feminists were really women haters-—they hated God’s design of their bodies, as they were good godless Communists and wanted to destroy the Patriarchy and get women away from caring for babies, so kids would be emotionally damaged and easily controlled—like ACORN thugs.
It is why we saw the super-sized muscled He-man and emphasis on breast size. Breast enhancement became necessary and normalized. Most normal breast size became ugly and emphasis on breast augmentation make women hate natural breast shape. Women became cartoon characters—objectified—as did muscle men.
It is to destroy dignity and worth of women and men and make them focused on materialism and superficiality—to ignore the intellect so they will be stupid useful idiots.
Once androgyny is pushed-—abnormalities will emerge to establish maleness and femaleness—to differentiate between the sexes. You get the extreme exaggeration because of the Laws of Nature and the natural desires of men and women.
Marxism is all about destroying natural laws—the design of man and woman and biological attachment. It is to create hate and distrust so the state will have to take care of all the dysfunctional and dependent idiots.
I call that the "Somebody Stole Muh Clothes" look. Also known as the "I Got No Job" look.
Try riding your horse in those bloomers, they'll chafe you to death.
In our area you see lots of guys in bloomers on bicycles...I believe that's part of the "Busted for DUI" look.
In the old days, people had more class.
Runway models maybe be quite thin but real women are fat as hell compared to my youth (54)
A size 4 in 1970 is an 8 at least...
Todays women...especially minority and lower income white are obese more often than not
And most women period are chubby now
These bash models threads are just a distraction.....or rationalization
I was quoting from the movie The Devil Wears Prada. Good movie.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.