Post by Dezzo
Courtney,
Courtenay*
the problem arises when people begin to take such economically and paragmatically based decisions as something more. Obviously, when a person sees a model; they are not aware of these things. Rather the first thing that comes to mind is the word 'model' itself. An ideal.
The term "model" means several things and I do not believe you have the research results of the average population to speak for the masses of what word automatically springs to mind upon the use of the term. Yes it can mean "exemplar: something to be imitated; someone worthy of imitation" but it can also mean:
"a hypothetical description of a complex entity or process"
"a type of product"
"a person who poses for a photographer or painter or sculptor"
"plan or create according to a model or models"
"representation of something (sometimes on a smaller scale)"
"form in clay, wax, etc."
"assume a posture as for artistic purposes"
"display (clothes) as a mannequin"
"a representative form or pattern"
Dictionary
Fashion shows, shoots set trends; physique grows from being an essentially pragmatic decision to one that serves to glorify itself. Fashion needs to clarify and publicise those very same pragmatic concerns, if the pragmatic concerns are to be taken seriously/be used as any kind of justification.
While I agree Laymen do not know the inner workings of the fashion industry and the reasoning behind it, that does not justify the ignorance and media-based knee-jerk reactions of the average person. If they're that upset by it, perhaps a little research can shed some light on the "pragmatic concerns" and they may be able to understand a little more rather than analysing everything on a superficial basis.
Lagerfeld, is sad, for saying something like. Surely, the thing that matters is your health whether too fat or too thin.
I agree that he perhaps did not phrase it in the most tactful way nor in a way that would appeal to the average consumer but let's face it, his demographic is not, indeed, the average working mother.
You can't tell health or diagnose disordered eating from an editorial or runway pictures, despite what the media claims.
The world and intention of high fashion is to create a fantasy, not depict how functional the garment is to quickly nip to the shops for some bread and milk. Fashion sells an alternative lifestyle associated with the garments in question. If you wanted to see the average person wearing clothes, go to a shopping centre. Want to see what a piece of clothing will look like on your size 12 frame? Try it on.
Yes, the pragmatic decisions of the industry are exactly that - logical, useful in practice and dogmatic to boot. They work - isn't it funny how, despite how the average person cries out at the horrible nature of the industry, they keep buying clothes from the very companies whose advertisements they dislike for their unrealistic depiction of the average consumer (which is the exact purpose of advertising, regardless - selling the lifestyle and fantasy)? Why fix something that isn't broken?
Courtnay,
The defense that model might mean more than 'exemplar' is pretty flawed because most of the alternative meanings point towards that very same thing or are derivations of the same idea. Furthermore, putting it within the context of fashion, you can't really say it means anything more than 'exemplar'. You could argue 'display clothes as a mannequin' but really most mannequins are supposed to represent standard body types and practically the body type most commonly used as a mannequin would conform to the body types of professional models.
I think it's the other way around: the fashion industry should do more to publicise what it's inner workings are. Normally, I would agree with you that people who would really be responsible for finding out more about what they believe in/buy into. An industry/entity that basically thrives on ideas like 'season' and 'trend' would be committing a suicidal act by daring to declare that the 'trends' that it sets are not important and that people are encouraged to be happy as they are. The fashion industry encourages these things - ignorance about it's own workings included because it cannot survive any other way.
Skinny models are unhealthy. I don't need a doctor to tell me that. And the degree to which skinniness has reached is pretty sad.
One of the things that really seem to sway opinions in fashion is the idea of something 'unattainable' - the luxury item. I think in a way having models with unrealistic, extraordinary body types and beauty and is an extension of this idea to the human being. What matters in the fashion world is not how you are but how you seem to be. No surprises then that the models who do really well seem to live equally flamboyant and unrealistic lifestyles with similarly scandalous personalities. You are right. Fashion is about escape, it's about fantasy. That is exactly the problem. Why fix something that isn't broken? Because it is broken. Health is a real issue. Self image is a real issue. These are not fantastic things. Fashion exerts an influence on them and it's about time it started being more aware and responsible.
The defense that model might mean more than 'exemplar' is pretty flawed because most of the alternative meanings point towards that very same thing or are derivations of the same idea. Furthermore, putting it within the context of fashion, you can't really say it means anything more than 'exemplar'. You could argue 'display clothes as a mannequin' but really most mannequins are supposed to represent standard body types and practically the body type most commonly used as a mannequin would conform to the body types of professional models.
I think it's the other way around: the fashion industry should do more to publicise what it's inner workings are. Normally, I would agree with you that people who would really be responsible for finding out more about what they believe in/buy into. An industry/entity that basically thrives on ideas like 'season' and 'trend' would be committing a suicidal act by daring to declare that the 'trends' that it sets are not important and that people are encouraged to be happy as they are. The fashion industry encourages these things - ignorance about it's own workings included because it cannot survive any other way.
Skinny models are unhealthy. I don't need a doctor to tell me that. And the degree to which skinniness has reached is pretty sad.
One of the things that really seem to sway opinions in fashion is the idea of something 'unattainable' - the luxury item. I think in a way having models with unrealistic, extraordinary body types and beauty and is an extension of this idea to the human being. What matters in the fashion world is not how you are but how you seem to be. No surprises then that the models who do really well seem to live equally flamboyant and unrealistic lifestyles with similarly scandalous personalities. You are right. Fashion is about escape, it's about fantasy. That is exactly the problem. Why fix something that isn't broken? Because it is broken. Health is a real issue. Self image is a real issue. These are not fantastic things. Fashion exerts an influence on them and it's about time it started being more aware and responsible.
It really depends on what class of fashion the models are used for. There is a huge difference between couture, high fashion, pret-a-porter, etc and not all collections are based on an aspiration (as opposed to reality).
And not all skinny models are considered unhealthy. Not sure about different countries but modeling agencies I know of via friends all have decent suggested guidelines that guide them to maintain a healthy lifestyle and diet.
It also depends on what each person classifieds as "skinny"
And not all skinny models are considered unhealthy. Not sure about different countries but modeling agencies I know of via friends all have decent suggested guidelines that guide them to maintain a healthy lifestyle and diet.
It also depends on what each person classifieds as "skinny"
Post by Dezzo
Skinny models are unhealthy. I don't need a doctor to tell me that. And the degree to which skinniness has reached is pretty sad.
That's a broad and, thus, inaccurate statement. There are plenty of skinny people who are healthy. There are plenty of people carrying a few pounds who are equally as healthy.
@chester
Yes, there are various classes of fashion and various degrees to which the 'aspiration as opposed to reality' thing can go. I'm obviously discussing about those that take it too far. Not that this is a problem in itself. Sometimes we need things that take us far enough to make us sense new ideas/reveal things about the thing that has been taken far.
But my critique is directed at those take take too far too far. So far in fact as to be detached from reality for sufficiently long periods of time to warp and distort; to even deny reality for the aspiration, the fantasy.
@Daniel
I apologise. I'm sure we could go on and on about this. That statement was too broad. But, the real question here is whether there are cases when it does become unhealthy and whether there are enough of them to at least demand things be re-looked at.
Yes, there are various classes of fashion and various degrees to which the 'aspiration as opposed to reality' thing can go. I'm obviously discussing about those that take it too far. Not that this is a problem in itself. Sometimes we need things that take us far enough to make us sense new ideas/reveal things about the thing that has been taken far.
But my critique is directed at those take take too far too far. So far in fact as to be detached from reality for sufficiently long periods of time to warp and distort; to even deny reality for the aspiration, the fantasy.
@Daniel
I apologise. I'm sure we could go on and on about this. That statement was too broad. But, the real question here is whether there are cases when it does become unhealthy and whether there are enough of them to at least demand things be re-looked at.
Post by Dezzo
Courtnay,
Courtenay* C-O-U-R-T-E-N-A-Y.
The defense that model might mean more than 'exemplar' is pretty flawed because most of the alternative meanings point towards that very same thing or are derivations of the same idea. Furthermore, putting it within the context of fashion, you can't really say it means anything more than 'exemplar'. You could argue 'display clothes as a mannequin' but really most mannequins are supposed to represent standard body types and practically the body type most commonly used as a mannequin would conform to the body types of professional models.
The size of mannequins in a size ten - 34"-25"-36". They are at the upper fringe of measurements of a runway model, particularly the hips. If a size 10 is too small to represent a female population of the average height of 5'4.5" (I believe? Somewhere around there.) then perhaps the issue is not with the mannequins. The mannequins are taller than average for reasons much like runway models - to be seen in display.
I think it's the other way around: the fashion industry should do more to publicise what it's inner workings are. Normally, I would agree with you that people who would really be responsible for finding out more about what they believe in/buy into. An industry/entity that basically thrives on ideas like 'season' and 'trend' would be committing a suicidal act by daring to declare that the 'trends' that it sets are not important and that people are encouraged to be happy as they are. The fashion industry encourages these things - ignorance about it's own workings included because it cannot survive any other way.
It is not the job of the fashion industry to provide reasons behind its pragmatic decision making nor to coddle the fragility of the narrow-minded. One cannot help those who cannot help themselves, when people are allowing themselves to be left in the dark.
This was the first result of a google search of "reasons height size models". Was that so hard? Particularly for people who supposedly feel so strongly about the issue?
Ignorance is not bliss.
Skinny models are unhealthy. I don't need a doctor to tell me that. And the degree to which skinniness has reached is pretty sad.
One of the things that really seem to sway opinions in fashion is the idea of something 'unattainable' - the luxury item. I think in a way having models with unrealistic, extraordinary body types and beauty and is an extension of this idea to the human being. What matters in the fashion world is not how you are but how you seem to be. No surprises then that the models who do really well seem to live equally flamboyant and unrealistic lifestyles with similarly scandalous personalities. You are right. Fashion is about escape, it's about fantasy. That is exactly the problem. Why fix something that isn't broken? Because it is broken. Health is a real issue. Self image is a real issue. These are not fantastic things. Fashion exerts an influence on them and it's about time it started being more aware and responsible.
And again, I reiterate: Ignorance is not bliss. You have just made a ridiculously broad, incorrect statement. Are there eating disorders in the average population? Yes. Are there eating disorders in the fashion industry? Yes, but less than you would think; if there are eating disorders in the average population, of course there are going to be individuals with eating disorders when you study a group of people. It's statistics.
If you honestly want to be taken seriously in your arguments, making sweeping statements such as this are not the way to do it. You seem eloquent enough and sound of mind but do try not to tarnish what could be potentially sound arguments with ignorance and painting with such a broad brush you block out any semblance of reason.
I love Karl but I think that he is more complex than his provocation lines. He was very fat 10 years ago and it is obvious that he was/is not confortable with his image.
See you on my blog
http://frenchmodesty.blogspot.com/
See you on my blog
http://frenchmodesty.blogspot.com/
Post by Courtenay
Courtenay* C-O-U-R-T-E-N-A-Y.
The mannequins are taller than average for reasons much like runway models - to be seen in display.
That doesn't stop people from wanting to be like them. Like I said the popular perception is not that models are there to be seen; but the other one.
Post by Courtenay
It is not the job of the fashion industry to provide reasons behind its pragmatic decision making nor to coddle the fragility of the narrow-minded. One cannot help those who cannot help themselves, when people are allowing themselves to be left in the dark.
Deliberately encouraging ignorance by never bringing up these same issues is the thing i was pointing to. Why? Because in some ways fashion feeds on that same ignorance; because some of it's status and selling power within many circles is dependant on the illusions it maintains.
Post by Courtenay[quote]
This was the first result of a google search of "reasons height size models". Was that so hard? Particularly for people who supposedly feel so strongly about the issue?
I don't feel strongly about this issue, though I can see you do. Reading that won't really do any good for me. Because my problem is not in the why but in the fact that not many people, the people who should know the why don't. This needs to be brought up and discussed. I'm glad that in some humble way we are doing that.
Post by Courtenay[quote]
Ignorance is not bliss.
For the fashion industry it is.
About the statistics of eating disorders comparing the normal population to the models, that was exactly what I was pointing out in my reply/apology to daniel a few posts up.
Post by Courtenay[quote]
You seem eloquent enough and sound of mind but do try not to tarnish what could be potentially sound arguments with ignorance and painting with such a broad brush you block out any semblance of reason.
Let's not get personal
Interesting discussion though, Courtenay (I apologise for misspelling your name).
Well, here's some interesting stuff. Spurred on by our discussion; I went on to read two studies. These are direct quotes, btw:
-Current substance use or alcohol abuse was reported by 35% of fashion models and 12% of controls (selected from the general population).
-A body mass index below 18 (the minimum to be considered healthy) was found for 34 models (54.5%) as compared with 14 controls (12.7%).
-Models reported significantly more symptoms of eating disorders than controls, and a higher prevalence of partial syndromes of eating disorders was found in models than in controls.
And about whether fashion really does need skinny models:
"Further studies will be necessary to establish whether the slight excess of partial syndromes of eating disorders among fashion models was a consequence of the requirement in the profession to maintain a slim figure or if the fashion modeling profession is preferably chosen by girls already oriented towards symptoms of eating disorders, since the pressure to be thin imposed by this profession can be more easily accepted by people predisposed to eating disorders."
Shocking, but I read worse. The national eating disorders society says that skinny models are thinner than 98% of the general population. I don't trust them though.
And this:
http://www.thatsfit.com/2009/12/21/size-4-model-considered-fat/
is ridiculous.
Let's just say I really am not happy to see some of my partial assumptions proven right.
-Current substance use or alcohol abuse was reported by 35% of fashion models and 12% of controls (selected from the general population).
-A body mass index below 18 (the minimum to be considered healthy) was found for 34 models (54.5%) as compared with 14 controls (12.7%).
-Models reported significantly more symptoms of eating disorders than controls, and a higher prevalence of partial syndromes of eating disorders was found in models than in controls.
And about whether fashion really does need skinny models:
"Further studies will be necessary to establish whether the slight excess of partial syndromes of eating disorders among fashion models was a consequence of the requirement in the profession to maintain a slim figure or if the fashion modeling profession is preferably chosen by girls already oriented towards symptoms of eating disorders, since the pressure to be thin imposed by this profession can be more easily accepted by people predisposed to eating disorders."
Shocking, but I read worse. The national eating disorders society says that skinny models are thinner than 98% of the general population. I don't trust them though.
And this:
http://www.thatsfit.com/2009/12/21/size-4-model-considered-fat/
is ridiculous.
Let's just say I really am not happy to see some of my partial assumptions proven right.
Leave A Comment
Create a Fashionising.com account to leave a comment or login.
SHARE URLS