Nina Garcia, You're My Only Hope
You’ve undoubtedly seen or heard of Lizzi Miller’s stomach this week. It was on the sofa with Matt Lauer on Monday (embedded after the cut and worth watching just because Lauer comes thisclose to crying shenanigans on Glamour editor Cindi Lieve’s promise to show more chub in her glossy), hitting CNN, got a mention in New York magazine’s blog, and is blazing up the Fatosphere.
The response was so large and effusive that Glamour editor Cindi Leive says Miller is proving to be a game changer when it comes to fashion magazines — which often pay lip service to the idea of representing all women, but usually opt for the carrot-sticks-and-cigarettes, skin-and-bones types when it comes to cover girls. “I think it absolutely will,†Leive told Matt Lauer on TODAY Monday. “You get a reaction like this and you can really see it. It’s also a sign of the times that women are really looking for a little bit more authenticity and a little bit less artifice in every part of their lives. “Will it change our approach? I think it will.†Ironically, the fashion mountain came out of what amounted to a molehill of a picture. Miller’s life-altering pose was not on the cover of Glamour; it was just a 3-inch-by-3-inch photo illustration buried on page 194. (Source: Akira News)
Page 194 isn’t exactly groundbreaking. And yeah, I noticed the photo myself as I was flipping through the pages, because I expect every woman in Glamour to be airbrushed within an inch of her life. I mean, Lizzi is gorgeous and I love the photo but damn, Glamour, can you stop stroking off for a minute and take a step back: the article was about body acceptance. If you really wanted to be groundbreaking, it was far from a radical photo. In her blog and on the Today show, Glamour editor Cindi Leive seems to want us to believe that we’ll be seeing more pictures of guts like Lizzi’s in Glamour, but I only hope that it doesn’t translate into more columns on loving your body just as you are in the same issue as a list of ways to flatten that stomach or celeb interviews where the writer gushes over how amazingly wee Jennifer Aniston’s thigh is. And then there’s the fact that Lizzi is the mean/average size, which means that there’s a whole world of women whose tum would look at Lizzi’s starter stomach and shake with hearty laughter.
Annabel, who describes herself on her About page as a former 280-pound teenager who lost 150 and wants to describe in her blog “what it means to thrive” had lots to say about Lizzi, including the following:
While I was *super* stoked to see a “plus-sized†model in a magazine outside of the “plus-sized†magazine niche, I have to admit that all of the attention paid to Lizzie (sic) made me hyper conscious of two things I am a bit uncomfortable with. One — Lizzie is just plain gorgeous and she doesn’t need the qualifying words “plus-sized†thrown in front of the description “model.†Am I the only one who looks at her and is like, “uhh what is so ‘plus-sized’ about her?†I also wonder why she couldn’t just as well have graced the cover.
That’s really the question, isn’t it? Not whether she needed to be qualified as plus-size (because, well, she says she is, so I believe her) but why is she confined to the end of the magazine, like an afterthought. I mean, it’s awesome when Jennifer Hudson or Beth Ditto rock their covers, but we won’t truly having any groundbreaking moments from the glossy media until they start using nameless curvy chicks for something other than the poster girls when it comes to body acceptance.
What do you think, BFDivas? Is all of this attention to Lizzi’s stomach good for the Fat Acceptance movement? Or is it just another token nod about loving yourself from the very establishment that some think provokes body image issues?
Posted by Weetabix
Filed under: Magazines
Email us
This drives me insane. She is not “plus sized”, except by fashion standards. She weighs about the same as me and wears about the same size, too. She looks amazing. I wish my body looked as good!
I feel like this is kind of sad. Why couldn’t she be on the cover? She’s beautiful and even naked, she was so glamorous and gorgeous that I stopped flipping through pages for a while and stared. I feel like it’s almost a step back – like “plus size” is starting to mean smaller and smaller sizes. Why was her weight even important? It’s supposed to be about beauty, not numbers.
I don’t think she’s “plus-sized” by any stretch of the imagination, either, but I do think this represents baby steps, especially considering all the backlash SELF magazine received in the same week for digitally slimming down Kelly Clarkson. Maybe mag editors will compare the gushing feedback received by Glamour to the negative vitriol received by SELF and follow the money.
But even if editors see the body acceptance light, I highly doubt we’ll be seeing women the size of Beth Ditto grace these mags. Mag editors want to appease readers, but they don’t want anti-obesity naysayers breathing down their necks accusing them of somehow “promoting obesity” either.
I think any step in the right direction is good and worth making a fuss about. I do hope the fashion industry doesn’t stall at size 12 for too long.
If they can make put women with combination skin, and big noses in the next magazine that’d be nice though :). If they’re not tall, even better.
She has a cute tum!
Hm? What? I don’t buy fashion magazines. I don’t think I’d buy them even if they got ‘real’ because, well, I don’t care about fashion. If they talked about comic books and DIY electronics soldering and the latest designs in dice entropy towers, then I’d be all over them like something that’s all-over something.
She’s about as plus-sized as Oprah Winfrey is white.
I’m with Rachel and Geek. It’s a teeny-tiny step, but it’s in the right direction. I’ll take it for what it’s worth and appreciate every little crack in the wall of body hate. When there are enough tiny cracks, that wall is going to come crashing down, and each tiny crack will have played its part.
But even if editors see the body acceptance light, I highly doubt we’ll be seeing women the size of Beth Ditto grace these mags. Mag editors want to appease readers, but they don’t want anti-obesity naysayers breathing down their necks accusing them of somehow “promoting obesity†either.
I agree. It will be a long time before a mainstream magazine shows a woman size 20 and up in a magazine unless it’s to showcase the “obesity epidemic” or a weight loss story. And while Beth Ditto has been a cover girl, it’s been for lesser-known mags, and the usual reaction is the same, either “that’s gross” or “she’s so unhealthy.”
As long as they insist on printing her weight (do they do that with the “regular” models?), and qualifying everything they say about her with “plus size”, it’s not really acceptance.
It’s more like, “look, we found a gorgeous chick who isn’t really fat, and we didn’t airbrush out the natural shape of her body like we usually do, and the we stuck a tiny picture of her way in the back, and made mention of exactly what she weighs. We’re so ‘accepting.’ Yay us!”
I won’t consider it true acceptance until women like her (and larger), are just mixed in with all the other models, with no attention drawn to the fact, and with no mention of her “other-ness”.
I love the pic, but was annoyed by all the hype over her being “average”, when she clearly isn’t. Not to say she isn’t normal, just that the “average” woman in addition to being a size 14 is also 5’4″, and has a higher bmi (dirty word, I know) than Lizzie. Plus she’s white, blond, no visible disability, etc. So yeah, baby steps I guess.
So, I guess if you’re not 12 or 14, you’re SOL in terms of body acceptance. Is that the gist I’m supposed to walk away with? HA!
Many, MANY miles to go, I guess.
It’s a teeny-tiny baby step. As far as the real world goes, it’s practically nothing. But in terms of the fashion world, it’s pretty earth-shattering. Especially because they are getting a positive response from a lot of their readers. Any time an un-retouched photo appears in a fashion magazine, especially of a size-12/14, it is news.
Fashion is crazy. I don’t read fashion mags or follow the trends, because they suck, and their treatment of women is horrendous. But anything that goes against the grain is fine by me, and if this causes designers and magazine editors any kind of angst, then I’m all for it.
Many, Many miles to go, yes. But this is a tiny step in the right direction.
Lizzi is lovely, and I’m glad her picture can bring attention to having more realistic-looking bodies reflected in the media, but her body is not my reality. I’m 280 lbs. and I can’t tell you when I ever saw anyone near my size in a magazine (even when Mode was still around).
And I’m really fed up with all these qualifiers that get thrown around when we do have bodies outside the media norm in the spotlight. Lizzi is a “plus-size” model, not just a plain old model. And at the end of the interview she says something like, “I exercise and live a healthy life and this is what I look like” as if she needs to justify her tummy by swearing that she eats her veggies. What if she got that tummy by eating potato chips? Who cares? It doesn’t make her any less attractive.
I think the real story is not that they published the picture, but in the massive response they got. Women are tired of being told they have to all fit into one tiny mold.
So… tiny step number one.
Just keep stepping.
*THAT* is what passes for a big tummy these days? Amateurs.
In that Lauer interview, one of the interesting things to me was when Lauer asked Lizzi if she was going to change the way she modeled in response to this, and she thought about it for a second and said “Um, sure.” She continued to talk about how modeling was all about holding your body this way or that, which makes me wonder whether models will be able to go against the norm to pose in a way that’s “natural” like this one.
So the idea I’m getting is that the photo and article wasn’t enough, and that fault is being found in the fact that it wasn’t on the cover, she’s being refered to as “plus” sized, and the article is a few pages away from another about how to work on your abs.
Okay, I think it’s great that the photo was published, but I’m a bit botehered by how people are still finding so many things to complain about. I think even if it was put on the cover, people would say, “But why isn’t she on the cover of every magazine!?” Can’t we just be happy for this, the way it is right now? I think it is the beginning of a new era for lifestyle magazines, so be patient and accept this as it is. Afterall, it is a step in a good direction.
Oh my god. If she’s plus sized you had better throw me in the ocean to swim with my own kind. What kind of message is that to teens who read that? Hey look at this average weight girl – isn’t she brave for showing us how fat and disgusting she is? Now, I respect what they were TRYING to do but I don’t think they quite got it. And yes, I “love” how she was shunned to the back. Save the cover for the 0’s and 2’s.
Still, good try. Better by far than SELF putting Kelly Clarkson’s pretty little head on some blow-up doll’s body.
“using nameless curvy chicks for something other than the poster girls when it comes to body acceptance. ”
This reminds me of the old thin privilege chestnut: You fat girls call yourselves “real women” and “goddesses” and stuff and that’s insulting to skinny women; aren’t we “real”?
She’s being reduced to a symbol of body acceptance instead of being just another model. That’s not inclusion, people. That’s tokenism.
I wonder who decided where to draw the line between regular and plus size and why they aren’t all just clothing sizes. You know those numbers in clothes barely mean anything these days and you never know what’s going to fit by looking at them.
Lizzi’s body looks like mine, she even seems to be proportioned in the same way. Looking at her stomach in the one picture made me think I should try harder to accept mine.
Literate Shrew… I’ve never seen that “aren’t we real” response to anything other than certain groups being called “real women”. I Don’t really consider that to be thin privilege because there’s a point to it. Aren’t all living women real? Some may not be natural or may use other means to change their look or shape, but they are still real people with feelings like anyone.
Betty wrote : [i] “Now, I respect what they were TRYING to do but I don’t think they quite got it.”[/i]
Bust out your crayolas and color me “Extra Cynical” but quite frankly I don’t think they were “trying” to do anything by this except maybe squeeze a few extra bucks out of womens’ pockets by trying to appear accepting while still clearly drawing the line of what is “acceptable ‘fat'”.
This is why I don’t think it’s such a big step or even all that great of a baby step in the right direction, it isn’t even a step at all. It’s a money-making scheme to maintain the status quo while not appearing to be maintaining the status quo.
“Aren’t all living women real? Some may not be natural or may use other means to change their look or shape, but they are still real people with feelings like anyone.”
Yes they are, and I can’t tell you how passionately I am against using the term, period. All grous or individual women deserve to be called real women, no matter how “uncommon” their weight or proportions are.
After losing ~140 pounds, I wear a size 8-12 (depending on the type of clothing and the manufacturer). So technically, I’m smaller than Ms. Miller. But thanks to being older (35, as opposed to 20) and saddled with the loose skin that comes with a triple-digit weight loss, my tummy is still way bigger, flabbier, and saggier than hers.
I think my body image is reasonably sane, but I’m still coming to terms with the fact that this is my body, now, and I can’t change the fundamental shape of it short of surgery.
Obviously, alot of us don’t consider the model plus sized, and that calling her pooch a tummy is laughable, but I do think it is a step in the right direction. I think there are alot more women who can relate to the body that Lizzie Miller has, than the body Jennifer Aniston has.
However, the problem is that magazines need to keep taking more and more steps in the right direction. Show me someone with back fat. I can relate to that. Show me an apple shape with stretch marks on her belly. That’s what my body looks like.
The chances of that actually happening though, are slim to none (no pun intended).
I like the picture of Lizzi, and it is refreshing to see someone outside of the size 0 standard in a positive photo. But really, the job of fashion magazines like Glamour is to sell women clothes and beauty products, and until they start using women like Lizzi, or even larger and/or more diverse, to fulfill their central mission, its not much of a sea change. It’s more like a concession, a little tip of the hat to what many of their readers actually look like, done only in the “safe” context of body acceptance.
and the CNN guy who asserted that women still want “Aspirational” images really annoyed me. Another man with the armour of self-appointed authority sweeps aside the reactions of piles of actual women to tell us how we really feel.
Frankly, fashion mags are completely useless to me primarily because of their asinine articles about pandering to consumerist expectations and the male gaze, and a close second because their fashion spreads with extremely thin women provide no help whatsoever in informing me about how those clothes might look and fit on me or anyone I know in real life.
Really, my only reliable source on what clothes look like is either trying them on myself or going out in public and looking at other women. Maybe fashion mags should seek to replicate this valuable experience.
In an issue of arguing semantics, let me say this.
Lizzy may not be a plus-sized woman, but she is a plus-sized MODEL. The two are neither the same, nor are they similar enough to be interchangeable.
When you look at the demographic you’re dealing with, you have to change your definition. Most people start plus sizes at a 14 or 16. However, the modeling industry takes (and generally prefers) plus-sized models as small as a 40-30-40, which is noticeably smaller than a size 14.
I don’t think this is the beginning of anything. By next month’s issue, the media will have forgotten all about her. I’d love for there to be more size variety in magazines (and race, and taste, and just more variety in general!) but I’m not holding my breath. I think it’s just a fluke.
I don’t remember now if I left this comment on here or another blog, but I think magazines are trying more and more now to bring in/keep readers by playing both sides. They know that body positive messages will please people, but they also need to keep people insecure enough so they can still bring in ad money; how could they still sell all the “slimming” clothing or diet products if we – the general we – stopped caring about that?
It said that she’s 5’11” and 180 lbs. That’s barely overweight according to BMI charts. I feel like the number 180 is meant to be somewhat shocking, but people forget that 180 lbs looks very different on someone that tall vs. someone much shorter.
Thanks ChloeMireille for point that out. Also, being a plus sized woman or model doesn’t just have to do with weight. It considers height and body build as well. It’s very probable that Lizzy is a tall woman. Judging by what I have seen, I think she appears pretty tall and bigger built in her stature.
Pingback: Big Fat Deal » Glamour Said They Were Gonna
Pingback: Big Fat Deal » Marie Claire thinks fat people are gross