Comments on: Glamour Said They Were Gonna

By: drstaceyny

drstaceyny — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 23:16:01 +0000

I’m hopeful, but a bit cynical, wondering if any increase in plus-size models will be economically-, rather that philosophically-driven, b/c hey, that issue sold copies, and made headlines, right. I appeared on the same segment of The Today Show as Leive (on this issue) and stated that while “It’s not a revolution [as some have said], but baby steps in the right direction.” Let’s see if this holds true. . .

By: Big Fat Deal » Marie Claire’s Got a Pet Plus Size Columnist

Big Fat Deal » Marie Claire’s Got a Pet Plus Size Columnist — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:32:54 +0000

[...] the “we here at major women’s fashion magazines care about fat people and their happiness!” trend, Marie Claire, major women’s fashion magazine, has started a once-a-month [...]

By: Nicole

Nicole — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 13:07:03 +0000

Late to the party… sorry!

The sad thing is that magazines are capitalist enterprises. They sell what makes them money. Which means the stick thin models appeal to a large enough demographic that they are as successful as they are. If, out of some mistaken sense of justice, we decide to wait until we have a whole magazine of body diversity, the management will turn tail and run back to the safe profits. Want this to be the real thing? Then put your money where your mouth is. If they see a jump in sales because of this they will know they are on the right track. Money, after all, comes in all sizes.

By: Glamour Gets Curvy Models to Bare it All

Glamour Gets Curvy Models to Bare it All — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 09:17:57 +0000

[...] A lot of us thought this was just a onetime thing and that Glamour would forget about real women and real curves, but we gladly were mistaken here as Glamour’s November issue features seven plus size models. In an effort to continue encouraging women everyone to start loving their own bodies the way they are, Glamour has included this beautiful bodies spread in their latest issue. Let’s just hope Glamour continues to include such features on a regular basis. These kinds of issues and discussions should start becoming the norm in leading magazines, and should not be looked at in awe and surprise. This is what women want. So let’s keep on giving it to them. To keep up to date with the latest posts subscribe to our RSS feed. You can also receive updated via email, subscribe for free here!. Thanks for visiting! [...]

By: Katy

Katy — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 22:33:51 +0000

This picture was also featured in the December issue of Glamour UK. Just one problem- it was billed on the front as, “Curves are BACK! Say men, designers, and Glamour!”

Well gee. Thank you, men/designers/Glamour!

Crystal Renn is beautiful, and yes, she has more curves than your average high fashion model; but her collar bones still stick out in a way that is conventionally [depressingly] ‘sexy’. She doesn’t have a double chin or flabby upper arms or BACK FAT. She doesn’t have a pot belly or cellulite or chubby cheeks. She, and the other models showcased, still represent a model of beauty that is unattainable for the vast majority of women in the UK. If those women are the benchmark for normal, what chance do the rest of us have? (Of impressing men, designers, and Glamour, that is!)

And Megan Fox as a body role model?! [Yes, she was featured as one of the celebrity 'curvy body' ideals!!] Incredibly thin with large breasts and a permanent ‘**** me’ expression; role model material?

Hmph!

p.s. Five pages after the ‘curves’ article is a low-cal diet plan forming part of a ‘Total Body Makeover’.

F*** you, Glamour!

By: Jennifer Hansen

Jennifer Hansen — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 00:30:44 +0000

Is it Land’s End that puts non-models in its swimsuits to show how well they work on average bodies, or is that L.L. Bean?

By: Kitrona

Kitrona — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 01:45:07 +0000

Woohoo, three to five sizes larger than the usual! That means it’ll… wait, still include people that are thinner than most people I know.

I want to see women who look like people I know. Fat, thin, in-between… women who aren’t makeupped and spa-ed and exercised and photoshopped to within an inch of their lives. Women who HAVE lives that include things that I would do or be able to relate to. It’s hard to relate to someone who jets off to the Riviera or something on a whim.

I’m probably not putting this very well, but the gist of it is, I don’t want to see models. I want to see women like the women I know. (Hah, fat chance, right?)

By: Shinobu

Shinobu — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 22:06:16 +0000

Sadly, I heard some women that subscribe to the magazine say they were going to write letters and cancel their subscriptions because they subscribed to the magazine as it was and didn’t want any changes.

By: Punchy

Punchy — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 17:09:36 +0000

Not that plus size women need “charity”! I just mean screaming about how great you are negates the greatness.

By: Punchy

Punchy — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 17:08:21 +0000

I appreciate the notion but a big naked spectacle doesn’t really help. Why not show some actual plus size fashions or just slide the plus sized models in without hollering about how progressive Glamour is? It may have been a better story if someone else had noticed it and said “hey look what Glamour is doing”. It reminds me of some men’s magazine that said (something to the effect of) Angelina Jolie is sexy because she gives a ton of money to charity and you never hear about it.