Cancel My Subscription
Reader Jessica wanted to make sure we were all aware of this post from Manolo for the Big Girl. (Since I’ve been off getting married and stuff, and I just got home, it’s good to get caught up on what I missed.) So the deal is, Glamour magazine featured a cover with America Ferrera, where they both A) declared her “HOT!” and B) airbrushed the shit out of her.
Francesca will not go into the horrible quality of the photoshopping. Please go to Ayyyy and read the comments in which Manolo’s noble readers wonder aloud just how freakish are those arms, or whether it is physically possible for a woman to make her neck bend like that.
No, no, Francesca simply wants to know from the editors at Glamour: Is Ugly Betty only HOT! if she gets rid of all the fat from her arms, every bit, and reduces from a C cup to an A? Is it not possible that Ugly Betty, or at least the actress who plays her, is HOT! exactly the way she is?
And in case that wasn’t hypocritical enough, check this out:
In general [one Britney Spears piece] is a poorly written article wrapping up the “she’s fat” / “no she’s not” reactions to Sunday nights performance [at the VMAs]. Again I was ready to leave it alone until I saw this quote from Glamour Magazine executive editor-at-large, Suze Yalof Scwhartz. “Girls aren’t looking as skinny this season as they did… There’s food backstage. They’re looking sexier.” At Glamour, she noted, a model won’t be featured “if she shows too much clavicle.”
I read an issue of Glamour recently because I was researching a possible project for them and deciding if it was a magazine I could get behind. And in that issue they had a story about swimsuits to flatter every figure, and they showed pictures of women in swimsuits who were up to a size 18, and even put one size 18 girl into a bikini. (I wish I could find this article online because I meant to do a post on it at the time.) I was very, very pro-Glamour after that. And now this. What happened, Glamour? Like, seriously?
Oh, and I really do have a subscription to the magazine right now. They are substituting it for Jane, which is now defunct. And following that link, we see that ex-Jane staffers knew about Glamour’s chicanery all along:
“Glamour is not at all like Jane,” says the refugee. “It’s the exact opposite. They preach fake empowerment of ‘loving your flaws.’ Jane doesn’t point out flaws. Glamour is still preaching that women aren’t good enough.”
Actually, the title of this post says it all.
Posted by mo pie
Filed under: America Ferrera, Britney Spears, Celebrities, Fatism, Magazines, Photoshop
Email us
I’ve been dying to see what the FA blog peoples would have to say about this. When I saw that cover in the supermarket on Monday, I had to do a double-take, then just kind of chuckle sadly.
Jane is defunct now? Ha! I didn’t renew my subscription after it changed editors because the new Jane sucked SO VERY MUCH. I loved the old Jane Magazine, but when Jane Pratt left it went down the tubes. To wit:
[second post down]
http://yoredux.blogspot.com/2006_07_01_archive.html
I broke up with Glamour not that long ago, too.
All of the mainstream women’s magazines are designed to make readers feel bad about themselves, and sell them stuff that’s supposed to make them feel better. They might give lip service to self-esteem, tolerance, and acceptance of difference, but their fashion editorials always tell their real truth: if you’re not a stick figure, you are No Good.
I’m not following your meaning again, I think.
…this quote from Glamour Magazine executive editor-at-large, Suze Yalof Scwhartz. “Girls aren’t looking as skinny this season as they did… There’s food backstage. They’re looking sexier.” At Glamour, she noted, a model won’t be featured “if she shows too much clavicle.”
Doesn’t that quote mean, not as skinny = sexier? Doesn’t At Glamour … a model won’t be featured “if she shows too much clavicle.” mean models with “some meat on their [collar]bones” are preferred to those with too little?
I’ve got an old subscription to Glamour that I’m waiting on the expiration for, and the first thing I said when I saw this month’s issue was “GodDAMN they airbrushed the hell out of America Ferrera!” What’s weird is they featured her in a spread last year and they left her alone and she looked gorgeous as usual. I guess you have to be airbrushed to be on the cover though.
Ah, I think I see now. (I commented before clicking through and reading. Sorry.) Ms. Scwartz says one thing and the cover of the mag says another.
Rage on.
And it’s a [i]bad[/i] Photoshop job at that. They obviously put her head on another body, the head being way too big. She looks grotesque, like a bobble-head!
And this is why I stay inside my magazine bubble consisting of only Bust and Bitch. I miss fashion magazines, but then this happens and I remember why I don’t look at them anymore. Yeesh, if they were going to pull off something like that, you’d think they’d hire a better Photoshopper…
I’ve been reading Glamour sporadically for 13 years. It’s my one truly guilty pleasure because I know it’s tripe, but used to really enjoy that flavor of tripe.
There has been a marked decrease in the quality of the writing since they started trying to be more like Cosmo by adding horoscopes and doing away with the features that made the magazine worth reading.
Articles about independence and empowerment have been replaced with articles promoting a really superficial kind of bravado tailored to get attention from guys.
10 years ago I would have said that Glamour was worth supporting. Now it’s just Cosmo-lite and I truly do feel guilty when I give them my money.
I spent the first few paragraphs of this thinking you were mad at the Manolo for the Big Girl crew (which is a problem with my uncaffeinated reading comprehension, not the post), so it was a big relief to realize you were talking about Glamour. Just had to share that.
And I know how you feel. Glamour has been among the best of a very poor lot, where fashion magazines are concerned. It’s really exciting when they show plus-size swimsuits or talk about serious feminist issues. But inevitably, they lower the boom, because fashion magazines are still primarily in the business of making us afraid we’re unlovable, then selling us instructions on how to be more lovable.
As Chesney said, I miss fashion magazines. But no lie, giving them up cold turkey is among, like, the top three best things I ever did for my body image. I didn’t even realize it until a few months later, when it was like, “Hmm, what’s this curious feeling? It’s like… I don’t…. hate myself?”
And yeah, that America Ferrera photoshop job is just unbelievably bad.
They also made her look less ethnic. Apparently to be on the cover of a magazine you not only have to be skinny but as white looking as possible.
I was reading the comments on the Manolo site, and a bunch of people who wrote into complain got this in response:
Dear [Name]
Thanks so much for your letter about our October cover photo of America
Ferrera. Let me assure you, we did not digitally slim her; as she mentions
in the interview, she wears a size 6/8 on the bottom, ten on the top. You
are seeing her as she actually appears. That said, we deeply value your
feedback. Be sure to take a look inside at the photos of America and let us
know what you think.
Sincerely,
Emilia Benton
Reader Services Intern
I’m sure she does, but in whose universe is the girl in the cover photo a 10 on top? Do they think their readers don’t know what a 10 looks like? Good fucking lord, how insulting.
What the hell? She doesn’t even look like the same person.
And Becky, I agree. That letter is offensive. I wear a size medium shirt right now (not sure what that translates to numerically) and I’m not an A cup. I don’t think I have been since maybe 3rd grade. It’s weird that they got rid of her boobs, since I thought most people expect women to not only have huge bulging collarbones, BUT also be so thin that you can see their sternums, and also somehow be a C or D cup.
We were watching TV Guide channel once to see what was on and they were doing something about some awards show. America Ferrera was on there and they were talking about her show, which we’ve never watched. DH must have misunderstood what they were saying when he heard the word ‘ugly.’ He said, “What are they talking about? She’s beautiful!”
I guess they got a few comments on this – this is the response I received. I’m letting that subscription lapse now. Wonder if I can switch it to something less crappy? That said, the photos of her inside look NOTHING like the photo on the cover.
Dear Anne,
Thanks so much for your letter about our October cover photo of America Ferrera. Let me assure you, we did not digitally slim her; as she mentions in the interview, she wears a size 6/8. You are seeing her as she actually appeared at our shoot in June.
That said, we deeply value your feedback, and your letter has been read by our Editor-In-Chief and other senior staffers. Be sure to take a look
inside at the photos of America and let us know what you think.
Sincerely,
Emilia Benton
Reader Services Intern
I’m know I’m late to the party, but I had to reply to Becky:
They also made her look less ethnic. Apparently to be on the cover of a magazine you not only have to be skinny but as white looking as possible.
It really doesn’t surprise me after that “Afros & Dreadlocks are a No-No” deal that went down not too long ago!
What’s the date on the photo on the right? Same time as the supposed cover shoot?
The detective work (and photo) are both from here, kapgar. Not to mention that I don’t think America’s body has ever looked quite as unnaturally slender as it does on that cover.
Er mich nicht funktioniert. Das. Do lots of apprenticeship. adult trish stratus The.
girl with the sex ray glassesI had been close to have been married at a sure worked for. Initially.