Glamour Said They Were Gonna
Back in August, the big news was the Woman on Page 194 of Glamour magazine–Lizzie Miller and her beautiful belly and her regular thighs, looking gorgeous. It sparked a lot of talk all over the internet–Glamour loves you just the way you are, and Glamour is starting a revolution, and Glamour is just paying lipservice to vocal body acceptance advocates and they are totally just shitting us, Glamour is, when they say that this is just the first step in a whole new world of body positivity for them. Matt Lauer even called out Editor-in-Chief Cindi Leive on the Today show, asking if this was a one-shot, in which the publicity was free today but the skinny models would be back tomorrow. No, no, Cindi Leive said. This is going to change things. And then in late September, she posted this on her blog:
As the editor of this magazine, I’ve been proud of plenty of portraits we’ve published–from fashion designers to First Ladies and beyond. But I’m especially proud of a shoot you’ll see in our November issue–not because of the work that went into it, but because of the important work it kicks off. Oh, and did I mention the whole fun, fabulous thing was your idea? …seven beautiful women, all three to five sizes larger than the models you generally see in magazines.
And the photo, as seen above, is pretty awesome, because these really aren’t the bodies you ever see in fashion and women’s magazines. Okay, a photoshoot. Not your standard models. That’s nice. So what? But she’s says it’s not just another last grasp at more publicity:
As you’ll read in our November issue, Glamour is committing to featuring a greater range of body types in our pages, including in fashion and beauty stories (traditionally the toughest areas for even the top “plus-size” models to crack).
This is just the start, she says. And this is something I am sad to be skeptical about. Really are we going to see more “plus” models? Really is there going to be more body diversity? Really do you mean it? I want to believe you, Cindi Leive, Editor-in-Chief. Do us a favor and don’t fuck this up.
(Have you seen the November issue of Glamour? What does the photo look like? Are all the ladies confined to the photoshoot, or has the new policy begun to spread to the other pages? Are you going to pick up the issue, or are you afraid this is all just corporate bullshit intended to drive sales to gullible, hopeful women and that it shouldn’t be supported?)
Posted by jenfu
Filed under: Advocacy, Celebrities, Crystal Renn, Fashion, Fat Positive, Magazines, Media
That picture is beautiful. But it isn’t going to convince me to buy Glamour. Even if they started filling their pages with “plus-size” models, I still can’t get past the superficial beauty advice on every other page. Bleh.
Glamour is my bathroom reading of choice, lol. Anyway it seems like the only other plus lady is in a piece on body slimmers, so no real progress there. The fashion spread is really gorgeous but the model is on the waifish side even for models. The plus-size spread is basically that one shoot, with some smaller stock photos of some of the models in the next two pages. Glamour obviously does get it…if readers responded so positively to Lizzie Miller, it’s because we already know she’s gorgeous; we don’t need an article telling us, hey look at these fat women they can be pretty too! It’ll be nothing but lip service till magazines and advertisers start putting their money where their mouths are and actually hire these models to do the same work the skinny models are doing, rather than putting them in a side show of sorts and calling it progress, but I don’t see that happening any time soon.
Aaand that should read “Glamour doesn’t get it”
I am happy to see real size women in an otherwise straight size magazine, however…such buzz has been given to Glamour & Marie Claire about “plus this” and “plus that” but why is it that no one is paying attention to the magazines that already exist that celebrate plus size women?
Gemini Magazine, Belle Noir, Skorch, Manik Magazine, and Plus Model Mag to name a few have been busting ass for years to bring their messages and their beauties to the public–yet Glamour gets all of the pats on the back.
If real women want to see real women on the pages of magazines, support the ones that already exist catering to you.
Skinny women are real too.
I know the women in the photoshoot are labelled plus sized, but they aren’t fat. I don’t think “real” is supposed to be “fat” or “skinny,” but true to real life — which means bumps and curves and not stick straight and malnourished. I’m just sayin’.
Real as in NOT photoshopped.
That picture is beautiful. But it isn’t going to convince me to buy Glamour. Even if they started filling their pages with “plus-size” models, I still can’t get past the superficial beauty advice on every other page.
^^ What April said.
Jezebel.com did a good take-down of this issue:
http://tinyurl.com/yz7qak2
Glamour–like all women’s magazines that make a profit out of women’s self-hatred–sucks donkeys.
WHAT plus-size women?
The GLAMOUR group shot features some very pretty, average-size women. Now, that’s a change from the usual fashion mag scrawns but a bunch of size 10, 12 and (maybe) size 14 women is NOT and to me never will be representative of plus size.
…and another thing: every one of those gals is young, so it would appear that not only does GLAMOUR have a really screwy idea of what plus size means, it only applies to women of, oh…30 and under. WHERE are the rest of us, you know, the ones with the money to spend on the products advertised in the fashion mags.
I’ve read everybody else’s comments here but I still think this is a huge step in the right direction. One small step, if you will. Hopefully they continue to go this way.
Plus, they really can’t come out of the gate with fat models because I fear that would be too much too soon. Baby steps.
I’m tempted to purchase this issue simply to show my support for this endeavor. If they see that by using regular women results in a profit increase, this would encourage them to continue with this. SHould the issue not sell, we go back to the old style.
I think its good that Glamour will present more women and fewer twigs.
I agree with Teghan, even a small step in the right direction is better than nothing.
Yup, it’s better than nothing, but I still refuse to buy the magazine. Or any fashion mag. Or pay attention to the fashion world (as evidenced by the way I dress. If only they made Garanimals for grown-ups!)
But, again, this whole idea of “real women” is disturbing. We come in all shapes and sizes, and to say one body type, thin or fat, is the “real” one is disturbing. Now, when you’re talking about non-photoshopped and non-starved, that’s a horse of a different color!
I love it. I am not going to be all huffy gruffy about it, it is a step no matter how small in the right direction of showing women as beautiful without fitting into a set bones sticking out criteria.
Yes the women who are that thin are still beautiful but so am I and I have curves the jiggle and stretchmarks and I am soft and cuddly but still female and wonderful.
So bravo for taking a step to show that there is more beauty than what fits in a size 0 pants.
<3 This made me very happy today.
Okay, first of all, we’re ALL real women from the smallest size 00 to size infinity. Doesn’t frigging matter. We’re all real.
Second, part of FA involves not bashing the straight-sized folk. Looking at them and saying they must be starving or have EDs is no different than them looking at us and assuming we sit around all day eating Doritos. As a matter of fact, I went to college with two model-sized women and neither of them had EDs or skipped meals. And both of them were 6 feet tall.
Third, I’ve already explained this a billion times, but plus-sized MODELS are not the same as plus-sized WOMEN. The benchmarks are completely different.
That said, I consider this a small step on Glamour’s part. If they can actually put this idea into fruition beyond a two-page Naked Fat Girl Extravaganza, I’m all for it.
The first thought I had when I saw the spread was, “This is the kind of thing that was once considered the cultural standard of smokin’ hot. Look at paintings from the Victorian age. Heck, look at photos of nekkid ladies on swings from the Victorian age.”
Which leads me to muse about ways to bring the dead sexy parts of Victorian fashion back without bringing back the corseted silhouette.
Not saying that it’s bad to show a variety of sizes and shapes or anything, but it seems to me that most of the people that seem like they want fashion magazines to change don’t even buy them. These magazines are a business and if people are subscribing and reading them for the current content, why should they change to suit people that are even buying the product?
I only flipped through the December issue, but it seems like it’s back to the usual. The plus-sized model article may have only been a stunt to draw attention.
“why should they change to suit people that are even buying the product?”
To make it more appealing so that they might :D
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.
Not that plus size women need “charity”! I just mean screaming about how great you are negates the greatness.
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.
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?)
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?
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!
Pingback: Glamour Gets Curvy Models to Bare it All
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.
Pingback: Big Fat Deal » Marie Claire’s Got a Pet Plus Size Columnist
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. . .