Nasty Gal ad banned over "underweight" model

[Amp34]

Yes.

And it's work clearly 100% because you just said plus sized not obease.

Plus sized are obease medically obease thsts what they are you just changed what they are from obease to some made up phrase designed to make it sound like Theyr e just the upper end of healthy

No, you’ve fallen into the trap of assuming “plus size” models are all obese. In the fashion/advertising industry “Plus size” is generally considered to be any woman of size 10-12 or over... would you call a size 12 woman obese?

It’s worth noting here that the average UK woman is a size 16.

There’s certainly an issue with weight and obesity in the UK (in fact the majority of people in this thread are probably overweight), alongside a rather warped view of “normal” and healthy because of this. At the same time we should not be confusing “plus size” models like those seen in things like the Dove adverts, AKA normal looking woman, with the very small minority of obese “plus size” models you rarely see out of specific publications.

Not that male models are much better, the average guy now is overweight with a pot belly, whereas the average male model is usually either stacked or slim too.

There’s a problem with society in most developed countries, not helped by our sedentary lifestyles and poor diets.

 

[dowie]

No, you’ve fallen into the trap of assuming “plus size” models are all obese. In the fashion/advertising industry “Plus size” is generally considered to be any woman of size 10-12 or over... would you call a size 12 woman obese?

It’s worth noting here that the average UK woman is a size 16.

I think you're conflating US and UK sizes there. The most prominent plus size models are overweight or into obese territory as far as I can tell.

As for the average UK woman, the majority of adults in the UK are overweight or obese.

 

[Efour]

Plus size means anything that isn't "normal" I don't think its that confusing.

16+

anyway this isnt worth talking about. cya in the next thread.

 

[Angilion]

Wait if they're tropical beaches why would we need blubber.

And err we evolved the ability to build boats to help us float we don't need blubber.


Why do people constantly ignore our massive evolutionary trait of we evolved to make things so we could adapt to a new environment in hours instead of millennia?

Cold? Kill something local and wear its adapted skin.

Hot? Build some shade

Also rather relevant is that if we are well adapted to aquatic life why do we drown so easily? But that's just the beginning. Animals adapted to aquatic life are, rather obviously, adapted to the most important aspect of aquatic life - being in water. Humans very obviously aren't. Our skin isn't well adapted for long periods in water. Our system for acquiring and using oxygen isn't well adapted for long periods in water. Absolutely nothing about humans is well adpated for long periods in water. We're very obviously not aquatic animals.

We're also very obviously not adapted to being obese since it's a direct cause or big risk factor in many health problems, including many fatal health problems. On top of that, having blubber isn't the same as being obese anyway. Blubber is subcutaneous fat only. Humans who are obese won't just have a lot of subcutaneous fat - they'll have a lot of fat in other places too.

She's just making up obvious nonsense to try to pretend her irrational position is rational. We know that. She may well know that too. But things can be politically useful even if they're not true.

 

[Amp34]

I think you're conflating US and UK sizes there. The most prominent plus size models are overweight or into obese territory as far as I can tell.

As for the average UK woman, the majority of adults in the UK are overweight or obese.

Nope, that’s UK sizing.

Some of the more vocal/prominent “plus size” models may well be obese, but that doesn’t mean the category is solely them - as usual the vocal minority are not usually the majority, and are usually on the extreme end of a view (or in this case weight).

A lot of “normal” fashion models are borderline anorexic (and some are anorexic), which is why the “plus size” model came about, to represent a normal healthy person (not just an average overweight person). Just like many other terms though (like curvy) it’s been coopted by others, but that doesn’t mean it’s still not used in its original sense by most in those industries.

And yes, agreed, as I pointed out in the previous post.

Edit: Think about it this way - people like Kate Moss and Naomi Campbell were/are considered “normal” models, but they don’t represent the majority of healthy women’s shapes and could be considered on th slim side of healthy.

 

[Daftbrown]

The point is that if I didn't frequent GD none of this crap would even exist in my world. It's only because of people posting about it that I learn about it, and I frequent quite a few sites.

Yes! Agreed.

 

[Daftbrown]

Totally agree.

GD seems to exist as this separate entity where a small group of people get together to complain about things and annoy one another in this perpetually endless cycle of misery.

Saying that, it's likely the same on most forums. Just these endless echo chambers of people spewing bile about women, fat people, immigrants etc. Not too say that there's not good discussions to be found, of course there is, but it's quickly lost to the void.

People who complain about the rise of 'absolute' and 'reactionary' culture on the left and right need only look at this thread for examples of why it's happened. Very little nuanced discussion, just dude's throwing about insults and judging others based on there appearance with little to no consideration given to the MANY experiences that may have influenced it.

Happy to see some reason here!

 

[Raz]

I was going to post this on FB but thought better of it -- didn't want to upset my fatty colleagues/friends lol

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45808500

So, an advert showing a perfectly healthy model has been banned because she looked underweight, whereas it's perfectly ok for a morbidly obese "plus size model" to grace the cover of Cosmopolitan magazine? (Tess Halliday)

I don't understand the world we live in anymore... I give up. Just, no.

Just going from one acceptable extreme to another. That model doesn't look particularly healthy (being skinny isn't always healthy) and given what we know about the psychological impact of such adverts on young girls I think it's right that it was banned.

Basically, we don't want people to starve themselves because they think being extremely skinny is healthy/beautiful nor stuff their faces in the equally silly big is healthy.

 

[One More Solo]

The way some dudes talk on here is ******** disgusting. I agree that this story is a little perverse and completely agree that actively encouraging the idea of 'healthy obesity' is twaddle, but the way you guys speak about it...

It's the language of the simple minded 12 year old bully boy and it instantly deters others from seeing you're point of view. And yet you all wonder why the 'loony left' has been able to run away with agendas like this one...

Well said.

 

[Pawnless Endgame]

C'mon guys, how many of us on here are fat ********? We're on computers all day and when we leave the office, it's all about World of Warcraft / Battlefield / GTA etc (or Fortnight if you're in your 20s). The vast majority are you are fat. I'm fat too. Just admit it

The way some dudes talk on here is ******** disgusting. I agree that this story is a little perverse and completely agree that actively encouraging the idea of 'healthy obesity' is twaddle, but the way you guys speak about it...

It's the language of the simple minded 12 year old bully boy and it instantly deters others from seeing you're point of view. And yet you all wonder why the 'loony left' has been able to run away with agendas like this one...

Agreed. There seems to be some double standards going on in this thread, given that we're on a computing forum.

She looks anorexic to be honest.

The model in question is pretty anorexic looking rather than "normal".

Agree too. Ok I had to look up Tess Holliday as well and she's rather a bit too big imo, but I'd rather take someone normal size or "real size" or more-to-hug or whatever terminology it is nowadays over someone who advocates anorexia. After all, it's more-to-hug

 

[dowie]

Agree too. Ok I had to look up Tess Holliday as well and she's rather a bit too big imo, but I'd rather take someone normal size or "real size" or more-to-hug or whatever terminology it is nowadays over someone who advocates anorexia.

But people don't tend to promote anorexia these days, it's all about fitness, "wellness", nutrition etc..etc.. heroin chic was the 90s...

Today's (conventional/non-plus size) models tend to look like, well the models on this Instagram profile of a guy who runs fitness classes for models:

https://www.instagram.com/russellsbc/

 

[Angilion]

[..]
Agree too. Ok I had to look up Tess Holliday as well and she's rather a bit too big imo, but I'd rather take someone normal size or "real size" or more-to-hug or whatever terminology it is nowadays over someone who advocates anorexia. After all, it's more-to-hug

Advocating obesity and advocating anorexia aren't the only two options. Calling obesity "normal size", "real size", "plus size", "more to hug" or whatever doesn't change what it is. Even when obesity is common enough to be considered normal.

 

[easyrider]

It's completely ridiculous double standard that is actually harming public health. 'Loving your curves', is akin to an alcoholic loving his drinking habit.

No it’s not

 

[asim18]

As I said above, it's insane that we are introducing "suga taxes" and having other such initiatives to reduce child obesity and on the other hand we are celebrating such obesity in models. It's madness.

That's because initiatives like the "suga taxes" are not designed to reduce child obesity, they are designed to sustain, normalise and capitalise from child obesity.

 

[Orionaut]

. Absolutely nothing about humans is well adapted for long periods in water. We're very obviously not aquatic animals.

Well,

As long as you discount all the various features that suggest that we might be.

Consider https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freediving.

Now certainly, the achievements of free-divers are both at the extreme and sometimes even a little contrived (EG pre-loading on pure O2)

But nevertheless, This level of aquatic performance puts Humans well into aquatic mammal territory (Albeit at the lower end of the spectrum)

And, like with long distance running (Remember the thread on human endurance running/hunting) with practice, most people could greatly enhance their aquatic performance because the basic abilities are something that we appear to have inherited through evolution.

And like with pearl diving ( See https://www.runnersworld.com/training/a20790390/the-amazing-physiology-of-pearl-divers/) underwater spear fishing has been practiced for millennia with people routinely holding their breath and swiming undewater for up to two minutes at a time.

How can one possibly argue that an animal with the ability to perform underwater in this manner has not evolved semi-aquatic capabilities??

Give me one example of any recognised non-aquatic animal that is capable of swimming underwater for many minutes at a time?

 

[Dis86]

Cormorants.

 

[Efour]

Some species of snake

 

[Dis86]

Apparently some monkeys too!

 

[Orionaut]

Cormorants.

Sea birds are semi-aquatic

Some species of snake

What, you mean Sea-snakes?? (See above)

Spoiler: Interestingly

Snakes can actually endure a vacuum for a surprisingly long time too. Early experimenters discovered that when you sucked all the air out of a bell jar, A Mouse would die, but a Snake would survive

Apparently some monkeys too!

I know about the Japanese Monkeys that like Hot baths. But any that can Actually swim underwater for minutes at a time??

That I have not heard of (Unless you are including Humans in that) Please tell me more!

 

[aardvark]

Give me one example of any recognised non-aquatic animal that is capable of swimming underwater for many minutes at a time?

bit of a circular argument there - any animal capable of doing that is by definition semiaquatic to some degree.

Being semiaquatic is about behaviour, its nothing to do with the argument by a stupid fat person.