Jezebel 
Enter your username and password.
New York, 6:26 AM
Mon Nov 30
18 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
tips@jezebel.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Anna Holmes
Email | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Dodai Stewart
Email | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor:
Tracie Egan
Email | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Anna North
Email | Twitter
Sadie Stein
Email | Twitter
Reporter:
Irin Carmon
Email | Twitter
Editorial Assistant:
Margaret Hartmann
Email | Twitter
Contributors:
Rich Juzwiak
Email | Twitter
Latoya Peterson
Email
Jenna Sauers
Email
Lizzie Skurnick
Email
Interns:
Katy Kelleher
Twitter
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
09/27/09
No it's not.
09/27/09
09/27/09
09/27/09
09/27/09
09/27/09
Until I see any short-tall-fat-thin variation of their models, I call bullshit on their whole "inner-beauty" claim.
09/27/09
This promotion of Christian values seems to come in the form of taking big groups of aspiring models to church for special MoL classes. I am very skeptical. This sounds like a classic modelling agency scam: pay money at the front end (in the form of classes, here, maybe not photos) for the promise of work later. Unless these classes are free? I don't know; I can't find the "impressive website" the Observer mentions, just a message-board looking site with one post: [modelsoflife.com]
ETA: there is another models of life website, modelsoflife.org, but I can only access that through google cache. impressive!
09/27/09
09/27/09
If I were trying to make some cash, I might do this: create a Christian talent agency, market aggressively in religious areas with the message: you can be a model and an exemplary Christian!, select as many young women as possible while still rejecting enough to be credible, then offer mandatory modelling classes for a fee with the promise of work and spiritual development later.
09/27/09
09/27/09
09/27/09
09/27/09
Like, I call myself a Catholic, and I happen to teach for a living, but that doesn't make me a Catholic teacher, in that I have to advertise and advocate for my Catholicism through my teaching. (Though it could be argued that my teaching is, in some ways, informed by my Catholicism. Shades of grey, I guess.)
Does this distinction make sense? Because I feel like it's so logical.
09/27/09
I wouldn't call myself an "atheist/agnostic student" because I don't roam around preaching at people.
09/27/09
I think that for many people who really believe in their religious teachings, they cannot separate the role of "teacher" and the role of "Catholic" or "Christian." I believe that is why we see so many people trying to shape the public sphere to their own religious morality. If you truly believe that your religion's laws represent the absolute truth, it is logical for you to insist that everyone else follow them, or at least that "man's law" should reflect them.
09/27/09
A devout Christian will strive to live their life in following with Christianity - kindness, charity, fellowship, mercy, love, forgiveness. They won't go around preaching, but live by example. And as these are core values, they don't just take them off when they're in the secular sphere and turn them back on when they're in the private sphere. However, they don't go around preaching. You may not even know they are Christian until Easter when they mention they are going to a service. They can be a teacher, and they can be Christian, and they can bring their Christian values without ever once imposing a Christian viewpoint to their students and without ever preaching to their students or ever mentioning their religion at all. They will simply strive to be kind, charitable, forgiving, and so on. Most of Christianity around the world isn't the preachy Republican American stuff or the preachy TV preachers in Canada and the UK. It's people who believe, and who don't preach but who iive by example, being kind to those around them.
09/27/09
09/27/09
So sure, "good" Catholics and Christians think of themselves/their lives/their faiths that way. But it doesn't mean that when I'm up in front of my students teaching about comma splices, I'm also trying to convert them. It just means that I hold dear the values of my Church as they're applicable (say, fairness, compassion, diligence, whatever).
Therefore, you can be a really devout Christian and also engage in some job/profession without using that job/profession as a platform for your faith.
So I use my Christianity/morality to make me a better teacher (/student/model/secretary/whatever), but don't use my teaching (/modeling/whatever) to make other people Christian.
09/27/09
I also agree with you that many people who identify as Christian, or Catholic, or whatever do not use their profession to preach their religion. However, there are many, many examples of people refusing to perform job duties in the name of their religion. (feministing.com has documented many pharmacists refusing birth control or emergency contraception to women based on their religion. Many pastors refuse to marry same-sex couples. Some doctors refuse to perform abortions.) There are many people who identify as devout Christians that don't preach at work, but whose faith affects the way they do their jobs. Obviously Models for Life intends to influence the way that its members work.
While these people are the minority, I think it is wrong to dismiss them by saying that "a devout Christian won't go around preaching, just living by example." Also, I would like to see the value of *tolerance* get a mention in there with love, charity, forgiveness, etc. :) Cheers.
09/27/09
09/27/09
Good design and simplicity are not mutually exclusive; I wish we saw more of both.
09/27/09
09/27/09
09/28/09
09/27/09
I thought the "Fellowship of Christian Athletes" at my high school was weird, then I went to a music conservatory for college and found out that the prayer group here goes to a "Christian classical musicians" retreat....and now, this?
Can't we just accept that religion doesn't have to permeate every aspect of people's lives?
09/27/09
You can be Christian and not fundamental, in fact that's about 99% of Christians. Also, faith by some people's definition means it permeates your whole life.
09/27/09
Also, again, this example of it is ridiculous, but as long as they're not infringing on the rights of others and keeping within the boundaries of church and state, allowing religion to bleed into other aspects of one's life is part of being devout, which in a way I can respect.
09/27/09
09/27/09
Also, I didn't word my statement right. It's not so much the religion-permeating-your-whole-life... thing that ticks me off. Like, I'd never argue against a football player feeling the need to pray before a game, or whatever. But there's an icky, holier-than-thou attitude about these groups. They're not just a model/athlete/musician, they're a Christian model/athlete/musician, so they're special and better. And the implication, of course, is that Christianity is rare in whatever they're doing, which to me sounds like that annoying persecution complex a lot of fundies have - which, as an agnostic (and therefore a member of an actual "religious" minority in this country, one that keeps me from ever having a chance to run for president, for one) really pisses me off.
09/27/09
09/27/09
09/27/09
I compulsively have to play devil's advocate when topics like this come up, because I'm a Christian, even when I find myself 99% against it, like this stupid modeling agency. Call it childhood programming, I guess. I saw Jesus Camp for the first time a month or so ago and found it all too eerily familiar.
09/27/09
09/27/09
Also, for the record, I'm not saying they don't have a right to exist. They do. Just, the ideas behind why they exist are a bit problematic.
09/27/09
I was comparing them because they're all similar organizations in how they exist. You were originally saying why does there have to be a Christian version of everything, and I was trying to answer you in that there are many instances of that kind of group sub sect. So in criticizing why specifically Christian groups exist, it might be a good idea to think about why any of them exist.
09/27/09
To allow women access to a talent agency for modeling that works to promote beauty, self esteem, peace of mind, and etiquette through standard modeling class practices in addition to bible study or similarly structured classes.
Most likely it's led by a person or group who thought, "How can we start a successful modeling agency that can compete with all the ones that are already established? Oh! A gimmick!"
Personally, I wish the intentions were more altruistic, but ultimately they can do what they want, and if they actually follow through on promoting inner beauty then they're helping in the fight against modern beauty standards.
09/27/09
On the other hand, in this particular case of a modelling agency, I can kind of understand it. Modelling can be a risky business for young women - having an agency who understands your values and will pre-screen jobs that fit those values, an agency that believes in mind/body/spirit balance as actually *follows* that value could be quite good for teenagers in the modelling world. It would be better if they had it more of a "spiritual" modelling agency that allowed girls of any religion who wanted a more balanced agency to join, though.
09/27/09
09/27/09
Go for it, live in faith.
09/27/09