Remember that interview with awesome plus-size model Velvet? Well the second part is up. Here's a choice quote: "The general reason one gets as to why there is not more representation of curvier folks within modern media is that inclusion would be equivalent to acceptance, and acceptance would then equal condoning, which would mean they support alleged ill health. The odd dichotomy is that whilst people like myself are banned due to the purported notion we will somehow 'promote' being unhealthy, we are besieged with media saturated with imagery of Britney Spears, Nicole Richie, Paris Hilton, Kate Moss and Lindsay Lohan. How these women represent good health is somewhat beyond me." [5 Resolutions]
@descent_into_votd: I just wish it were less standardized now. There was a time when Mae West and Louise Brooks coexisted as beauty ideals. And more recently, Marilyn Monroe and Audrey Hepburn. So I just want people to be able to think Velvet is beautiful, and Erin O'Connor is also beautiful - at the same exact time.
@femalemathmajor: Amen. And when in doubt, I'd rather see someone *bigger* than me in something than someone smaller. I always want the stuff I see at the Torrid site, for example, cause I think "oh this is not made in a thin fabric that makes it bunch up around the hips" or "this top doesn't look too x-rated on her and her boobs are a lot bigger than mine". When I see it on someone a lot smaller than me, I tend to just think "she'd look good wearing a potato sack, whatever".
I know that the runways and high-fashion magazines like Vogue depend on a sample size, so I don't care if they all use women the same height and size. But there is no excuse why magazines that show off-the-rack clothes once they've already hit stores, like pretty much every other female magazine out there, not to use a variety of sizes, cause the designers *already make the clothing in a variety of sizes*. So it's BS.