|the same old question on Sep 30, 2006 @ 08:36 am|
"Clothes look better on the hanger than on", or was it the other way around? Two thoughts: first, superskinny models are unattractive (I think we all agree, jealousy notwithstanding); and second, the whole idea of pret-a-porter is that real actual living human women are supposed to wear these clothes. It's really in the designer's best interest to make clothes that a normal person could wear and look good in. Even if the "normal person" is supposed to fit into a size 4, I'd rather see that than size 0 or smaller. What's next, 18-24 months size?
Ali de Bold
|Fashion isn't about "normal" on Sep 30, 2006 @ 12:50 pm|
Designers see fashion as art. Art doesn't need to be attainable. The thing with scrawny models is that the clothes hang better and flow better as they're walking. Normal women have thighs, bellies and booties that can impede their "art" from looking it's best.
|Fashion - Taking Responsibility on Oct 03, 2006 @ 09:15 am|
I think its not just about clothes being art and how the designer perceives their clothes hanging...The bigger point is the societal implications and Milan is taking responsibility for that. What message do young girls get...Everything looks better on skinny girls, so girls will inevitably want to be skinny. Even if it means being unhealthy. There is a balance, and the fashion industry has gone too far. I say good for Milan, I hope others follow.
|Don't agree on Dec 16, 2006 @ 10:50 am|
I cannot blame the fashion industry solely for the fact that young girls want to be skinny. The problem is that no one has a discussion with girls about having a positive body image. The reason why designers use skinny girls is because they just do fit the clothes better. Often when a designer makes a collection, the clothes are all one size because they use the SAME SIZE pattern for all of them. Despite what most wiomen don't want to think, models are that skinny because they are blessed with fast metabolism, not because they starve themselves to be skinny. Insider: NO agency will take a girl with an eating disorder. They look for girls who are naturally thin. Not that what Milan is doing is bad, it is great because they are taking responsibility, for what the parents shoudl be doing. I think that they see that people are always going to be pointing fingers at them for this. But really, it is all about conversation and influencing young girls about the importance of self esteem and having positive body image. I hate how adults do not have this communication with their daughters and then start pointing fingers. If you don't do your job, then how can you blame someone else? If you are a parent, you are a role model for your daughter, and how you feel about yourself is reflected back on her.
|It's a matter of Perception on Dec 19, 2006 @ 02:15 am|
I do not agree that being skeletally skinny looks good. Blame it on media and advertising. Portraying the image that being super skinny is to be desired. In fact, I truly think that having some "meat" on the frame carries the clothes very much better.
Many times when I look that the models parading the clothes, my first impression is that the clothes can only fit those who do not eat. Not Real At All!
|Double standard on Feb 05, 2007 @ 06:17 pm|
The funny thing about this is that there's such a double standard that exists. While runway models that are super skinny are admired/envied, regular people who are super skinny are usually faced with questions like 'do you eat?'
I have an incredibly high metabolism and just don't gain weight (I'm 5'7 and weigh between 110 and 115), and you would not believe how many times I get stared at weirdly, or have people asking me if I have an eating disorder (which I don't!)
I used to be really self conscious because I am so skinny (or skeletal), but I've learned to just embrace it and be happy with the body I have, even though I would love to be able to gain 15 pounds or so.
And I think that's what everyone needs to do - everyone is beautiful no matter what shape/size they are. Most of the stuff I see on runways is so crazy and just flat out weird that I highly doubt designers actually expect normal people to wear them - so why are people upholding these super skinny models as the 'ideal beauty?'
If that made any sense
|stuff on runways on Feb 15, 2007 @ 12:48 am|
yes, but the stuff on runways influences fashion on the street. Think skinny pants, pointy, high heels, belts....
It's purposely exaggerated for just for show. If they wore normal street clothes, it would be so boring! Everyone goes to see a show to see something creative or extravagant (same with costumes for plays and musicals). Also think about contemporary art galleries featuring innovative works of art, the entire point is to see something that you would ever normally see. The models are wearing works of art - art created by the designers.
|Size on Feb 15, 2007 @ 09:14 pm|
One thing people don't know is that modelling is all about size - not about weight. IA woman who is 5 ft 9 and 115 pounds would be undesirable to the industry if she didn't have the correct measurements in the right places.
People are constantly confusing weight and size.
|how come you're so fat? on Feb 21, 2007 @ 07:57 pm|
I think it's good that they are making sure Models aren't dangerously thin, but I think the public in general need an education about acceptable beauty. I too think all sizes are beautiful and like youreyesopen I've been told on occaision I'm too skinny though I never endeavor to lose weight. People feel comfortable commenting on my body but what if I said, "Hey how come you're so fat?" I don't think it would go over the same.
they should rule on a case by case basis. Giselle looks thin but to me she looks healthy thin, whereas someone like the Olsen twins looks dangerously thin, know what I mean?