In the January issue of PLUS Model Magazine, plus size model Katya Zharkova and a straight size model are seen in the nude in an attempt to "open the minds of the fashion industry," which is stepping further away from reality, according to PLUS founder and editor-in-chief, Madeline Figueroa Jones.
The magazine reveals that some of today's plus size models are wearing the same size as models Christie Brinkley, Paulina Porizkova and Cindy Crawford at the height of their fame in the 1990s. Zharkova, 28, wears a size 14.
The photos appear alongside statistics about today's sometimes dangerously thin straight size models and the continuously shrinking frames of plus size models. Among the revelations: "Twenty years ago the average fashion model weighed 8 percent less than the average woman. Today she weighs 23 percent less" and "most runway models meet the Body Mass Index physical criteria for Anorexia."
When Jones first saw the images, shot by photographer Victoria Janashvili, her reaction was immediate and emotional.
"I nearly cried," she told Fox411.com. "The images were submitted to other mainstream magazines and while they loved what they were seeing, they would not publish them. When they came to me, there was no hesitation on my part. I knew this would be amazing for people to see and that if we added the correct statistics, the impact would be powerful."
Click here to see the full editorial from PLUS Model magazine.
And powerful it was. When PLUS model magazine published a blog post, boldly titled "Plus Size Bodies, What Is Wrong With Them Anyway," it spread like wildfire.
The post asks why the fashion world is afraid to cater to plus size women in advertising, but is willing to accept their dollars.
"This is not about healthy vs. non-healthy women," Jones tells Fox411. "Because if that was so, most of the models on the runway in New York and Paris would not be walking. Not eating for days at a time can't be healthy. But I don't see anyone proclaiming how unhealthy it is and yanking them off the runway and denying them fashion."
Jones added that the feature is simply about "those plus size women who do embrace their size and want to be treated, marketed to and accepted as equals."
The response to the blog post blew Jones and her team away. It received more than 300,000 hits within the first days of being published, as well as more than 7,000 Facebook shares and more than 1,000 on Twitter.
"The statistics and photos in this article have had a global impact," Tulin Reid, Executive Marketing and Creative Director of PLUS said in a statement. "As a plus size fashion magazine, we are thrilled with the results as it expands the conversation that we have monthly between advertisers, designers, readers and the modeling industry.
"We are not advocating an unhealthy lifestyle, but the right to have as many fashion options as the next size 2, 6 or 8 woman," Jones said. "There are all sorts of epidemics right now besides obesity, which include cancer, auto immune diseases and a myriad of eating disorders."
Most of the comments on the post have offered support of the message and include shared accounts of painful shopping experiences.
Still, the response hasn't been all positive and Jones admitted that the experience was an eye-opener for her.
"I knew that we would get some backlash but I did not expect for plus size women to be compared to drug addicts," Jones said. "Some of the feedback was so bad, we couldn't even approve it for the public to see. But we want the conversation to happen because it gives us the opportunity to help them see that this is not a health issue. It's an equal rights issue."
Reader Comments
Just as it is claimed that non smokers love to hate smokers, perhaps fat woman love to hate thin woman !
Magazine sells more copies by playing to shallow vain women's insecurities and featuring softcore lesbian porn pictures.
This is supposed to be news?
Meanwhile TPTB continue to poison our water, air, and food, causing people to continually become more and more sick and obese. But who cares? Let's get mad at fashion designers instead. Obviously they would sell more clothes if they advertised using regular fat people. They just use thin people just to spite us... of course.
So, hell yeah it's news that somebody is finally pointing out the obvious.
Best sharpen up your "seeing" (pattern recognition) skills if you expect to survive in this pathological reality.
I should add that being able to SEE the line of force behind social issues is a survival skill that people really need to work on. Being able to SEE why this topic is relevant is part of that skill.
The problem is many of us that see the pathological reality would rather DO something about it, rather than sit back and regurgitate a pot of old ideas endlessly for years on end
WE GET IT GUYS... THE WORLD IS EVIL... QUESTION IS ARE YOU GOING TO CONTINUE TO UP-CYCLE AND RECYCLE THE SAME POINTS OVER AND OVER OR ARE YOU EVER GOING TO PROGRESS ??
Also, let me point out: if you think it's tedious, you should try DOing it.
We are DOing more experimental / trailblazing work now... To bad you did not have a more advanced section for more advanced work ( beyond your social experiments in the forum ) That would be cool !!
I am sorry that Signs of the Times seems to be becoming less serious and less important by the day.
It even looks as though you are encouraging, or pushing homosexuality, and especially lesbians!
Very depressing.
I am a therapist and I have worked with eating disorders. The way media is portraying what a female is supposed to look like, is a great contribution to eating disorders among young girls, and it DOES ruin their health and their lives. Anorexia even kills some of them. Now THAT's what's truly depressing!
When someone's child die's to anorexia what do the parents say? They didn't see the warning signs?
Do they not have meals with their children? Do they not spend time with them to know if their eating habits have changed?
Does the media have full control over these children or does it have control over their parents?
Sometimes people need to look in the mirror. Change starts with you.
the picture of two naked women embracing as in this picture did not suggest anything to do with lesbians to you?
That is strange. I do not think that normal woman actually have pictures of themselves such as this one!
In any case, I am tired of this sort of thing. The fashion industry is unhealthy altogether, not just because it encourages the poor young women to be thin and become anorexic but because it is also full of narcissistic and homosexual people. It is run by such people. I do not think websites like sott.net needs to encourage homosexuality which is about as sick as one can be.
Help them sott.net - do not encourage them.
Anyway, any more of this sort of subtle propaganda for homosexuality and I will be gone from here. The standards have dropped dramatically over the last few months.
It is worth knowing that some people associated with SOTT are/might be gay so they won't go against homosexuality... Furthermore, the Cs say it is essentially natural for some people. Truth be told, if you read the forum section, there are some members who are openly gay and I have to say they are nice people...
I think as with any other image, there is the healthy side and pathological side... I think what you think is sick is the pathological side of homosexuality co-opted by the pathological elites and thrust back down to the populace... It is interesting to note that of late there has been a push of gay-ness in society and what it means to be gay through a multitude of TV Shows, movies, magazines etc. Same way through rom-coms they push the idea of what it means to love etc... They; popular culture, are also pushing the idea of the casual flings just friends for sex with no emotional attachment heavily as seen in some major blockbuster movies and tv shows of the past 12 months!!
What are they priming us for in the future one would ask? Truth be told, our lives and ideals are defined by culture and society and that in turn is defined by literature, art etc..
I'm with Joe and pjms9. None of you 'got' the article but instead you all veered off into homophobia. I don't believe SOTT stands either for or against homosexuality, but that isn't even the very real concern that is brought up by this article, which is how the fashion industry influences insecure women to starve themselves in order to supposedly appear attractive.
If you don't get that and instead choose to rail about homosexuality, I can only pity you, for about half a second, and hope that you get help for your psychological problems. And I agree with Joe, you can stop reading SOTT right now if you are tempted to post such hateful comments.
Sexual orientation isn't a choice, or a disease. It just is, and that has been well established. What's unhealthy is harboring concerns about other people's sexual orientation, as you three apparently do. That's not your business because it doesn't affect you personally. So don't try to tell other people what they may and may not do with their lives.
You wouldn't want anyone telling you who you're allowed to see and sleep with, so where do you imagine that you get to tell anyone else that? You can all take your fearful homophobia and go see a shrink, or maybe a hooker. Or perhaps a sex therapist - you get both in one.
I wouldn't be surprised if the buzz this particular issue has got is through some fancy PR work on the part of the organisation. One thing is for certain, as a result this mag will probably have more customers. Not bad, now beauty product manufacturers will be clamoring up to get there products into the mag and paying a good premium for it if I might add... Good all round business. Plus size women feel liberated and feel like they have a magazine that speaks directly to them and there issues, whilst industry manufacturers are happy they have a wider segment to target through this portal... Win win.
REAL WOMEN: What a load of bull crap. A term that looks to alienate a whole multitude of females just like the image being pushed by the fashion industry does. Women come in as much a variety as men in terms of size/shape and form. So what is this term REAL WOMEN meant to mean anyways?
The magazine that wrote this article is the democrats to the republicans, the labour to the conservative, the left to the right. Both defining the terms of the argument and debate, creating black and white images. Creating mental boxes and defining their limits, restricting creativity and thought... A whole load of BULLCRAP!
I don't deny that the fashion industry is tough to women especially... But I don't agree with this term Real Women.. It is a term that is or has been co-opted for nefarious needs.. A woman defined by the Plus Size of her body, a woman defined by her dislike of other women who don't fit her image, a woman whose main aim is to be the antagonist of the thin industry approved female... Where is the grey between the black and white?? Wouldn't it be ironic if there highest advertising contributors were mcdonalds, KFC and Pizza hut... They would have us believe that they can define the real female proto-type... I call BS!
Plus Model magazine: Don't look beyond the name, it says everything. They need the same dollars from the same contributors as there other industry approved partners.
"Twenty years ago the average fashion model weighed 8 percent less than the average woman. Today she weighs 23 percent less" and "most runway models meet the Body Mass Index physical criteria for Anorexia."
-How much of that percentage actually come from the obesity epidemic?
"When Jones first saw the images, shot by photographer Victoria Janashvili, her reaction was immediate and emotional."
-emotional reaction...we know a thing or two about such reactions don't we?
" "This is not about healthy vs. non-healthy women," Jones tells Fox411. " WELL IT SHOULD BE, because if it is not, it just confirms what is "this" about.... $$$$
"Jones added that the feature is simply about "those plus size women who do embrace their size and want to be treated, marketed to and accepted as equals." "
-In other words... every women should have the same right to be manipulated by the industry and targeted to become a consumer...nice!
REMEMBER: "The product is consuming."
Sick and twisted all the way, and women falling for this kind of BS and embracing such stances to justify their unhealthy habits are no better than anorexic models or fashion industry players, they are just the other side of the coin.
One step inside and you are bombarded by adverts for beauty products... It doesn't take long to realize the business model here.. There aim is to bring into the fold, women who feel alienated by the fashion industry and sell them the same products. It's not just clothes, we are talking other beauty products as well. Have a look round the website and see for yourself.
It is exactly like any other fashion industry approved website only instead of this having victoria secret models, it has plus size women... The motto is the same nonetheless: SELL, SELL, SELL.
All this other valiant stuff about the injustice of the industry I feel is just for show to win over emotions and approval of an alienated market segment and then do the deed; Push the Product.
What a load of hogwash. This is not liberating women: It is what you said:
-In other words... every women should have the same right to be manipulated by the industry and targeted to become a consumer...nice!
Yes we are trying to get people to pay attention. Do you have a problem with that? Do you think we should be trying to get people to NOT pay attention? John, if you don't like this site, you can go elsewhere. But you should think twice before deciding to throw spurious accusations around.
Lara quantifies the success on numbers or hits as she calls them... 450,000 - 10 million. As Lara also points out you spin the same info because it bumps the hits for newbie readers... Did I read LJ's post wrong?
Folks, I just want to point out that it was not until SOTT had turned it's attention to the issues of diet and health that the PTB actually took direct action against us in the form of a trumped up charge that we were inducing the French populace to - horror of horrors - use supplements, change their diets, get the psychopaths out of their lives and thus reduce their stress.
What does that tell you?
So now, we have a few prime examples of internet COINTELPRO agents whose job it is to make it look like this issue is not so important.
Guess again. I'm the one who was subjected to a 6.5 hour interrogation on December 15th, after 6 other members of my household had been interrogated as well. I KNOW what kinds of questions they were asking and now, having read the 2010 MIVILUDES report, I KNOW that keeping people unhealthy is the MAIN agenda of the whole system; because a physically and mentally weakened population is much easier to control.
Promoting ideas and ideals that underpin this agenda is a big part of how the MASSES of people are kept under control, and believe me, until the masses wake up, there is NO HOPE of any action on the part of anyone changing anything on our planet. With the masses still asleep, nothing you say or do will make an iota of difference no matter how true it is.
And thus, the SOTT focus on helping those who are still sleeping to get a clue, even if only a small one. And yes, that means we ARE concerned about numbers because social proof is extremely important to average human psychology.
As for those of you who see some "gay agenda" in the image on the article, that says more about you than anything else because the first thing I see is the difference between health and starvation.
Take your anti-gay agenda back to your enclave of Right Wing Authoritarians ruled by psychopaths.
I suspect that SOTT has banned a few disruptive people in the past, but it has attracted a larger readership lately and, unfortunately, some of them aren't helpful. I'd encourage SOTT to ban a more people from membership that enables them to comment on articles, as appropriate.
I've seen this before. When a blog or website that's for the people not the crooks becomes popular, suddenly nasty people show up to throw mud around and generally disrupt the forum. Alert and righteous folks who own such venues quickly take steps to exclude those interlopers.
I hope SOTT will have the sensitivity and the will to take such action.
clearly doesn't appreciate Sott.net, his ability to post has been limited to zero posts per day for the foreseeable future. This action is being taken in his own interest (since he clearly can't act in his own interest and stop visiting a site he does not appreciate). Go figure.
Hi Luke,
Most of your posts on this thread repeating that this PLUS magazine is benefitting. I look at this way. SOTT also publishes articles from cnn and mail etc. Does it mean sott endorses them. No. It is the TRUTH that sott endorses.
Tbf, this issue is also being directed at men as well, nowadays it is all about protein shakes to build muscle mass... Most guys I know are involved in that, drinking this stuff like it is milkshake! Is it really healthy?
So it appears there is an effort to destabilize both sexes within there bodies; not that this is news.
I mean, should advertising/film/fashion go back to beaming Anita Ekberg-type physical role models at women? [Link]
The phrase used in the headline "real women" is an obviously divisive bit of finger-wagging. Models are real women too. They're not droids.
Clothing manufactures get the same retail price for any given garment, no matter the size. And the amount of labor required to make those same garments remains pretty much the same for the full range of sizes too. But the amount of fabric it takes to make a garment can double for a plus sized woman.
As a result, the difference in profit margins from making plus sized garments to small represents many billions of dollars in the textile/fashion industries.
That's what drives the advertizing hype. It's all about the money. And they don't give a damn for the health of their customers.
As for me, I am far more attracted to a confident women who's comfortable in her skin than to one who has bought into all the fashion industry hype, and is suffering from all the health issues that go along with habitually starving herself.