PDA

View Full Version : Chloe, big boned Miss England or ominous harbringer of obesity doom?



pvicente
2008-Apr-07, 11:34 PM
I came across a fascinating article while surfing around.
Here it is (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=554870&in_page_id=1879), it looks like the latest edition of Miss England features an unusual contestant, Chloe Marshall, 17 years old and clearly overweight.
Now, usually I would think of a fat Miss Whatever as a funny but not very relevant factoid, something unusual but not worth losing some sleep over.
But this article manages to give the whole story a sinister and fascinating angle, as the author puts it:

She is an ambassador not for the beautiful larger lady as she'd have us believe but a poster girl for diabetes, strokes, heart attacks, cancers and all the other devastating and potentially fatal health problems that are caused or exacerbated by obesity.
The whole thing gave me a kind of "Dr. Strangelove" feeling, it reminds of the general's rants about the devious communist conspiracy and our precious bodily fluids. I do believe that being overweight might not be the best for your health, but I have trouble swallowing the idea that this girl should be pulled out of public view in a hurry before she corrupts people's minds with the idea that being fat is not the end of the world.
But I could be wrong, this could be the spearhead of the great devious communist (or islamist) conspiracy to corrupt our pure bodies with murderous fat, so what do you think?

Gillianren
2008-Apr-07, 11:47 PM
She's both big-boned and undeniably endowed with more fat than is healthy. However, I'm not sure anorexic is a better look.

Neverfly
2008-Apr-07, 11:54 PM
She's both big-boned and undeniably endowed with more fat than is healthy. However, I'm not sure anorexic is a better look.

I agree. I'm tired of the 'super model' super skinny image and just about everyone I know is too.

Doodler
2008-Apr-08, 04:20 AM
I agree. I'm tired of the 'super model' super skinny image and just about everyone I know is too.
Actually, thems not super model types (Crawford & Company were pretty well and comfortably stacked). Thems waifs. The same breed of androgyne that nearly cooked Calvin Kleins' goose when he stuck preteens in his ads because he liked their look.

Spacewriter
2008-Apr-08, 04:53 AM
I find the article and the commentary here to be pretty tasteless. Since when is it okay to put up a picture of a woman and then denigrate her for her looks?

When will the pics of fat guys get put up so we can slag them? And who's next after that?

Is this a road we really want to be going down? Judging anybody by their looks and making snide comments?

Sheesh, folks...

Neverfly
2008-Apr-08, 05:05 AM
I find the article and the commentary here to be pretty tasteless. Since when is it okay to put up a picture of a woman and then denigrate her for her looks?

When will the pics of fat guys get put up so we can slag them? And who's next after that?

Is this a road we really want to be going down? Judging anybody by their looks and making snide comments?

Sheesh, folks...

That's a good point too.
Anyone else ever notice how "family- type setting" commercials have some fruity, ugly overweight Dad and a Gorgeous Mom?

Are these producers desperately trying to condition society to think ugly guys make great husbands?

Ronald Brak
2008-Apr-08, 05:07 AM
She looks great. And that amount of fat on a woman is not a large health risk. Nothing compared to smoking, anyway. I suppose the person who is saying she is a bad role model would also say that beauty queen who was in a wheel chair was a bad role-model. After all, she was sending out a message that it's okay to have your spinal cord severed in an accident.

HenrikOlsen
2008-Apr-08, 01:00 PM
Since when is it okay to put up a picture of a woman and then denigrate her for her looks?
Sorry but if you're competing in a beauty contest, you're going to be criticized on looks.
Them's the breaks.

Had the picture been of her competing for chess champion, your objection would have been valid.

Doodler
2008-Apr-08, 02:45 PM
FYI, about girlie in the OP, she's perfectly attractive to me. When's her eighteenth?

Nadme
2008-Apr-08, 02:51 PM
Oh please. This isn't about health. Men want women to starve and punish themselves for not conforming to the Playboy aesthetic because "men deserve" a beautiful slim woman...even if he's not physically attractive himself.

We live in a sick society which routinely publically humiliates female celebrities for being "too thin!!!" or "too fat!!!" (10 pounds overweight is "too fat!!!").

Unfortunately a lot of stupid women fall for all this unrealistic b.s. hype.

Worry about your own danged weight and quit picking on other people.

Doodler
2008-Apr-08, 03:02 PM
Oh please. This isn't about health. Men want women to starve and punish themselves for not conforming to the Playboy aesthetic because "men deserve" a beautiful slim woman...even if he's not physically attractive himself.

We live in a sick society which routinely publically humiliates female celebrities for being "too thin!!!" or "too fat!!!" (10 pounds overweight is "too fat!!!").

Unfortunately a lot of stupid women fall for all this unrealistic b.s. hype.

Worry about your own danged weight and quit picking on other people.

Hey hey, careful where you wave those generalizations!!! You've already hit a few innocent targets just in this thread alone.

Maha Vailo
2008-Apr-08, 03:29 PM
She may need to lose a few kilos, but I must say that anyone who promotes a "sexy at any size" image is a wonderful woman in my book. Hats off to Chloe.

- Maha "3 cheers for the chunky" Vailo

CodeSlinger
2008-Apr-08, 03:36 PM
Wow, that article runneth over with vitriol. Would the author of that article attack under-weight models, since according to her logic they are poster girls for all the health problems that are caused or exacerbated by being under weight, with similar fervor? Somehow, I doubt it.

Ilya
2008-Apr-08, 03:45 PM
Oh please. This isn't about health. Men want women to starve and punish themselves for not conforming to the Playboy aesthetic because "men deserve" a beautiful slim woman...

Had you ever looked at Playboy? Women in skin magazines are invariably much better fed than the scarecrows on the runway, because that's what men actually find attractive! "Thin is beautiful" is basically a myth perpetuated by fashion industry. Blame it, not "men".

Neverfly
2008-Apr-08, 03:52 PM
Men never tell their daughters to watch their figure.
Mothers do.

Nadme- you got it all backwards.

You might want to step back and think- think HARD - about WHO actually does all the influencing about weight...

korjik
2008-Apr-08, 03:54 PM
I am sorry, but if she exercises regularly, then her weight is a smaller factor to her health than pretty much anything else, including just going outside on a sunny day. To label her as 'obese' really just shows how far off the labeling is.

Which is pretty much true. I came across the BMI equation a couple weeks ago and checked my BMI. Up around 30. So I reversed the equation and calculated my highest optimal weight. 210 lbs. I would have to lose 70 lbs to get there. That may sound like alot but consider that I am 6 foot 5. I am by pretty much any definition huge.

So I took a closer look at the BMI formula. Mass/height squared cannot take into account the fact that mass climbs as volume cubed at a minimum. The BMI index says that at a constant BMI and constant body form, a larger person must be less dense than a smaller one. That seems to be a rather fatal flaw in that system

Gillianren
2008-Apr-08, 04:47 PM
Men never tell their daughters to watch their figure.
Mothers do.

I'd suggest watching where we all fling the word "never." I've heard fathers say that, and I have a mother who didn't. Heck, I knew a little girl who came home from her grandparents' having learned the new phrase "I fat." Lots of people contribute to bad body image; the woman who wrote the article is one of them.

I will also note, Spacewriter, that I, at least, was not denigrating her because of her weight. I'd have to lose thirty pounds before I do that.

I will also note, Korjik, that the BMI doesn't work very well on women, because some of us have, um, larger fat deposits than the BMI is willing to take into account. Also hips. Again, I need to lose weight. But according to the BMI, I need to lose 90 pounds. That would make me start losing bone.

Fazor
2008-Apr-08, 05:01 PM
To me the rant in the article sounds more like a "We're tired of being blammed for women's health problems because we promote eating disorders and unhumanly skinny figures, so we're going to play the game and blame YOU for unheathy behavior!"

The fact is, people come in different shapes and sizes. Being overweight *can* have very negative consequenses on your health, but so can being too skinny. But you're never going to have 100% of the people be exactly their ideal weight.

Besides, as much as they kick and scream against it, pagents and titles like this are about "looking pretty". They say that's not what their promoting, but their actions scream of it. And as far as attractiveness goes, *I* for one think she's very pretty. I wouldn't go walking around in that two-piece more than I have to, but I don't look good in a bathing suit either, and I don't think that makes me ugly.

If they really want these kind of things to make a good, wholesome point, shouldn't that point be what you do and who you are are more important than what you look like?

Vermonter
2008-Apr-08, 05:19 PM
Well, I do agree on the skin mags. Most of the girls are filled out, and not twigs. I also agree about BMI being **. Now, I am overweight, but according to BMI I should weigh a max of 160. I'm 5'8" and weigh around 260, also working out a lot. Last time I weighed 200 was when I was in 7th grade playing soccer full time and running around all day. Granted, I have a large frame, and I do have a bigger gut, but still.

Damburger
2008-Apr-08, 08:58 PM
The Daily Mail is something you shouldn't be reading. There is a line between trashy tabloid and trashy tabloid that openly supported Fascism.

That said, in this rare case they kind of have a point. This girl doesn't appear to know the difference between curves and rolls. Obesity is a problem, and overreacting on unrealistic female body images in the media really isn't helping. I'm just surprised they managed to print an entire article without mentioning asylum seekers or house prices.

They did kind of demonstrate their journalistic disintegrity by mentioning BMI though. My BMI is around the same as her, and I don't look as round as she does at all.

jfribrg
2008-Apr-08, 09:09 PM
FYI, about girlie in the OP, she's perfectly attractive to me. When's her eighteenth?

Ditto. I'm not sure what definition of obese the author of the article is using, but that lady is definitely not obese. I'm not sure her weight would even qualify as unhealthy, but that depends on her body fat %. By pageant standards, yes she is probably twice as large as any of the others, but I took a good look at her legs (for clinical purposes only :) ), and they look to me to be very muscular. If she sat around eating twinkies all day, you would not have that kind of definition.

Damburger
2008-Apr-08, 09:12 PM
FYI, about girlie in the OP, she's perfectly attractive to me. When's her eighteenth?

Age of consent in this country is 16, so you are good to go. We also have some very nice and reasonably priced beer, which in my opinion you would need.

pvicente
2008-Apr-08, 10:44 PM
Oh please. This isn't about health. Men want women to starve and punish themselves for not conforming to the Playboy aesthetic because "men deserve" a beautiful slim woman...even if he's not physically attractive himself.

We live in a sick society which routinely publically humiliates female celebrities for being "too thin!!!" or "too fat!!!" (10 pounds overweight is "too fat!!!").

Unfortunately a lot of stupid women fall for all this unrealistic b.s. hype.

Worry about your own danged weight and quit picking on other people.
Have you considered the possibility that there is another motive besides men's alleged preference for thin bodies behind this, like profit, for example?
You see, I did some digging around after starting the thread and ook at what I found!
Here (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=554870&in_page_id=1879) we have poor Monica Grenffel worried sick about dastardly Chloe corrupting the youth, unleashing a wave of diabetes, heart attacks, etc, etc...
Things look bleak to the cause of good health, but wait! It looks like someone (http://www.monicagrenfell.co.uk/) is selling a set of helpful books like "Crash Diet" (http://www.monicagrenfell.co.uk/shop/product/3/crash-diet) and "Cellulite Buster" (http://www.monicagrenfell.co.uk/shop/product/8/cellulite-buster), how convenient... :whistle:

Darkwing
2008-Apr-09, 01:38 PM
I also agree about BMI being **. Now, I am overweight, but according to BMI I should weigh a max of 160. I'm 5'8" and weigh around 260, also working out a lot. Last time I weighed 200 was when I was in 7th grade playing soccer full time and running around all day. Granted, I have a large frame, and I do have a bigger gut, but still.

The BMI makes some certain assumptions, two of which are: That you live a sedentary lifestyle, and men tend to systematically overestimate their height. So people who have higher muscle to fat ratios, like athletes, will be "overweight" according to their BMI when they are in fact in good shape.

I'm 5'7" (being honest I'm really more like 5'6 1/2", but then, men tend to overestimate their heights, remember?), and I used to be 221 lbs. I looked at the BMI and found that, my max "healthy" weight was about 160. At 221 lbs. I was classed as "severely overweight". I thought that was total **. I felt a bit chubby but I didn't think I was "fat". I always had a large frame, or so I thought. There was no way, I thought, that I was 60 pounds overweight. 30 lbs maybe, but 60? No way. I played sports regularly and wasn't a total couch potato.

Then one day I just decided to get serious. I started exercising 40 minutes a day, 7 days a week. I restricted my caloric intake to ~1900 calories a day. I wasn't eating celery or anything, but I tried to eat some kind of vegetable every other day or so :) but for the most part I still ate the same kinds of junk food I always did. I just restricted it to no more than 2000 calories a day at most, on average about 1900.

Eight months later, I had lost 60 lbs, at a steady rate of about 2 lbs a week, and had reached 161 lbs. People at work began asking me if I had developed an eating disorder (no, I haven't). In talking to my doctor, he was very pleased that I had lost the weight, and asked me if I intended to lose any more (I think he might have been probing to see if I was going to go too far). I told him then that I thought I had reached my target weight, and that I didn't need to go any further. He agreed--if I was constantly exercising, having a BMI that's at the upper end of the "healthly range" is just fine.

Looking back on it, I can't believe that at 221 I thought I was only 30 lbs or so overweight. Having lost 60 lbs, I've seen the light now and realize that I was deluding myself. The BMI isn't the ** I used to think it was. You just have to interpret it properly and take the assumptions into account.

(sorry, that was kind of long winded)

Tobin Dax
2008-Apr-09, 02:14 PM
The BMI isn't the ** I used to think it was. You just have to interpret it properly and take the assumptions into account.
I'm going to politely disagree with that bold statement. I don't think that you did either. You went for it completely, no interpretation or assumption involved. Or am I misreading the fact that you now have a healthy BMI?

Darkwing
2008-Apr-09, 02:28 PM
My BMI has been hovering in the 25-27 range. 20-25 is supposedly considered "healthy", whereas 25-30 is "overweight." Since the assumption for the BMI is that a person is sedentary, if you are active, the "healthy" range should shift a little to compensate. So I might be BMI 26, but very active, so while the chart says I'm in the overweight range, I can assume that I'm really in the healthy range.

Wakenaam
2008-Apr-09, 02:41 PM
your BMI should also be considered with the type of exercise/activity you engage in....bodybuilders/weight lifters et al have higher BMIs w/low body fat....call them obese?

Neverfly
2008-Apr-09, 02:48 PM
I'm going to politely disagree with that bold statement. I don't think that you did either. You went for it completely, no interpretation or assumption involved. Or am I misreading the fact that you now have a healthy BMI?

Consider Grade Point Average in school.

Over-all, a high GPA doesn't mean a person is smart. Nor does it mean they have a good education or that it's well-rounded.
A high GPA doesn't mean they studied essentials either.

But for a quick glance, the GPA gives some idea as to whether or not you want to look deeper at a transcript.

When I was flunking classes in High school- I Cared... But I couldn't necessarily see results right away either.
If I worked hard on my algebra in freshmen year- my low F turned into a high F. Not much motivation there over the course of days or weeks.

But later, I began focusing on the GPA. Because it revealed immediate results.
I could calculate it out daily- and watch the numbers rise. Doing that enabled me to have daily goals- I went from failing to straight A's.

So, just because someone uses an indicator doesn't mean they totally find it justifiable or even. Just that it enabled them to monitor their progress.

Michael Noonan
2008-Apr-09, 03:27 PM
The only thing being expressed here is the bias of the reporter.

As a judge on last year's Miss England contest, I was hugely impressed, not just by the beauty but by the skills dedication and determination of the contestants.

For example, most had raised huge sums of money for their favourite charities. They shone out as young women to be admired.

To me this is just a rant by a person not qualified to judge health or the values of charitable worth of a contestant. Chloe is a beautiful and brave young lady.

So Monica is a judge and indicates a set of values based on the worst pageant values. Very little if anything is said about the health of the young lady. Why mention most contestants ability to raise money for charity? Monica's perception of fat is written in such a way that indicates Chloe didn't raise funds ... is that the case?

Ii is as if any show of fat negates the charitable aspect of pageants? Monica's article cheapens an honorable cause.

Musashi
2008-Apr-09, 03:51 PM
Chloe is overweight, but she is not fat and nowhere near obese. Even using the BMI, she is just barely overweight. If she lost 8 pounds she would be in the normal range. Would that make an appreciable difference in her appearance? Not really. This Monica woman would still be whining about "fat Chloe," she just wouldn't have the BMI to back her up. Or, more likely, she would just say that the BMI must be flawed if it allowed fatties like Chloe to be considered normal.

novaderrik
2008-Apr-09, 07:01 PM
i've come to the conclusion that the definition of what makes a woman "beautiful" is being crammed down our throats by people that have no real use for or interest in truly "beautiful" women..
the fashion world is, after all, pretty much dominated by gay men.
i'm not being anti gay here- i have nothing against gay people- but why do they get to tell us straight guys what we should think makes a woman beautiful?

Hornblower
2008-Apr-09, 11:22 PM
So I took a closer look at the BMI formula. Mass/height squared cannot take into account the fact that mass climbs as volume cubed at a minimum. The BMI index says that at a constant BMI and constant body form, a larger person must be less dense than a smaller one. That seems to be a rather fatal flaw in that system

It may not be that simple. My eyes tell me that for a given fat percentage, taller people on average tend to have a greater height to girth ratio, sort of like an El Greco figure. I think the height squared formula is pretty close.

What is a bummer in my opinion is assuming an ideal weight for a particular height without allowing for large variations in bone and muscle size. While I was in the Army, they wised up and started doing just that. If one is over the screening weight for his height, measurements are taken of the neck and waist, and the fat percentage is estimated from the ratio of those measurements. If that number is under the regulation limit you are acceptable regardless of your actual weight. It is not completely accurate in all cases but it is better than rejecting a physically fit soldier who happens to be structurally stockier than average.

Doodler
2008-Apr-09, 11:28 PM
i've come to the conclusion that the definition of what makes a woman "beautiful" is being crammed down our throats by people that have no real use for or interest in truly "beautiful" women..
the fashion world is, after all, pretty much dominated by gay men.
i'm not being anti gay here- i have nothing against gay people- but why do they get to tell us straight guys what we should think makes a woman beautiful?

rAmen

Lord Jubjub
2008-Apr-10, 12:22 AM
BMI standards have changed. If I remember right, the BMI first came out with overweight at 27-28 and obese at 35. Then some studies showed that there is a very slightly increased chance of heart attack for BMIs between 25 and 27, so the limit was dropped to their current states.

I think that rankings of BMI should be as follows:

<19 Anorexic (health problems likely from too little fat)
19-21 Underweight (healthy but having no reserves)
21-25 Healthy (having some reserves and no elevated risk)
25-28 Chunky (sufficient reserves to maintain health with a slightly elevated risk)
28-30 Overweight (risks from excessive fat begins to outweigh benefits of a fat reserve)
30-35 Very Overweight (considerable risk to health and happiness)
>36 Obese (should be experiencing serious limitations to health)

Delvo
2008-Apr-10, 01:26 AM
While I was in the Army, they wised up and started doing just that. If one is over the screening weight for his height, measurements are taken of the neck and waist, and the fat percentage is estimated from the ratio of those measurements. If that number is under the regulation limit you are acceptable regardless of your actual weight.Interesting... I once inquired about a construction job that turned out to be a Navy construction job, which meant the hirees needed to meet the same standards as a sailor or ROTC enlistee or such because the Navy uses "its own" people instead of outside private contracting companies, which meant I was technically applying to join the Navy instead of a construction company. They rejected me over the phone based on my height and weight alone and said there were no tests I'd be allowed to take to demonstrate my actual health status and capacity for exertion. Height and weight were all there was to it. (Part of the reason I remembered this phone call was that at one point, when asking about performance tests, I actually literally said "I'm not fat, I'm just..." and then paused because I had suddenly realized that there was no way I could finish that sentence without the sentence being a cliché, a standard fat-people denial about being fat. :D)

Maksutov
2008-Apr-10, 04:28 AM
Is a "harbringer" someone who brings about the predictions indicated by a "harbinger"? http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/566/iconwink6tn.gif

BOT, I've had a few really skinny girlfriends and a number who were pleasantly plump. The latter were preferable to the former, for many reasons, including (oink, oink) physical ones.

Meanwhile, I don't know, there's something about that picture that looks "doctored"...

Musashi
2008-Apr-10, 06:13 AM
Turns out that Chloe is actually only 2 pounds away from a "normal" BMI. Contrary to Ms. Grenfell's accusation, Chloe does exercise regularly and eats a healthy diet. I am beginning to think that Grenfell was just craving some attention. Maybe she has a book coming out or something.

Perhaps Grenfell, "an internationally-renowned nutritionist", would be happier with Marianne Berglund (BMI 16.1)? She's the one on the right, next to another "too fat" model, size 12 Jen Hunter (5'10" and 154 pounds):

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2006/11/jen261106_358x450.jpg

Neverfly
2008-Apr-10, 08:15 AM
I am beginning to think that Grenfell was just craving some attention. Maybe she has a book coming out or something.
This one was nailed here (http://www.bautforum.com/1213297-post23.html)...



http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2006/11/jen261106_358x450.jpg

The picture on the right is ......... scary....:neutral:

Michael Noonan
2008-Apr-10, 09:51 AM
Perhaps the fashion elite are just suffering some industry caused blindness. From a clothing point of view fabric is best presented as seen in the shops on clothes racks.

When did it happen that the lady had to adjust to the clothing? Oh that's right, it's been that way for hundreds of years. Shoes most likely.

Was it ever the responsibility of the clothing to assist the woman to look beautiful?

HenrikOlsen
2008-Apr-10, 11:52 AM
Was it ever the responsibility of the clothing to assist the woman to look beautiful?
Ever since the first person made the first garment for a woman that has been one of the functions of clothes.

Here's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egtved_Girl) an reconstruction of the dress worn by a girl buried in a coffin from 1370BC (yes, it's known to the year).
It's difficult to claim that wasn't made to assist:)

Ilya
2008-Apr-10, 12:40 PM
(Part of the reason I remembered this phone call was that at one point, when asking about performance tests, I actually literally said "I'm not fat, I'm just..." and then paused because I had suddenly realized that there was no way I could finish that sentence without the sentence being a cliché, a standard fat-people denial about being fat. :D)

How about "I am not fat, I am a bodybuilder"?

HenrikOlsen
2008-Apr-10, 12:48 PM
How about "I am not fat, I am a bodybuilder"?
Have you ever seen a bodybuilder when they're not slimmed down to competition buff?

They're chubby.

Michael Noonan
2008-Apr-10, 01:15 PM
Ever since the first person made the first garment for a woman that has been one of the functions of clothes.

Here's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egtved_Girl) an reconstruction of the dress worn by a girl buried in a coffin from 1370BC (yes, it's known to the year).
It's difficult to claim that wasn't made to assist:)

Great choice of article HenrikOlsen,

This is a burial of a young mother and child. Clearly the clothes and other items would be chosen with love. The clothing is functional and beautiful.

I doubt that function is considered in high fashion. In which case the living suffer greater indignity for beauty than the dead.

Abbadon_2008
2008-Apr-10, 01:16 PM
Had you ever looked at Playboy? Women in skin magazines are invariably much better fed than the scarecrows on the runway, because that's what men actually find attractive! "Thin is beautiful" is basically a myth perpetuated by fashion industry. Blame it, not "men".



Agreed. Adult models -- those in men's mags -- are far curvier than runway models. In the fashion industry -- whish is rife with gay men, BTW -- models are simply mobile clothes racks. Skinny tall, shaped very much like adolescent males.:mad:

I never cared for the at all. Heidi Klum and Tyra Banks are exceptions, because they EAT!

I'm not gay-bashing! Just pointing out that the males in that industry clearly don't admire women in the same way as I do.



Now, Ms. Marshall, the Fat Queen... http://img150.imagevenue.com/loc1153/th_33020_chloePIN1903_468x702_123_1153lo.jpg (http://img150.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=33020_chloePIN1903_468x702_123_1153l o.jpg).isn't all that fat. Chunky, by some standards, but LOVELY, IMO.

If I was at a party, and saw her across the room, I'd put my heaping plate of hotwings, lumpia, and nachos aside, and chat her up with no problem. She has a beautiful face and killer smile. And once she turned 18....Yee-Haaa!!!!

Gillianren
2008-Apr-10, 04:31 PM
All I'm going to say on that particular subject is that you don't have to be gay in order to have a different bodily ideal in women than you guys have, and that not all gay men think the same thing is pretty--many of my male friends think I'm lovely (not bragging; just an example), and as I said, I'd have to lose pounds--stones--before I could criticize that woman's weight. Of course, just about everyone I know, male and female, gay and straight, thinks my friend Shanti's beautiful, and she's 4'11" and never weighs more than about 98 pounds.

The thing is, some of us really do have big bones. While I do carry plenty of extra padding, it's not evenly distributed, but my body still looks relatively proportionate. Yeah, it's become obvious that I need to lose weight, but I wouldn't have to lose much before it wasn't.

Darkwing
2008-Apr-10, 05:22 PM
Re: padding...once I lost some extra padding, I noticed two things: Hard chairs are more uncomfortable, and bumping your elbows (on a door jamb, say) hurts a lot more than it used to!

Nicholas_Bostaph
2008-Apr-10, 08:55 PM
Since no one else has said it yet, I'll take a moment to:

As a professional photographer I want to take a moment to say that the bikini photo in the link was either setup specifically to make her look bad, or taken by the most incompetent photographer they could find. The main light is far too strong compared to the fill (if there even is a fill), resulting in excessive shadowing contrast. It also has a far different color temperature, which is what causes the weird coloration and harsh appearance of her skin and face. This coloration, in a low resolution picture like that, tends to look a lot like splotchy skin or 'spider veins'. It's possible the photographer was using their flash in low ambient lighting, but any amateur would have known they needed to use a gel if they actually wanted a flattering shot.

In short, this photo makes her look both heavier and less pleasant, than she would in real life (or other contestants would in flattering photos).

Amber Robot
2008-Apr-10, 10:28 PM
It seems to me that the BMI may only be useful in a statistical sense, i.e., when applied to a population. Applying a single number indicator like this to an individual is like saying all women who wear a size 6 are the exact same shape and size. It may work in an average sense, but it won't take into account peculiar variations of the individual.

Solfe
2008-Apr-10, 11:12 PM
Chloe's main issue is that childrens clothing sizes start at 6-9 months, 9-12, etc., etc. Then they jump to Toddler-2, T-3, T-4 and so on.

For men, things change after T sizes, things are measured in inches. For women, they just keep the same size for life, they just drop the "T" at the begining.

Should I ever lose my job, I am going to open a women's clothing store called "It's all a two"; I will label everything size two and arrange the clothing by actual size - smallest in the front, largest in the back.

Solfe

Neverfly
2008-Apr-10, 11:30 PM
Should I ever lose my job, I am going to open a women's clothing store called "It's all a two"; I will label everything size two and arrange the clothing by actual size - smallest in the front, largest in the back.

Solfe

I think a lot of stores are already doing that:think:

Noclevername
2008-Apr-11, 12:31 AM
Oh please. This isn't about health. Men want women to starve and punish themselves for not conforming to the Playboy aesthetic because "men deserve" a beautiful slim woman...even if he's not physically attractive himself.

We live in a sick society which routinely publically humiliates female celebrities for being "too thin!!!" or "too fat!!!" (10 pounds overweight is "too fat!!!").

Unfortunately a lot of stupid women fall for all this unrealistic b.s. hype.

Worry about your own danged weight and quit picking on other people.


Don't blame the guys. It's only the ones who promote the images that should be held responsible, not all men (or women). (The men who work for fashion mags generally don't care for women anyway).

Delvo
2008-Apr-11, 01:52 AM
As a professional photographer I want to take a moment to say that the bikini photo in the link was either setup specifically to make her look bad, or taken by the most incompetent photographer they could find.It even had me checking the straight-line features in the background for curvature, on the suspicion that they'd used a weird focal length for a mild fisheye effect.

Nicholas_Bostaph
2008-Apr-11, 03:38 PM
It even had me checking the straight-line features in the background for curvature, on the suspicion that they'd used a weird focal length for a mild fisheye effect.

I hadn't thought of that, but I don't think they even had to. 'Weight' in pictures is often a bit of an illusion. By softening skintones, removing blemishes, and syncing light temperatures, you can draw the viewers attention away from the things many will unconsciously blame on extra weight. Doing the exact opposite, like they did here, works to place emphasis on the extra weight she does have.

Look at the pictures further down the page. If you had seen just them, would you have had nearly the same reaction as when you saw that first bikini shot? It's not just because she has more clothes on in them...

The Supreme Canuck
2008-Apr-11, 04:08 PM
Don't blame the guys. It's only the ones who promote the images that should be held responsible, not all men (or women). (The men who work for fashion mags generally don't care for women anyway).

Thank you!

Gillianren
2008-Apr-11, 04:34 PM
Sigh.

Guys, straight men have a certain amount of say in fashion, too, simply by definition. Fashion exists to attract a mate. If it doesn't work, women won't wear the fashionable clothes. Which means straight men must take a certain amount of responsibility as well. And I've known straight men who like them some toothpicks. I knew a staright man who thought that the well-muscled woman in Starship Troopers was fat, for heaven's sake. Blaming gay men for societal views of women is blinding yourselves to the truth. Fashion only works if straight men like it as well.

And I assure you that it's much harder to find any clothes at all in plus size than it is in any other bodily configuration, including petite (under 5'4") and maternity.

The Supreme Canuck
2008-Apr-11, 05:00 PM
Guys, straight men have a certain amount of say in fashion, too, simply by definition.

Whoops. In my last post I meant to cut the quote off before the second set of parentheses.

Amber Robot
2008-Apr-11, 05:34 PM
Fashion exists to attract a mate. If it doesn't work, women won't wear the fashionable clothes. Which means straight men must take a certain amount of responsibility as well. .

Ah, if only this were true. Fashion exists to sell clothing. That's why fashion changes over time, even if it changes for the worse. Then you have to run out and buy more clothing, even it makes you look bad. They then convince you that if you don't wear the clothing you won't be fashionable.

Somewhere in the whole mess there might actually be something about attracting mates, but it doesn't appear to be a high priority in the fashion industry. Especially when current fashion is to have pants that ride so low that they can make healthy women look fat.

Gillianren
2008-Apr-11, 08:57 PM
Ah, if only this were true. Fashion exists to sell clothing. That's why fashion changes over time, even if it changes for the worse. Then you have to run out and buy more clothing, even it makes you look bad. They then convince you that if you don't wear the clothing you won't be fashionable.

Somewhere in the whole mess there might actually be something about attracting mates, but it doesn't appear to be a high priority in the fashion industry. Especially when current fashion is to have pants that ride so low that they can make healthy women look fat.

Fashion has existed for thousands of years. For quite a lot of those years, it didn't change quickly. Further, it has often been the case that physical preferences varied over time. In Western Europe in the 14th Century, women wore dresses that made them look pregnant. (Well, women who weren't, you know, wearing clothes they could work in.) If it didn't successfully attract a mate, it wouldn't've lasted that long. Likewise, in the '70s, women completely rejected what they were told was a good new look for them. And, finally, a lot of fashion designers are women and straight men, despite what you lot seem to think.

Delvo
2008-Apr-11, 09:27 PM
If there are so many different forms that can still serve the same function, then form can't possibly be following function. The function has nothing in particular to say about what the form should be.

GeorgeLeRoyTirebiter
2008-Apr-11, 09:27 PM
I can't understand blaming the fashion industry for it, either. There's no advantage to them by giving half the population a negative body image. "Hey, fatty, you'll never be thin enough to wear this dress! [evil cackle]," just isn't going to sell many dresses.

There is, however, a huge financial incentive for the people who sell diet books, programs, foods ("half the calories at twice the price!"), etc. to make as many people as possible unhappy about their weight, because they can then claim to be offering a solution to that unhappiness.

pvicente
2008-Apr-11, 11:34 PM
Is a "harbringer" someone who brings about the predictions indicated by a "harbinger"? http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/566/iconwink6tn.gif

Ooops, I thought that "harbringer" was the logical choice, that it was somehow connected with "bring something" or something like that... :o


BOT, I've had a few really skinny girlfriends and a number who were pleasantly plump. The latter were preferable to the former, for many reasons, including (oink, oink) physical ones.
I do agree with that, actually I've got a girlfriend that is a bit on the plump side, and I would never trade her for any of those stupid skinny fashion industry models. ;)
But I do pity those poor girls, they starve and sacrifice themselves for the "privilege" of wearing some of the most ugly, stupid, weird rags that I have ever seen. Actually I think that the "fashion industry" is more or less the same thing as some works of "modern art", stupid pointless crap created for "insiders" and critics.

Lord Jubjub
2008-Apr-12, 12:11 AM
If I can see the top of the pelvic girdle, :eek:, I tend to think starving Africans, not sexy models.

novaderrik
2008-Apr-12, 12:18 AM
i don't think anyone ever blamed "fashion" on gay men- just the "fashion industry". gay men, it seems, have way too much say in what the latest "fashions" are, at least according to the industry.
but, the thing is, i never see anyone wearing anything even remotely like what shows up in the so-called "fashion" magazines. maybe it's because i live out in the middle of nowhere- but i don't think so. even on my trips to the bigger metro areas of MN, i still see women wearing clothes that look normal. and most of the women have at least some curves- those that look like "supermodels" stick out like a sore thumb. but, of course, this IS Minnesota, and we do like us our food up here...
i agree with pvicente, the whole "fashion industry" is just sort of like one huge insider thing- almost a joke that only the people directly involved "get". either that, or it is just art.

eugenek
2008-Apr-12, 12:45 PM
That's a good point too.
Anyone else ever notice how "family- type setting" commercials have some fruity, ugly overweight Dad and a Gorgeous Mom?

Are these producers desperately trying to condition society to think ugly guys make great husbands?

According to my wife, we do. However, I'm not sure what you mean by "fruity". I shower on every 31st of the month so I doubt I smell or anything.

Noclevername
2008-Apr-13, 05:31 AM
Sigh.

Guys, straight men have a certain amount of say in fashion, too, simply by definition. Fashion exists to attract a mate. If it doesn't work, women won't wear the fashionable clothes. Which means straight men must take a certain amount of responsibility as well. And I've known straight men who like them some toothpicks. I knew a staright man who thought that the well-muscled woman in Starship Troopers was fat, for heaven's sake. Blaming gay men for societal views of women is blinding yourselves to the truth. Fashion only works if straight men like it as well.


WHOAH, major miscommunication! I was not "blaming gay men", I was blaming the fashion industry, which happens to include a sizeable number of gay men and bitter, old women, many of them past-their-prime former models who grew up in that hypercompetitive world. Any tiny minority that sets distorted and, for those not born with certain rare genes, unhealthy and unattainable beauty standards for mass-media constant reinforcement to impressionable young girls deserves a round of booing.

And straight men have very loose standards on the whole. Yes, there are some who buy into the whole "waif culture", but only because that culture exists to be bought into. Men also bought into Rubinesque beauty when that was fashionable, too. As did women. People learn habits, and attraction is influenced by the images you're most often presented with.

Doodler
2008-Apr-13, 11:14 AM
Fashion only works if straight men like it as well.

Like Hell it does.

Last time I checked, these dweebs were catering to a bunch of effete avante garde fashion snobs who's tastes in clothes had absolutely nothing to do with any woman I've seen walking down a street, lately, even in high dollar burbs of Northeast DC.

Half the time I see these Auschwitz wannabes trotting down the stage, I think they have more in common with circus clowns than high class women...the other half, I can make educated guesses about the amount of blow the designer snuffed at the club the night before.

pzkpfw
2008-Apr-13, 11:52 AM
...I can make educated guesses about the amount of blow the designer snuffed at the club the night before.

You know that's why they need flat models, don't you?

Doodler
2008-Apr-13, 01:04 PM
I fear I cannot answer that response in any manner that would be appropriate for a family board.

All I can say is that my answer would not have been hostile to you, and that the answer I have in mind is making my cheeks hurt from the grin...:)

laurele
2008-Apr-13, 05:18 PM
I applaud Chloe for her courage in standing up to artificial norms set by the fashion industry whose sole motive is to sell clothing. In economics, scarcity makes something a commodity. Since most women do not fit the "supermodel" 5'10" and 110 pounds description, those who do qualify as the "scarce commodity." Conditioned to believe that look constitutes the ideal of beauty, women of normal sizes will desire it and buy into the whole diet industry. A lot of people are making big bucks from promoting an artificial standard of beauty. I'm guessing many of them are PO'd that a 17-year-old is showing them up as frauds and setting a healthier example for women everywhere. If women suddenly stopped buying into this looking like a concentration camp survivor is beautiful thing, a lot of people in the fashion and diet industries would see their profits plummet.

From the pictures, it's obvious Chloe isn't even fat, just on the high end of normal. I doubt she's at the point of being at risk for heart attack and stroke. Like others here have said, very few columnists have discussed the health risks of being dangerously underweight.

Also, being somewhat overweight does not always mean a person eats too much or is lazy. Some people's bodies naturally gravitate to a certain size. I was never very thin and as a teenager had to deal with people judging my very normal body as problematic. Today, I'm a size 14 even though I don't eat a lot and in fact have a gastrointestinal disorder. My blood pressure is consistently normal. As an actress, when I got my first professional headshots, the photographer made a comment to the effect of, I should choose to be either thin or fat because this "in between thing" wouldn't get me anywhere. Considering that the "in between thing" equates to a normal body, that's quite a telling statement.

Kaptain K
2008-Apr-13, 06:18 PM
OK, nobody's said it and it may be considered crude by some but my first thought when I saw Chloe was "I wouldn't throw her out for eating crackers in bed!"

Tobin Dax
2008-Apr-13, 09:51 PM
OK, nobody's said it and it may be considered crude by some but my first thought when I saw Chloe was "I wouldn't throw her out for eating crackers in bed!"
As you said, it would be considered crude. However, I don't disagree.
I've not made a reply/post or two, as I don't think that taking the conversation is that direction is appropriate on BAUT. This is the essentially the same reason I haven't said what K said or (politely) taken that idea further.

Neverfly
2008-Apr-13, 11:11 PM
As you said, it would be considered crude. However, I don't disagree.
I've not made a reply/post or two, as I don't think that taking the conversation is that direction is appropriate on BAUT. This is the essentially the same reason I haven't said what K said or (politely) taken that idea further.

Yet many of us were thinking it;)

Sometimes you just gotta be blunt and crude.

I agree with Kaptain K too. She looks just fine. But all of that is just appearances anyway- the big question would be: What is she Like as a PERSON?

I think this story can make a good example of pointing out: There is more to a person than anyones opinion about looks. And more to attraction than any set standard.

Noclevername
2008-Apr-13, 11:17 PM
I agree with Kaptain K too. She looks just fine. But all of that is just appearances anyway- the big question would be: What is she Like as a PERSON?

I think this story can make a good example of pointing out: There is more to a person than anyones opinion about looks. And more to attraction than any set standard.

For dating, yes. For a beauty contest...?

HenrikOlsen
2008-Apr-13, 11:21 PM
OK, nobody's said it and it may be considered crude by some but my first thought when I saw Chloe was "I wouldn't throw her out for eating crackers in bed!"
I would, but then I'm overly sensitive to irritants such as crumbs and similar to the point where a single grain of sand is enough to keep me from sleeping.

Neverfly
2008-Apr-13, 11:51 PM
For dating, yes. For a beauty contest...?

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder;)

Actually, I think she was pretty nice to look at...


I would, but then I'm overly sensitive to irritants such as crumbs and similar to the point where a single grain of sand is enough to keep me from sleeping.

So does your wife seed the bed with sand hoping for pearls?

Tobin Dax
2008-Apr-14, 12:10 AM
I agree with Kaptain K too. She looks just fine. But all of that is just appearances anyway- the big question would be: What is she Like as a PERSON?
Exactly.

Big Bad Boo
2008-Apr-14, 07:09 AM
Ok, so I have an odd point of view on this.

I am a mixture of things, one of them is a fashion designer. Well, kinda of sort of. (I make clothes from cheap fabric, but I just got a brand new sewing machine! :D) Anyway, my goal is not to make clothes only rail thin girls.

(Face it- America's Next Top Model is not realistic. Most runway models retire from the runway at about 23 years old and go to catalog or editorials instead.)

My goal when I make my clothing is to have clothing for every type of woman. Imagine this: A store that has their sections divided by height and weight. Petite and plus sized? There'll be a section of clothes that'll compliment that (Like empire waist blouses, medium sized prints, and straight-legged pants.) What about average everything? There'll be a section for that. You want to downplay your butt? Look for the rack in your section that says "Reign in Your Rump" (or something like that; some people may not appreciate the humor.)

But some people have got to realize that there are, naturally, long and lean people out there. Example, my cousin. She's 14 years old. About 6'1" tall and a natural size zero. And she looks healthy. She can out eat a horse (and does so, frequently.) Some people (who are average and/or plus sized) don't appreciate that it can be also very difficult for someone to be skinny. And some of the nastier ones assume that if you're a size zero you MUST be doing something unhealthy to be that way.

It broke my heart when my cousin called me (she never calls me, by the way) sobbing uncontrollably because kids at her school spread the rumor that she's bulimic when one of them heard her throwing up in the bathroom after lunch. You know why she was throwing up?

Because she was gone for about 4 days with HORRIBLE food poisoning and still suffered from some ill effects.

But, since she was skinny, people though she had to be lying to cover up. It only escalated from there.

So my store will have everything for everyone, including the size zeros.

But anyway, I'm also trying to break into the acting and modeling industry. Yes, I do see the girls who only eat one container of yogurt once a day. And I agree, it's not healthy. But some plus sized models aren't setting a good example either. One girl I met, who was a size 15, said she ate some insane about of calories EVERY HOUR to keep her shape. (And believe me, it wasn't fruit. Think twinkies. Lots of twinkies.)

But then there are the people who gravitate towards a certain size (like what laurele said.) Me, I gravitate towards a size 8. Not skinny by the industry standards, but I have had more that one agent/casting director/whatever say that I can be damn sexy, cute, and leading lady (girl?) material if I try. So what does that mean when someone from the industry says that when I am not skinny by their standards?

So, all in all, I have a very mixed view on this. But to sum it up I think bodies are beautiful if they're healthy- be it party-ready-plump to turn-it-up-thin.

(Although I would like to point out that if you can't get through a normal doorway, or if someone can touch their index fingers and thumbs around your waist, you've got a problem.)

novaderrik
2008-Apr-14, 08:09 AM
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder;)

sometimes, beauty is in the eye of the beerholder..

Maksutov
2008-Apr-14, 10:24 AM
sometimes, beauty is in the eye of the beerholder..:lol:

At least until the next morning...

Ilya
2008-Apr-14, 04:09 PM
sometimes, beauty is in the eye of the beholder;)

That cage (?) looks rather beautiful to me. And look at the reflection in the central eye!

Swift
2008-Apr-14, 07:03 PM
That cage (?) looks rather beautiful to me. And look at the reflection in the central eye!
Ok, everyone in this thread roll a saving throw...

Neverfly
2008-Apr-14, 08:05 PM
Is that a scarab in the cage?

Gillianren
2008-Apr-15, 12:33 AM
Ok, everyone in this thread roll a saving throw...

San loss! San loss!

Noclevername
2008-Apr-15, 03:42 PM
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder;)


In a B-contest, the judges are the beholders. No matter what everyone else thinks, their standards determine the winners. And given that most judges in these contests are fashion industry or showbiz insiders, guess what, their standards are not those of Joe Average.

Doodler
2008-Apr-15, 05:29 PM
I think an average person kinda fails to grasp the criterion that a pageant judge uses. I've seen some drop dead gorgeous, bring me a drool bucket so I can watch her just breathe, beautiful women get gutted by judges for the nitpickiest details of her anatomy. Not even the obvious things, I mean the characteristics of hair, skin texture, having moles, or too asymmetrical a face (and I've got damned good eyes and barely noticed that one...). This isn't your first impression kind of analysis. Thwy're unbelievably unforgiving.

Gemini
2008-Apr-15, 05:45 PM
Agreed. Adult models -- those in men's mags -- are far curvier than runway models. In the fashion industry -- whish is rife with gay men, BTW -- models are simply mobile clothes racks. Skinny tall, shaped very much like adolescent males.:mad:

I never cared for the at all. Heidi Klum and Tyra Banks are exceptions, because they EAT!

I'm not gay-bashing! Just pointing out that the males in that industry clearly don't admire women in the same way as I do.



Now, Ms. Marshall, the Fat Queen... http://img150.imagevenue.com/loc1153/th_33020_chloePIN1903_468x702_123_1153lo.jpg (http://img150.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=33020_chloePIN1903_468x702_123_1153l o.jpg).isn't all that fat. Chunky, by some standards, but LOVELY, IMO.

If I was at a party, and saw her across the room, I'd put my heaping plate of hotwings, lumpia, and nachos aside, and chat her up with no problem. She has a beautiful face and killer smile. And once she turned 18....Yee-Haaa!!!!

"Fat -Bottomed girls you make the rockin' world go 'round"- Queen :)

Noclevername
2008-Apr-15, 07:53 PM
"Fat -Bottomed girls you make the rockin' world go 'round"- Queen :)

And don't forget that timeless classic, Baby Got Back.

Doodler
2008-Apr-16, 12:06 AM
And don't forget that timeless classic, Baby Got Back.

/gangsign

;):p