Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue features its first-ever plus-size model

Quote by Dancing_Doll
I've been waiting a while to post my own thoughts on this one because I didn't want to unfairly steer the convo or discussion in one way or another. The post was really meant to provoke thought on the whole concept of female beauty in the industry with that ever-underlying vein of debate over 'personality vs looks', and judgment - for one viewpoint or another.

Straight up, if I was running the marketing or PR at SI, Dove, Maxim, Vogue or Playboy, I'd only be after maximum profits. If I knew that bald guys with handlebar moustaches in speedos would sell the maximum number of mag copies or products, that's what I'd feature. It would have little to do with what I personally find attractive in my own life. Clearly ads are geared toward the majority of whatever that demographic finds aesthetically pleasing.

When it comes to SI... the models are chosen to appeal to a very specific demographic of guys, which is a readership of 78% male, with a median age of 37 yrs old, and an average income of 60K. The majority want to see the best of the best, the fit hotties, the 'dream girls' that they maybe don't get a chance to date or have sex with in regular life. They are practically biologically programmed to respond to healthy bodies in their prime. I think Ashley Graham is a beautiful girl, but I'm not offended that bigger girls are often excluded from these types of magazines. They feature what sells.

I've seen this questioned in the past and how mainstream beauty images are blamed on the industry and that only featuring fit, beautiful people in mags, hollywood movies, and advertisements somehow fosters or warps our own impressions of what we find attractive. That if there was more representation of body types and looks, that we, as a society, would become more all-inclusive and accepting and more likely to focus on the inside rather than the outside.

For the most part I disagree with this argument, with one caveat. Extreme versions of beauty do have the capability of distorting younger minds (particularly of teenage girls). They have yet to understand that fashion and beauty is sold as a fantasy and in efforts to differentiate, images can be taken to bizarre levels. I think the industry has made an effort to curb the 'glamour' of eating disorders in recent years, but they have yet to cut down on the photoshopping - which I personally think makes images less attractive. The more glossy they make the photos, the more the models start to appear computer-generated and they all start looking the same.

I think it also speaks to the irony that many mainstream women's magazines have chosen to feature a 'plus-sized' model on their covers in recent years only to find that those issues aren't selling as successfully compared to issues featuring typical models. So, women aren't buying into it either, despite lots of PC lip-service about wanting diversity. Money talks, so you can't blame the magazines or industry for not featuring more body diversity if consumers aren't responding to it. Ultimately we drive these industries, not the other way around.

As an off-topic observation - I do find it interesting that many people ardently subscribe to the idea that looks don't (and shouldn't) matter and that it's only about the personality and heart of a person etc. yet they would feel totally comfortable putting down the looks of a certain segment of the population and being totally exclusionary (eg. this guy or girl is too muscular, that girl is too skinny, she has implants - blech!, she wears too much makeup, there's nothing to hold onto etc). If looks don't matter, why would it be ok to bash any of these people either? Maybe they're wonderful, smart people with a heart of gold. How is it any different than saying someone wouldn't date an overweight person or a guy with a small dick etc?

A couple of years ago, I made a thread about breast implants in the 'Ask the Guys' and I remember reading the answers and opinions over the years which were about 95% negative with many mean-spirited comments about how disgusting it was and one guy even went so far as to say that he wouldn't even be *friends* with a woman who had breast implants. Nobody said a word to the contrary or got their back up at all. But if anyone were to say they refused to be friends with overweight people, I'm pretty sure they'd get a healthy dose of forum-smackdown.

I think it's just something worth thinking about when people put out there that skinny girls are just a bag of bones or how unattractive their bodies are, or how fake breasts = fake girl and it's a total turn off, while feeling virtuous or morally superior about stating a preference for an all-natural thick and curvy girl that at the heart of it, they're really no different than the people saying that want a fit guy or girl with a beautiful face. Skinny-bashing can hurt the feelings of a naturally thin girl that doesn't put on weight easily just as much as fat-bashing hurts bigger girls that are having trouble losing the pounds. And saying how revolting someone finds breast implants probably doesn't go over well with women who are post-mastectomy or were just looking for that extra boost of self-confidence and went up one cup-size.

Looks do factor into attraction. There's nothing wrong with being into one look and not another. And whatever criteria you go by doesn't make you more or less superficial than another person's criteria. Saying "personality is the only thing that matters" is a fair opinion, but you have to live by that one with zero judgment and zero preference. When it comes down to it - let's be real - very few do.

Anyway - good discussion in this thread from everyone. I've enjoyed reading the different viewpoints so far!