…or merely annoying? Yes, this is coming from someone who, at one point, ran a petite-focused blog (Shorty Stories is technically still “live” but no longer updates). I follow several Facebook pages, including Endangered Bodies, Adios Barbie, Any-Body (the UK chapter of Endangered Bodies), and to a certain extent, Jezebel, and find many of their posts bothersome. I would say that about half their posts are about physical size – the emphasis on the lack of larger people in the fashion industry (and of course, the recent criticism of Abercrombie & Fitch refusing to use plus sized models or make plus sizes. Why specifically A&F? Why not demand, say, Banana Republic make plus sizes? J.Crew? LOFT? After all, these three companies already make petite). And since they seem to focus on the lack of larger sizes, are they truly being size positive for all, or just a certain segment of the population? And by not emphasizing on all sizes, are they all that effective in promoting diversity and size/looks acceptance?
Wouldn’t be great if “size diversity” actually meant “size diversity”?
Maybe I’m just looking at this from a short, small-framed girl’s perspective and am not seeing it from someone who is on the larger side. I can’t even begin to understand what it’s like because I’ve never weighed any more than 105 lb (high school to second or third year university weight), a weight that is still on the smaller (but not super-skinny) side for my height of around 5’2″. To me, size diversity includes ALL SIZES, not just a focus on plus. Unfortunately, there seems to be a lack of other size-related posts on the vast majority of these sites, other than thinly-veiled insults on those who are small. Yes, most models are too skinny, but one does not have to say (or even imply) that size zero needs to be banned. After all, what would small-framed women wear? We can’t all fly to Europe or Asia to shop (come to think of it, saying that size zero needs to be outright banned may even be unintentionally racist, considering that women in certain parts of the world may be more likely to be size zero or two) and we may not want to shop online if we are not familiar with a brand. Another issue is that size zero scares many people off. Some clothing brands have tried to show different sizes by using their staff as models on social media and their website. If a certain staff member is indeed a 0 or 00, even if she is relatively short and small-framed (and therefore does NOT look “too thin”), critics will comment on how size 0 is “disgusting.” Question: did you know that this woman was a size 0 before you read about it? If not, then don’t say anything. Not everyone who is a size 0 is emaciated.
Top: Endangered Bodies logo; Bottom left – Any-Body; Bottom right – Adios Barbie. These sites may mean well, but they can be (unintentionally) insulting, sizist and even at times, racist
Of course, size diversity is not the only issue I have with these sites. These sites seem to be very anti-diet. While one should never lose weight just because “thin is in,” nor do I believe in “fad diets,” being completely anti-diet can be just as dangerous as the pro-thin movement, since these sites seem to be implying that one should eat whatever one wants, rather than treating one’s body well. To me, treating my body well means eating healthfully and exercising, while their posts imply that one should be able to treat his or her body any which way. Can you see how that is a problem? And considering that as a society, we have a portion control problem and a poor relationship with food in general, being completely anti-diet without emphasizing good choices is not a good idea and definitely not body image-positive. However, I have a feeling that these sites just don’t see that and don’t realize that by being “anti-diet” and anti-small sizes, they are encouraging more people to hate the way they look.
First image by:pukrufus/iStockphoto
