. . . who has the guts to articulate, in an interview with the Washington Post, the sad truth about the fashion business: It exists not to serve women but to use them. As Megan Carpentier over at Jezebel writes, "If a designer wants to design a pair of formal, satin shorts with pleats and pockets because for some godforsaken reason he thinks that's cool, then he's got to find a rail-thin model to wear it, or else his design is going to look as ugly and unflattering as it actually is. If he wants to design clothes for women to wear, then he might actually be forced to take into account the women who will be wearing them."
And thanks to Carpentier for pointing out some of the cognitive dissonance in the story. Which is unsurprising. We as a society are so screwed up on the subjects of weight and health, it's a wonder we don't all burst into tears every time we walk into a clothing store.
1 comment:
The satin shorts look just as bad on the rail-thin model, but we've been trained to *not look* at models, just the clothes, and her body gives the least interference possible to the designer's idea. Unless we're being disgusted because the model is *too* thin, of course.
When our beauty ideal is to be invisible, there is something seriously wrong.
Post a Comment