Keep All Your Misery...

weighty:

This is an interesting standpoint. Do “plus size” magazines, shows, websites, etc. do more to help body acceptance, or to hurt it. Is compartmentalizing people based on body-size beneficial, or should we look for a more inclusive approach? Or a blend? These are great issues, and I think Holesintheground makes some great points. I do think though, it’s nice to celebrate the beauty of being big, as often fat people are considered to only ever be ugly, but does this work against an idea of inclusion? 

holesintheground:

I hate this shit. 

Creating a magazine purely for ‘plus size’ (hate the phrase too) women is just like saying that ‘plus size’ women have no place in ‘normal’ magazines.

It completely misses the point. The issue is that magazines as a whole don’t cater to women of all sizes. I can’t imagine that there are many women who will now be happy that they have a ‘plus size’ magazine to read, they want to be able to read the same magazines as everyone, but just to be included and represented within them.

It also promotes the annoying hate that different groups of women have for each other. As someone who is relatively slim (I’m a size 10-12) I really hate all this anti skinny nonsense. SOME PEOPLE ARE JUST SKINNY. All this ‘you’re not a real woman unless you have curves’. We’re not all blessed with buxom breasts and bountiful booties; we are all different shapes and sizes, and the sooner we learn to live with that, the happier we will all be.

Magazines need to change. This is not the right way to do it.

End rant.

This is such bullshit. Plus, it’s aimed at sizes 14 - 20. So basically, if you are over a size 20, sorry, you just aren’t as beautiful. Is that what they are trying to size? I don’t want to have a magazine aimed at fatties. I want to be able to open any magazine and find what ever size you are, the magazine thought to include something / show clothes that might cater to and interest you.

(Source: milkntwosugars, via bbwprincess)