# Why is thinness in women fashionable?

Discussion in 'Human Science' started by visceral_instinct, Dec 4, 2009.

1. ### CutsieMarie89ZenRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
3,485
As the "Real Beauty" Campaign Dove did, has shown that one need not look like a supermodel or even be "thin" to be healthy or attractive.

Despite what the fashion industry encourages you to look like, many women even when fit, will never be able to wear a size 3 pair of jeans, but they shouldn't feel like they are unhealthy or not attractive because of their size. For it would be untrue. Making yourself fit into size 3 jeans when being that small isn't natural for you is what is unhealthy. And like I said before, the lean and small look that is currently in style, it's just a fad, who knows what will be the fashionable look 40 years from now. (Big butt and small breasts, perhaps? Or maybe an allover muscular appearance? Short legs and long arms? The sky is the limit.)

3. ### WillNeverValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,554
You're talking about this, right? All I saw in that commercial was "It's okay to be plain-looking. We'll still take your money at Wal-Mart."

Wal-Mart's attempt to cash in on the "ugly girl market."

5. ### CutsieMarie89ZenRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
3,485
No I was talking about the picture, exclusively, it came from the Dove Real Beauty Campaign, I don't care about their marketing goals. The women in it are healthy and attractive, but they couldn't trade pants with me. Which as far as many ignorant people are concerned makes them fat. Because they don't fit the stereotype of 'What is currently considered beautiful at the moment'.

7. ### shorty_37Go! Canada Go!Registered Senior Member

Messages:
12,140
:thumbsup:

Obviously he spends his time whacking off to a screen full of fake, airbrushed or photo shopped images. I feel sorry for any woman that actually does meet up with him because unless she jumps out a magazine or off the Computer screen she just ain't going to measure up.

I like how all the images were of what...20 something yr olds?

(except for Racheal) So I guess it means that REAL women don't exist after the age of 25.

He is delusional, let's face it he believes everything he sees in magazines is real. Those images and women do not represent the average REAL woman.

I wonder if he knows women have babies and put on weight and their bodies change. I wonder how horrified he would be at a C Section scar or stretch marks.

All I can say is good luck out there in the REAL WORLD WILL finding Mrs Perfect. Hopefully you win the lottery so you can buy yourself the next playboy playmate.

Last edited: Dec 5, 2009
8. ### shorty_37Go! Canada Go!Registered Senior Member

Messages:
12,140
Yeah mine too...

9. ### WillNeverValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,554
Yes, the so-called Real Beauty campaign is by Dove combined with Wal-mart. Like I said, it's Wal-Mart's attempt to cash in on the "ugly girl market."

They probably did some marketing research, and discovered that plain-looking and ugly women don't spend as much money on beauty products as beautiful women do. So, they concocted a ridiculous and manipulative campaign... which attempts to convince the ugly women that they have some sort of mystical, hidden beauty that warrants the purchase of Dove soap. This is a pitiful attempt to cash in on their wounded vanity.

It's both sad and laughable at the same time, frankly.

10. ### WillNeverValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,554

In the meantime, you need to go back and reread the parts about the images not being owned by me and the idea that those images were posted in response to a poster in this thread expressing a desire to see Playboy women in the way I described. You didn't understand those parts, and you yourself asked for more women to be shown at one point -- as long as they weren't beautiful. I also did post a montage of a non playboy, non model, ordinary everyday woman who I used to know, and she fit the exact same mold as those girls. I took her image down because I used it without her permission. However, those who saw it beforehand saw she was a babe.

So yes, real women CAN and DO look like that.

11. ### ogdredRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
64
A few people have mentioned already that a fuller figure was once considered attractive in the west because it signified wealth. I have to wonder whether this isn't the case with thinness now. In modern times it is in many ways more expensive to maintain a trim physique (unless of course one forgoes eating altogether--not very practical for people who must work very hard as the poor typically do). Cheap food is almost always synonymous with unhealthy food. Food that is quick and convenient (pre-processed, frozen, drive-thrus) also tends to be grossly laden with fat, salt, and sugar. So if you've got a small food budget and very little time to prepare meals... good luck staying thin.

Furthermore (and if the following deviates just a bit into paranoia, oh well)...

Turn on the television and you're likely to see an abundance of campaigns which appeal to (feminine) insecurity--pills that'll make you thin; creams to take away the wrinkles, pimples, freckles, you name it; face paint that'll hide your imperfections; modern-day corsets that'll squeeze in your thighs, butt and tummy; pre-prepared foods that will actually help you lose weight; home gyms, fitness clubs, belts that'll give you those rock-hard abs even while you clean! Alongside these advertisements we have commercial television programs which overwhelmingly depict women who are quite "above" average (slender, fit, all imperfections concealed, etc). Now comes the kicker... a rush of ads for fast food, pre-prepared food, pizza, ice-cream, you name it. Maybe it isn't intentional, but it looks like the fashion, diet and beauty industries are propped up by a food industry that makes their ideals almost impossible to obtain. In one second viewers are given the "thin is in" message, next they're tempted with some delicious (and cheap!) fat-laden treat, and finally they're sold a product that will purportedly erase the results of eating such garbage.

It's a great system for generating profit :shrug: . Why in the world would an industry market images that are attainable? Sure there's a niche for things like the "Dove Beauty Campaign", but it's a relatively small niche. Generally speaking the most money is to be made in selling people on an image that is very difficult (and costly, we're lead to believe) to obtain.

Insecure women make wonderful consumers. Since the whole thin craze is aimed primarily at exploiting women's insecurity, most men don't seem all that affected by it comparatively. Of course, there are cases like WillNever who've just eaten it up...

Messages:
3,714
Crab people?

13. ### Dr MabusePercipient ThaumaturgistRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
714
Because other women tell them they have to be that way.

14. ### EnmosStaff Member

Messages:
43,184
I know for a fact that you have back problems!

Messages:
6,221
I have to disagree with you there. It's much cheaper to prepare your own food at home than to buy fast food or pre-processed, frozen food. I'll grant you that it does indeed take a little time to prepare the food, but not that much time. I'm not sure where all this BS about poor people only being able to afford fast food came from, because as someone who has actually been poor I can assure you that when your food budget is $20/week, you aren't buying pre-made frozen food or fast food. 16. ### nietzschefanThread KillerValued Senior Member Messages: 7,721 Well said...even mcdonalds charges a fortune for their shit food. 17. ### ogdredRegistered Senior Member Messages: 64 ... Unless you're buying top-raman, which I recently saw on sale at the store at (no joke) 10/$1. But yeah, you definitely have a point. A bag of dried lentils will feed you on much less than McDonalds' will. My point about the efficiency of pre-prepared food is still valid, though, especially for those who work multiple jobs and support families. Not to mention the fact that, let's be honest here, cheap pre-packaged or fast food taste a hell of a lot better (thanks to flavor additives and MSG) than a diet of eggs, potatoes, beans, lentils and bananas does (cheapest raw ingredients at my local supermarket)--try feeding kids that stuff when what they see on TV and get at school are hamburgers and pizza.

It's absolutely possible to be poor and healthy. You could conceivably grow a lot of your own food and ride your bike to work--plenty of people do this. However it's a lifestyle that really caters to the young and unattached (people with time and energy). Like I said, "good luck", because it isn't the easy route.

18. ### SyzygysAs a mother, I am telling youValued Senior Member

Messages:
12,671
I have nothing to say, but this pic needed to be shared:

Messages:
64
Sort of... in that the food has little nutritive value. At the same time, it costs more than $1 to make a hamburger, and yet that's how much you'll pay for one at McD (maybe I should put quotes around "hamburger", though). 20. ### John99BannedBanned Messages: 22,046 i am stang out of this.:facepalm: 21. ### mike47BannedBanned Messages: 2,117 I like thin women for a simple reason : I can carry them from one room to another and I can hold them up and in bed I find them more arousing and satisfying . I do not care about fashion and all the other craps .... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! . 22. ### NasorValued Senior Member Messages: 6,221 It's a pitiful hamburger that probably won't fill you up. The "dollar menu" burgers are sometime like 300-400 calories, so you'll need to buy more if you're actually hoping to get a complete meal (assuming you eat 2000+ calories/day). For comparison, hamburger buns are about 30-40 cents each at the grocery store, and ground beef is around$2-\$3/lb depending on what kind you buy. I don't really know for sure, but I suspect that even the worst, cheapest ground beef you can find at the grocery store will be at least as good as what they serve at McD. So for a 1/4 lb hamburger + bun, you're looking at a marginal cost of around 80 cents; and the burger will taste a lot better and have a lot more calories than the McD burger.

As for time, well, I've never really clocked myself, but I'm pretty sure I could go from nothing to several complete burgers in under ten minutes. Teach off some chunks of beef, flatten into paddies, drop in pan, turn on, and weight about 4-5 minutes. You could spend more time than that waiting in the McD drivethough. Seriously, it's not like anyone is talking about defeathering and butchering a live chicken here...

23. ### Michael歌舞伎Valued Senior Member

Messages:
20,285
There was a study in Sydney that found most Sydney men are actually attracted to normal sized women and don't like skinny women. And, come on lady's, lots of women think Matthew McConaughey is "hot" because he has 6 pack abs.