Ridiculous Study Claims Plus Size Models Equal Obese Society
Posted by: Kristina Uriegas-Reyes
in Feminizzle
on Apr 22, 2011

A new study from The London School of Economics and Political Science claims that plus-size models will increase obesity in the United States and Europe. Authors, Dr. Davide Dagone and Dr. Laura Savorelli, write that, “Given that people are on average overweight, we conclude (that using larger models) may foster the obesity epidemic.”
In a weird way, I understand where their logic came from. Yes, Obesity is a problem in the U.S. and if plus-size becomes the normal standard of beauty, anything over becomes more “ok” or attractive to society and people are less likely to try and control their weight. The study says things like, “Health is on average reduced since people depart even further from their healthy weight.” There are so many more things to take into consideration though. For one thing, they make the assumption that plus-size models are overweight and that’s not always the case. They also make the assumption that thin models help people control their weight by providing incentive, but don’t note that they may also lead to eating disorders. The founder of Hope.com says, “I would say the skinnier models provide a worse body image and unrealistic standard. Younger girls are especially subjectable to being influenced by underweight models.”
If we’re going to go in their logic direction, it could also be argued that thin models lead to obesity because the models are so far from attainable that society just “gives up” instead of using them as a weight control incentives. Both are extreme and unlikely argument results. Dr. Gregg Jantz, an eating disorder specialist says, “We need a mix of models, none of whom have extreme weights, either thin or fat, but who look great at a “normal” weight.” Sounds about right.
In my opinion, if we don’t at least try and change the standard of beauty, whether normal or plus-size, then the way women view themselves will never change. It leads to a trickle down effect of women being unhappy with themselves, which leads to a lack of life confidence, which can and does hold women back professionally and emotionally. Why would we want to keep doing that?
Either way, any researcher or statistics course taker will tell you that one study does not a fact make.
..and just because I love this picture:
Here's Crystal Renn walking Gaultier in 2005 in full plus-size model glory.

[photo/source: Hollywood Life]
The opinions expressed on the BUST blog are those of the authors themselves and do not necessarily reflect the position of BUST Magazine or its staff.

written by Harpoontang, April 22, 2011
written by Cheryl W, April 22, 2011
written by Katie Anna, April 22, 2011
If America wants to tackle the obesity epidemic, it should start by addressing the ridiculous amount of junk food that gets marketed and widely distributed, not blame it on perfectly heavy models who just don't happen to be stick and bone. McDonalds, anyone? Starbucks? Dennys? Wendys? I could go on.
written by Miss Vidal, April 22, 2011
There are so many problems that need to be addressed, economy, access to quality food, government endorsed exercise programs, affordable health programs and incentives for those who keep a "healthy" lifestyle.
Its simply idiotic to think that the use of plus size models is gonna make people to go get fat.
The use of plus size models simply speaks that designers (and the companies they represent) are seeing a complete new market that they hadn't explore fully before, its sadly all about money and not so much of creating a more accurate description of female beauty.
However, as a consumer, I like to see the variety that is slowly (but surely) surfacing in fashion, and media. Its refreshing and a bit more honest (still photoshoped let's not fool ourselves)
written by Z Funk, April 22, 2011
Any "study" that relies on the idea that women are morons is not a study to be taken seriously.
written by jennifro, April 24, 2011
written by Jennifer June, April 28, 2011
But.. what if women find out that they are beautiful no matter what shape or size they are? What then? They might stop spending all that money on garbage to make them look skinnier, younger, taller, bustier and *gasp* spanx (love those things) might go out of business!!
This has nothing to do with worrying about society becoming even more obese. It's all about the same shit as always. Money.
http://www.theladyslounge.com
written by Amanda T, April 28, 2011
written by Colleen K, April 28, 2011
written by Ashley Brook, April 28, 2011
xoxo Ashley
http://loveashley.net
written by RamenforBreakfast, April 28, 2011
This "study" is why, when I turned 17, I vowed to never purchase a magazine again that didn't fit my reality. I haven't put down a dime for any magazine with women on the front save for Bitch and Bust since then. So sick of looking at size 2 white girls in $200 jeans!!!
written by Annie B, April 28, 2011
Thank you,
Annie
written by susans, April 28, 2011
I agree with poster above: any study that assumes women are morons was clearly a waste of government funding. Maybe they should spend that money creating programs that help girls have a healthy body image.
written by minoukatze, April 28, 2011
now is one who would have been considered normal 30-40 years ago. The obesity rate is skyrocketing, and the models get skinnier and skinnier. I somehow doubt that, all of a sudden, healthy looking women on the runway are making society fat. God forbid we look at a fashion magazine and not be filled with guilt or self-loathing.
written by Auntie Maim, April 28, 2011
written by botanylicious, April 28, 2011
written by Meryl, April 28, 2011
You have readers who ARE obese. Don't call them a "problem". Don't imply that "controlling one's weight" is something that everyone needs to be doing constantly. That's a fallacy and it plays into all the old patriarchal bullshit you're supposed to be against.
I can't even be bothered to explain it to you. "Auntie Maim" gave a good response. Maybe you should actually read it and pay attention to your readers for once. It would have been nice, for example, if someone had addressed my concern that after the Ashley Graham shoot you printed two letters that shamed THIN models (one calling them "vacuous", the other generally assuming they were anorexic).
I don't read your magazine to feel bad about my body. Hell, I can buy Cosmo for that. I won't be renewing my subscription.
written by leilanigl, April 28, 2011
Honestly, both standards are ridiculous and arbitrary, but let's at least discuss this with an eye for actual facts, not assumptions.
written by Amber Dawn, April 28, 2011
written by Amber Dawn, April 28, 2011
written by Jessica Svoboda, April 28, 2011
written by Michelle Parsneau, April 28, 2011
written by Michelle Parsneau, April 28, 2011
written by authorunknown, April 28, 2011
I do wonder, though - the women coming down the runway look consistently pissed off. No matter their size, if they were forced to smile, would happiness in women suddenly increase? This I would endorse.
written by addisonherron-Wheeler, April 28, 2011
written by tommynomad, April 28, 2011
This was not a study of real women and their attitudes. No one was asked any questions, as far as I can tell. This was a mathematical exercise, using body image and models merely as context. It's pure conjecture. While it may have made the grade for mathematics, it's what Dr. James Loewen calls BS: bad sociology. The best response would have been disdain or methodological criticism.
written by Mmm-Hmm, April 28, 2011
So we are looking at basically a simlair series of research coming out of the UK being used to support their Nanny state and the inscreasingly restrictive policies on human freedoms within in the UK.
Obesity is not a matter for the government to adminstrate over. It is no more remarkable or fearsome than being born with rutilism or with a high metabolism or being born African American or from a Pacific Islander family.
To say that a thin person is bad is just to say the same that a fat person has something inimically "wrong" morally within them WHEN they are simply a product of genetic circumstances.
Now the idea of extremely thin models is not ideal but there is a simple reason for why and I think if the general public knew, they might not struggle so much for the ideal. The fashion industry is dominated by gay men. Wonderful creative gay men. But their predilictions are to create fashions that make women look like young men; slim, breastless, waifish young men.
So simply, the fear of fat, faulty. Fat women; a product of both genetics and various encdrocrine conditions that first make it to five times as hard for them to loose weight AND psychologically shamed to feel disempowered to be healthy at any size BY THEIR OWN LOVED ONES. The fear of plus size models; faulty. With the average normal woman being a size 10-12, a fashion industry that ignores money, is a fashion industry without money. Somewhere companies such as Torrid, Lane Bryant, Alight, Sillouetes, Iggi, and Koinia I doing quite fine.
If there is one thing in this world women deserve after getting the vote, the right to wear pants, and being treated as equals, it is the ability to wear attractive clothing that fits them.
written by Adorn Me jewelry, April 28, 2011
written by Auntie_Maim, April 28, 2011
@Meryl: Kudos to pointing out the assumptions about obesity in the article.
FYI, the second author is misnamed above as Laura when HIS name is Luca. MY pet peeve with BUST is that I feel there is too little fact checking, proofreading and editing and I think that undermines the credibility of the information, the author and the magazine. There were errors in all four articles that I read that were featured in the email with this one. That's right, ALL of them. Just because BUST is a commercial magazine and in the mainstream doesn't mean it can't be good, or at least relatively accurate!
It isn't ever made clear in the article above that this study is NOT what we generally assume a study is, i.e. actually studying an adequate number of people in an experimental group against a control group and reporting the results. I'm a bit confused because they're doctoral students. Was this paper done before they started on their dissertations or is THIS their topic?
How big plus-size models actually are will probably have to remain a topic for debate. I just don't believe what I read about that. I've seen video of Crystal Renn in which she genuinely does not look bigger than a size 8, but above, she looks bigger than that. I've read an article describing the clothing chain Marina Rinaldi as being for "plus-sized women" and "size 8 and up" which was either a typo or fashion industry bias against anyone over a size 6.
Also, I'm surprised that the Huffington Post reported on it as a "new study" last week when it looks like the paper was released last year.
written by Julianne Pigeon, April 29, 2011
written by coffeegirl18, May 01, 2011
Size 0-4 is the usual for a runway model, Size 8 is the usual for a plus-size model.
The sizes in between are usually for catalogue modelling. There's actually a pretty wide range of modelling. Some actually do body part (hand, foot, eye) or makeup modelling.
Note that this is just according to what my friend has seen.
written by Fed up, June 19, 2011
I’m using these sizes just to make the point clear, btw. I won't even pretend I know what sizes these models are, but face it, whether you want to call these girls fat, skinny, normal, what have you, there is a huge gap with no real representation between the stick figures and the plus sizes
I certainly don't see figures like mine represented in the fashion world (5'6", 125lbs, size 6)
written by Danielle R, July 27, 2011

RSS feed




