The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Dishonest images feed growth of anorexia > Comments

Dishonest images feed growth of anorexia : Comments

By Melinda Tankard Reist, published 12/9/2007

When you look at the messages teenage girls are sold, perhaps it’s not surprising that they are starving themselves to death.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
Hey Melinda

Of course you realise the solution to all this is a Taliban style enforcement of dress codes for women as well as tightening media censorship laws. This would ensure that women could never compare their bodies with other womens' bodies.
Posted by strayan, Wednesday, 12 September 2007 11:13:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Where are these skinny models?

They are in women’s magazines and teenager magazines.

Who buys these magazines?

Well I have never once seen a father buy a women’s magazine or teenager magazine for their daughters to read, so it has to be the mothers who are buying them.

These magazines are highly commercialised with hardly anything of any positive value in them., and realistically they should be considered to be a health hazard.
Posted by HRS, Wednesday, 12 September 2007 11:35:02 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What is really sad is that these images are fed to young girls by mothers, other women close to them, girlfriends, womens reading materials, and feminist politic
Posted by aqvarivs, Wednesday, 12 September 2007 11:39:36 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Avqvarivs

Congratulations!! I have been tossing up for a while now as to which poster deserves the OLO Feminist-Hater-Most-Ignorant-Of-Feminism Award. The jury’s in and the winner is … YOU.

I thought I had read every ill-informed, Chinese-whispers distortion of feminist values that there could possibly be in the world (including the one that blames them for September 11), but your bizarre attempt to blame feminism for encouraging young girls to be thin is one that must have slipped under my radar.

There’s not much point sending you links to the 1,000,000 or so articles, reports, books, monographs, theses, surveys, speeches and other material presented by feminist social observers over the past decades in an attempt to raise awareness about the unhealthy social messages given to young women about their body image – as they wouldn’t do you any good. Your ‘toxic feminist’ fantasies are set in concrete.

In fact, not only have feminists been far and away the most vocal and active opponents of this escalating social scourge, they have been stumped at every turn by powerful vested interests who earn their $billions from the female-insecurity industry.
Posted by MLK, Wednesday, 12 September 2007 12:19:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
MLK, I'll tell you what. I'll match you article for article all written by women purporting to speak for all women, feminist included. For every feminist(small f)warning about the dangers there is a feminist(large f)crying womans right and empowerment for women to be everything and all things, and promising it wont cost a thing. So do us all a favour MLK and take a good look at your dishonesty and blind feminist support. You can't have it both ways. And name calling and falling back on the tired 'misogynist' accusation when ever someone writes something you don't want to hear is hardly mature. Rather it shows you to be immature and intellectually undisciplined in general. I don't like todays feminism. It's a disgusting, selfish, socially fragmenting, man blaming, expectation of special consideration that destroys more families than any other politic. Now, if I really didn't like women, I'd be barracking for feminism and the further destruction of little girls minds by selfish power hungry brutes such as yourself who's only issue is their own ego and sucking the lifes blood of their own sex. Especially getting the young nicely twisted at an early age to exert control and influence.
I happen to love women in particular and all women in general and so stand against feminazi political trash where ever it rears it's ugly head. I read a lot of social works written by women and have nothing but admiration for those who's work advocates for a genderless politic for an egalitarian society and a pro-family outlook. Those are my team mates.
Posted by aqvarivs, Wednesday, 12 September 2007 1:11:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
We should have models with figures.Most of them look like pelicans or broom sticks and that stupid peacock walk exacerbates the silly look.Bring back the 34 24 34 look.How could any person male or female possible think it attractive to see someones bones sticking out.The magazines do have a lot to answer for.Having the same measurements top middle and bottom is not the way women are made.Absolutely ridiculous.
Posted by haygirl, Wednesday, 12 September 2007 1:20:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Blaming externalities is the SOURCE of this psychosis.

You're compounding the problem.

Eat something, for your own sakes.
Posted by trade215, Wednesday, 12 September 2007 1:31:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
MLK,
I would disagree. There have been countless people calling themselves feminist who have appeared in women’s magazines, and quite a few feminists have also written columns in women’s magazines.

What I can’t understand is why so many doctors have stacks of women’s magazines in their waiting rooms.

Don’t they care.
Posted by HRS, Wednesday, 12 September 2007 2:01:29 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I remember years ago campaigns against 'body image', about how "it's what's on the inside that counts" and "it's OK to be large" aimed at young females in an attempt to reduce the incidence of eating disorders. Now we have a country in an "obesity epidemic".

Obesity is a much more widespread and damaging issue. One only has to casually observe women in public to see that anorexia is the exception and obesity is becoming the norm. The focus should be on having a healthy lifestyle. Concluding with a quote such as "...constant newspaper and magazine articles blasting the horrors of sugar and fat and the ‘epidemic’ of obesity are certainly not encouraging." shows complete contempt for health; sugary and fatty foods are a much greater danger.

I'm not trying to deny the health risks of eating-disorders. Many images in the media clearly are totally unrealistic. The modern technology of digital manipulation only furthers the absurdity. However I think that the effects of "..poor body image, depression and anxiety..." will more commonly lead to a state of apathy, of giving up on the impossible goal, and lead to overeating rather than under-eating.

Just because the media attempts to define such lofty goals, does not mean that females (or males) should not take pride in their bodies and attempt to keep them as healthy (and thus attractive) as possible. The task of pushing a healthy lifestyle as a method for achieving an attractive body is difficult in today's culture of instant gratification, crash diets and plastic surgery.

Finally, I'd have to agree with aqvarivs, that women tend to be the ones to judge, comment on, and discriminate on looks, and push for personal-image awareness more so than men. However given the article really makes no attempt to lay blame on males, the relevance of such a comment is questionable. However what I would like to point out is the inference that eating disorders and body image are solely a female issue, when the evidence clearly shows that they are not.
Posted by Desipis, Wednesday, 12 September 2007 2:12:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Crikey. What interesting responses.

Regardless of my doubts about many of Reist's causes, there's nothing I can argue with in this piece. She's right.

What's really frustrating about the whole thing, is that these stick thin models aren't the ideal for most guys. Most women who get on the catwalk for fashion parades would look far more attractive if they piled on a few kilos.
From the male perspective, it's all rather confusing as to what is really fuelling this.
Posted by TurnRightThenLeft, Wednesday, 12 September 2007 2:33:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Acqvarivs

Look at this quote ... take a LONG, HARD look at it.

'I don't like todays feminism. It's a disgusting, selfish, socially fragmenting, man blaming, expectation of special consideration that destroys more families than any other politic. Now, if I really didn't like women, I'd be barracking for feminism and the further destruction of little girls minds by selfish power hungry brutes such as yourself who's only issue is their own ego and sucking the lifes blood of their own sex.'

While I accept there was provocation on my part, the rage in this quote is staggering. Outer rage is a symptom of inner rage. Get a grip.

HRS

You've made some good points. Some feminists write for women's magazines, but almost always in an effort to counteract their social effects through the reach these magazines enjoy. By way of comparison, many dissident journalists write for mainstream newspapers and magazines, even though the publications contradict their political values. Often you have to fight your battles from inside the belly of the beast.

Also, while it's partly true what you say that many mothers introduce their daughters to women's magazines, just as many try hard to discourage their daughters from buying them. In my experience of motherhood and in my association with hundreds of mothers over the years, there is an enormous amount of anger and confusion among many women about the corrosive influence of women's magazines in their daughters' lives.
Posted by MLK, Wednesday, 12 September 2007 2:54:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A simple solution is to ban catwalk models who have a Body Mass Index of under 18 like they do in Madrid Fashion Week. When designers can no longer design sculptures to be displayed by walking skeletons then fashion magazines will be juxtaposing cat walk models that a plumper than the lasses advertising the local product so the body image will fatten up.

We have two extremes here, there is anorexia nervosa and "ten ton tessie" coexisting side by side. Both have harmful long term effects on fertility and skeletal and organ health.

I think universal school lunches could go a long way to getting children nourished, aware of reasonable portion sizes and familiar with the taste of non-junk foods.
Posted by billie, Thursday, 13 September 2007 8:29:37 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
MLK, in your conviction to remain an apologist for feminism you have mis-characterised outrage as rage and appear not to know or at least acknowledge the acute difference by definition. Outlining the elements and irresponsibility of a politicalised, sexist ideology and the social atrophy it has brought about is social conscience. I would be no less outspoken if it was being done by masculinist.

http://mensnewsdaily.com/archive/l/l-misc/larukirkland052103.htm

"The emancipation of women is primarily dependent on the reintroduction of the whole female sex into the public industries, to accomplish this, the monogamous Family must cease to be the industrial unit of society." - Friedrick Engels (in this regard feminism has been victorious. They have, for the most part destroyed the family unit).

http://fact.on.ca/news/news0211/dt021102.htm

http://www.fathersforlife.org/pizzey/hatemen.htm

“There is no scenario that anyone could come up with that would bring about 'equality' between 'men' and 'women' unless no distinction between 'men' and 'women' was actually being made!“ Feminism depends on a acknowledged sexual distinction as the source of their power. Woman power.
Much better to have practices, rules and laws that make no such distinction.
The politicalisation of the sexes is a destructive social element and has at the heart of child rearing, motherhood/fatherhood, PARENTING, caused the most god awful disconnect between and within the family unit. Anorexia, bulimia, child suicide, child pregnancies, anxieties, and with few exceptions every psychological breakdown suffered today by children is a result of the parentless family and the expectation put upon children to be adult before their time while suffering the absents of their mother. I say mother because it is her constant attention that developing boys and girls require above all else. Do I minimise the role of fatherhood by this statement? No! Fathers are very necessary but mothers, consistently, more so. The role of motherhood has been devalued by the feminist, and our children suffer the consequences. So too the woman for her acceptance of such nonsense as being empowering. We have children having and raising children in hopes of recreating a sense of that physical and emotional compleat family they grew up with out.
Posted by aqvarivs, Thursday, 13 September 2007 12:30:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Aqva, what a load of codswallop!

40 years ago my mother was absent for 12 months because she had to sit beside her dying mother. Other friends mothers were away from the family home for long periods in the 1950s caring for their aged relatives.

100 years ago children grew up in motherless households because mama had died in childbirth.

STOP BLAMING WOMEN. I am inclined to blame you for the pain your dysfunctional family life brings to your posts.
Posted by billie, Thursday, 13 September 2007 1:42:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thank you billie, your singular post refutes every argument feminist and divorcing women have put forward for child custody. Who knew that it would be a woman to voice the fact that mothers are of no value and that they have no impact on the outcome of their children. Your a diamond in the rough. Lets not blame women for their failure to protect their children from their own stupidity cuz 40 years ago your mother went to nurse her mother. Or because a 100 years ago mothers died in child birth at a rather alarming rate do to the lack of medical institutes, knowledge, and practitioners. Or include the fact that midwifery wasn't even regulated until 1902 and that before midwives were being actually trained, they practiced such methods of dealing with a breach birth by rubbing honey and cream on the belly. Your a beaut billie. Let's not hold women/mothers accountable for not being around to properly raise their children. Their children would commit suicide, take drugs, have learning difficulties, have psychological issues of abandonment, get pregnant, have image conflicts, etc, at the same rate whether the mother was there or not. Much safer to blame some poor poster for being at fault than actually take note of the effects of parentless children raising themselves.
Try reading a little more than fembot quarterly comrade.
Posted by aqvarivs, Thursday, 13 September 2007 11:45:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I don't think there's anyone denying the effect (re anorexia) of media and advertising. The real question is - what is to be done about it.

We could start I think, by having a stronger regulator for advertising. That's something that should be easy to get agreement on, and which affects what children see.

As best as I understand it - the advertisers currently police themselves.
Posted by WhiteWombat, Friday, 14 September 2007 7:37:19 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Just where in the article were men blamed for this? I'm always keen to take on authors who try and turn issues into gender wars but after having read the comments first I went and searched the article for the part that has caused the gender component in the discussion and could not see anything to justify it.

Please point to the parts of the article which suggest that men are somehow to blame for this. I've seen the claim in other places but it's not in this article.

It's a piece about the impacts of some of the images that some hold up as ideals. Most of us don't consider the ultra stick thin an ideal.

I agree with those who have pointed out that these images are not driven by men but the article does not seem to claim that so why the fuss.

I saw something in MX the other day about beauty and mens views on it. I don't have the article with me and I don't know what the source was but what I read rang true with me. The points I recall were
- Most men prefered some bottom on women
- Victoria Beckum was out for most, to skinny.
- Most would be self conscious enough about their own bodies not to choose to get naked with women commonly held up as super beautiful. (Other considerations aside).

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Friday, 14 September 2007 9:31:38 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Avqvarivs

You may not be able to tell the difference between rage and outrage.

I can.

The blind rage toward feminism which you inject into every gender OLO commentary is not only irrational, it is blazenly deceitful. You make up one ‘evil-feminist’ scenario after another to fit your distorted fears then venomously react to the very scenario you have invented.

I have met enough anti-feminist attitudes like yours from both men and women to know that they are not driven by anything as simple as misogyny. They are driven by the need to control others and to vindictively smash anything that looks like organised dissent - which is all feminism really is.
Posted by MLK, Saturday, 15 September 2007 6:31:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
MLK, I see you maintain your personal attack while not adressing the issue. I don't blame you. Gender feminist like yourself must keep to the policy of creating privilege for women above any social justice and true equality. Better the self-dramatisation, and chronically offended position of the victim, and never mind that listening to you one would never guess that you live in a country where women are legally as free as the men. You gender feminists advocate preferential treatment and portraying women as victims, your type of feminism is obsessively gynocentric and misandric. Your all about domination, subjugation, victimisation and oppression of anything male and have lost all contact with right and wrong along the way. Any defence of the actual truth that thwarts your manipulated 'event' is rage. “If yer agin us, yer a woman hater”. Ha. That might have worked 40 years ago but, too many real women have come forward after discovering the truth behind todays gender feminism.
I'll stand beside equity feminist any time and work to ensure true equality, but in no way will I support inequality, or the privilege of woman by 'right'. Keep personally attacking me. It makes your position even the weaker. The rest of us will discuss what is said or not said relative to the article. Something for which you have studiously ignored choosing ad hominem attacks in order to escape culpability for what is done in the name of woman by women and the detrimental effects of such self adoration and hyper-criticism. The only one expressing rage on this thread so far is you and your little tantrums. Grow up.
Posted by aqvarivs, Sunday, 16 September 2007 7:30:40 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy