BlogHer - Fashion - Comments

You've given me a goldmine!

Candelaria Silva — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 12:41:27 -0600

Thanks for these blogs. They are going to be so useful to me as I finally will be able, soon, to shop to replace some of my nearly threadbare clothes.

I look forward to the shoe issue and hope you include some for those of us with bigger feet. There's an online store that caters to women with larger feet. They used to have a store in Boston but now don't. It was called Investments. I think their now called Designer Shoes for Women.

Thanks, again.

http://blog.candelarisilva.com

Good and plenty!

I'm limping, too

Candelaria Silva — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 12:23:12 -0600

I agree. So uninspired. It's become formulaic and I don't like all the changing of judges. In past seasons, there was more of a core group. Heidi's been much more vocal this season. It feels like the designers are hampered by knowledge of previous seasons and what a big deal they think this might be for them. I'll still watch but I no longer feel compelled to see it live.

http://blog.candelarisilva.com

Good and plenty!

It's in the knit

Expat Mum — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 12:16:25 -0600

I've always loved cardi's but I'm finding some of the bigger ones in the stores make you look about two sizes bigger than you actually are, especially when you belt them. I think the thinner knit styles that hang or even swing are very flattering and less bulky looking.

Unfortunately, here in Chicago, the cardi season is very short. It quickly becomes too cold to wear one as a jacket, and they're too bulky to wear underneath your parka!

Cardis for all!

kgseymour — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 19:29:19 -0600

A few years back, I bought my husband a grey wool zip up cardigan. I loved it on him -- it was a touch of classic and preppy but still modern and stylish. He thought he looked like a young Mr. Rogers in it. Now that he's gotten ever-so-slightly more into fashion, though, he totally digs it.

On the other hand, I've always, ALWAYS been a cardi girl. You'll almost never see me leave the house without a little sweater!

Kristen

www.jeez-o-petes.com

It's about Height

Brianne — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 18:00:55 -0600

As you mentioned, whether or not a size 12 is healthy depends on the height of the woman. If she's 5'9" a size 12 is very reasonable. It's obviously a different story if she's 5'1". The models in the magazines are more than likely 5'8" and above, and thus a size 12 would probably not be above average or unhealthy for their height.

Nice Post

summer — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 11:39:45 -0600

Great tips, especially #4. Also take a look at the detergent/softners that are going into the the washing machine.

Thanks so much for the shoutout to BTC Elements =)

Summer Bowen
Founder
BTC Elements Store: www.btcelements.com
Blog: www.btcelements.com/blog
Tweets: www.twitter.com/btcelements

OMG I thought I was the only one...

HEIGHT GODDESS — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 00:17:19 -0600

OMG, I was having lunch today with my Mom and I pointed out this same thing. This lady had a pair of slacks that were clearly meant for a flat shoe! It was drives me nuts when I see ladies making this mistake which most of the time doesn't give a flattering look. I'm tall(6'1) and I've always been conscious of the length of my pants and which ones I can wear heels with. I've created a tall women's clothing line www.heightgoddess.com because most designers believe tall women don't wear heels....well a 36" inseam will work only if I wear flats all time.

http://www.heightgoddess.com

I think you misunderstood ...

Susan Wagner — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 19:25:15 -0600

what Cindy Leive was saying. Here's the transcript from her interview with Campbell Brown (via CNN.com):

BROWN: What's amazing to me is that anything larger than a size six is considered plus size in the fashion world. And the vast majority of us are larger than a size six.

LEIVE: It's one of the bizarre realities of the modeling industry that once you're over a size six, you're considered a "plus- sized model." Of course, you're not actually a plus-sized human until you're size 14 and over, and there are very few plus-sized models who are. But nonetheless, the women who you see in our magazine are all working as so-called plus-sized models and they are four to six sizes larger than most models you see in magazines.

The models are not size six; they are size 12 - 14, which is six sizes larger than the largest models who would normally appear in a fashion magazine.

Friday Playdate

GLAMOUR EDITOR: Those seven naked models were a size 6!

Deidre — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 14:24:15 -0600

According to the editor of Glamour Magazine (in an interview w/ CNN) the seven naked models in the "plus size" photo were about a size 6! Not sized 12! These women were plus sized on in the modeling world; not in the real world.

The editor seemed to think it was a big move to include women who were about 4 sizes larger than the other models typically seen in magazines.

d.
www.TheSavvyGirls.com

It's a good start

Vered — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 14:10:25 -0600

That photo of Lizzie Miller in Glamour magazine was a good start. I think "regular" women really did feel validated and liberated when that photo was published. I'm looking forward to seeing more women of all shapes, sizes, ages and skin colors in fashion magazines.

----

Hire a Blogger

Social Media Services

I don't want to be in magazines

elizabethbake — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:54:16 -0600

I am most definitely plus-sized, but I don't want to model clothes that "need an elaborate pulley system and a can of Crisco" to get on, as Ashley Falcon said. What I do want is for the world to become a place where we celebrate fashion, not figures. Diversity, sure. But I don't think that I will, in my lifetime, see American society become such that I won't be embarrassed to stand next to my model-thin friends, or shop in a place whose sizes dare to rise above 6.

These wonderful designers that we all love are being supported by both the model-thin and the plus-sized and the everything-in-between. Don't we buy Marc Jacobs handbags no matter what size we are? Don't Jimmy Choos fit most every girl (regardless of whether we can afford them)? We support their work; it's time for designers - and the magazines that feature them - to support everysized women by designing for all of us.

but a grain of sand

Bryn — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:35:10 -0600

I think that subjects such as these that keep us talking about body types and beauty and shapes and sizes keep us from talking about what's really important- who we are as individuals. That we, as women are all unique and intelligent and beautiful in our own ways. A magazine showing a few average size women may be a start, but it is but a grain of sand in the battle that girls and women have to fight to find and retain self esteem in our culture, in which we are barraged with either negative or unrealistic female stereotypes.

What role models do we have as women? Take one the most powerful women in the world- Oprah as an example- she is powerful and hugely successful and what do magazines and press and people focus on? Her weight. it's not okay. and it is a double standard.

The Fashion industry does not have our best interests at heart.

I am a counselor, I specialize in eating disorders and have for the past 10 years. Although I personally don’t believe that fashion magazines CAUSE eating disorders, I certainly do believe that they add fuel to the fire and that they seriously contribute to poor self esteem and body image issues. We ARE influenced by media and images, and the images in popular media are 98% unrealistic. These images are designed to cause insecurity. The diet, fashion and cosmetic industries make billions of dollars off of people who are trying to reach an unreachable and unreasonable standard. These magazines set up these impossible standards, provoke insecurity and then offer a “solution” through the products they advertise.

I personally think that these magazines adding a few average size women in their pages is only another ploy to get us talking about them, and more to the point- BUYING them. It's insidious.

the unbearable bearableness

Not convinced

cmartin82 — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:31:22 -0600

I fall somewhere toward the middle of the spectrum on this issue. While I'm pleased to see the spread, it's only because I see plus-sized models in magazines so rarely. At this point, those of us who want to see models like this will take what we can get.

I don't think a spread like this is going to affect real change because you'd never see plus-sized models in a magazine without making it about them being plus-sized. Put these women in a regular fashion spread, and don't print a word about "Celebrating your curves" or "Loving your body." When I see that, I'll believe these mags' standards of beauty are changing.

Agreed

Susan Wagner — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:24:54 -0600

And thanks for clarifying, and for being so polite.

Friday Playdate

Where is the middle of the spectrum

AbiGrace — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:17:35 -0600

While I am pleased to see more diversity in magazines, I'm annoyed by the dichotomy. It seems a model can either be a size two or plus sized. It would be a nice change when the vast majority of healthy feminine shapes can be appreciated as opposed to our only options seeming to be under-fed with delicate little bird bones or "meat on her bones".

No wonder we have body issues in this country, "average" is hardly even represented. "Average" is like a dirty word. No one wants to be an "average" model. There is a whole spectrum of us between skeletal and plus sized.