Feminist X rants against a fashion industry that insists on using female models who look like they are starving. The post is basically an attack on the gay guys in the fashion industry who choose female models who are so skinny that they look like boys.
What person looks at that and contemplates the aesthetic value of the dress? That spectacle is not an artistic expression intended to render the wearer invisible so that the clothing becomes the focus. Her shocking presence steals the focus from the dress. She does not look like a hanger. She does not look like a pre pubertal boy. Anyone with a pair of eyes can see that she looks like a woman who is starving to death. Outside of the most shallow and image obsessed people in the fashion industry, who have tried everything to brainwash themselves into thinking that woman is something one should look upon with calm composure, anyone who sees that image experiences a visceral reaction of horror.
What I wonder: Is this state of affairs totally explainable by reference to the sexual preferences of gay fashion designers? If so, we need more female and heterosexual male fashion designers.
What I'd like to know: Do Vera Wang and other female designers use models as skinny as those used by gay male fashion designers? Does Anna Wintour of Vogue prefer skinnier models? If so, why?
Another possible explanation: Maybe the aging affluent female customers who spend big bucks on haute couture prefer to see dresses worn by androgynous models who seem less like sexual competition. Could this have something to do with it? Do upper class women in their 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s and with declining sexual market value really want to go to a fashion show and see incredibly sexy and fertile women modeling clothes?
Since Feminist X is bisexual and shares some of my own preferences for non-starving well-endowed women she's the sort of woman who is least likely to see sexy voluptuous cat walk models as competition. Rather, I bet they look more like tasty morsels to her (that's how I see them).