Likewise. Way to take something, read too much into it, and run with it…

Please try to be realistic, and a bit more honest. Are you really going to seek out partners who fit your definition of “unhealthy?” Are you going to stay in a pathological relationship because you feel sorry for your partner? If so, you’re not going to have a very enjoyable life, but have at it if that’s what you’re into. I’m not, and the type of partner I seek does exist, so why should I settle for what I see as “less?” Why should anyone?

My definition of health is my own, and it’s related to the type of woman I’m attracted to. The specifics are irrelevant, but we all have our criteria for selecting partners and I would caution you from reading too much into what I or others “mean” when I/we say things like “healthy” or “emotionally damaged.” When you ask about whether someone in a wheelchair is ‘healthy’ or not, I’d have to say “How should I know? You’ll have to be more specific and tell me exactly who you are talking about.”

Anyway, I think sane women should avoid crazy men as much as sane men should avoid crazy women. Shouldn’t they?

At some point we need to determine and then focus on our own personal interests and desires (no matter how arbitrary they may be) because no one else will do it for us. No one said life was fair, nice, or fun. We have to make it that way ourselves and not all of us will succeed in achieving those lofty goals (in fact, chances are we won’t).

Sacrificing our own desires or having unrealistic abstract ideas about egalitarian desirability will only be an exercise in frustration (but some people are into that, I guess). As for me, I’d rather have a pleasant relationship than a dysfunctional one, so I seek out those I believe I’m most compatible with. To claim to be doing otherwise is to be lying through one’s teeth or shooting oneself in the foot.

I’d like to know how exactly how “high fashion” contributes to society, other than using its millions of dollars to cram a very narrow understanding of life and beauty down the throats of us all?

And from “this trivialized box…” onward that sentence was one of the most accurate and concise description of ‘the fashion world’ I’ve read, btw (except for “white;” I’m guessing there are some non-white idiots and loathsome rich people who look silly too).

Anyway, what’s often seen as “stupid” and “funny” is the arcane world of “high” fashion (emphasis on ‘high’). The part that affects the rest of us is probably better described as “the clothing and textile industry.”

And if it annoys us, why shouldn’t we mock it?

Besides, you contradict yourself when on the one hand you claim fashion to be a mere subset of ALL OF SOCIETY regarding its complicity in (or blame for) the proliferation of certain problematic attitudes, but on the other hand in the very same paragraph you say it’s an “enormous industry which affects nearly all of us…” (not to mention it’s one that invests enormous amounts of money in continually jamming those attitudes into our heads nearly everywhere we go).

It’s pretty obvious that on many points -but certainly not all- the fashion industry is not responding to what ALL OF SOCIETY wants, it’s pushing it’s own ideas (or at least those of a relatively few individuals) on the rest of us, and rather aggressively at that. As for me, I like to push back sometimes.

one of the first things that struck me was that some of these models are in their mid to late 20’s — which is ANCIENT for fashion, honestly. women who have finished puberty are no longer skeletal enough (as skeletal as they may seem to the outsider’s view) for modelling, and this is a fact. these measurements are quite likely actually roudned UP — because let me tell you, i am 34-25-35 has been the “model size” for quite a while now and today’s 34-25-35s are a LOT thinner than those in the 80’s. in paper they have remained a “size 4″ while actually being 00 sized. Models will tell you again and again that their 27 inch hips were too big, their 21 inch waists too thick.

so in this distorted context, i was “pleased” to see women who more marginally resembled women (that is, they HAD breasts and their thighs did not look entirely like chicken legs) than I “usually” see, which is beautiful wide-eyed faces (of girls who are usually 16 or 17) planted on the bodies of undernourished 12 year olds with their ribcages photoshopped to be less prominent, because without even debating what is “beautiful”, i think we all would agree that there are many things disturbing about that as a “standard”. this is the true irony + disconnect here — the spread which does actually seem quite “diverse” and “real” (there are pores visible in the photos) within an industry so distorted.

Second, and this is a general comment here and not a reply/attack — can we stop doing this thing where we put ‘the fashion world’ in this trivialized box for idiots and loathsome rich white people who look silly, and accept it as a part of society and an enormous industry which affects nearly all of us whether we admit it, appreciate it, hate it, or what? I’m really tired of this blog and its commenters continually dismissing “fashion” as something that is “stupid” and “funny”. Is it really just “fashion” objectifying sexuality + beauty? Or is it, you know, ALL OF SOCIETY which fashion happens to be a part of, and one that happens to focus more explicitly on visuals/appearance/presentation/body/etc?

I don’t really know where to start, commenting on the full set, but I will say that reading a model comment where she states that her favourite body part used to be her legs, because they were so skinny, but now they are muscular and strong so she hates them is heartbreaking. Another says the thing she hates most about her body is her ‘fat’.

Kate Moss was asked if she knew she would be naked at this photo shoot, and she said ‘no’. 2 photos down, she is captioned thusly, “Kate Moss wears harness (worn as a thong), and another angle of this shot is a few photos further.