Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

B931 - Photographic Image and Modelling Bill 2016 Watch

    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    It's the parents' task and responsibility to educate their children about the dangers of malnutrition and obesity. Moreover, eating disorders are only symptoms of underlying mental instability – children in a good mental condition faced with anorexic models won't become anorexic whereas even if this ‘treatment’ decreases the prevalence of eating disorders, children in a bad mental condition will develop another mental disorder.

    Therefore, a) no to a nanny state, and b) address the causes, not the symptoms.
    You do realise that in a large number of cases where eating disorders occur the parents aren't very reliable?

    I see what you're saying about addressing the causes, and in one sense this bill does that; this will definitely reduce the number of eating disorder cases. The problem lies with treating the mental health condition itself - it's very hard to treat, even without the minefield of triggers in today's society.

    We do not claim this bill is a perfect solution, it's merely a stepping stone.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    How do you measure 'mental instability' in order to address it?
    That's why it's such a problem, you often don't know until it's too late. Life Peer is right in what he says though, this may solve one problem, but without solving the underlying issues it'll only be creating a different problem.

    However, I would agree with a bill like this should it be in place to protect the models themselves. If the industry couldn't employ models of a certain weight/fat percentage/whatever, then models would be under less pressure to to be dangerously skinny.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    How do you measure 'mental instability' in order to address it?
    Erm, perhaps with a plethora of standardised diagnostic procedures?

    Eating disorders are strongly correlated with specific personality traits such as neuroticism and environmental factors such as social isolation or child abuse. Some people are more prone to them than others, even due to genetics, but they're only manifestations of underlying issues, not the whole issue themselves.
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    Erm, perhaps with a plethora of standardised diagnostic procedures?

    Eating disorders are strongly correlated with specific personality traits such as neuroticism and environmental factors such as social isolation or child abuse. Some people are more prone to them than others, even due to genetics, but they're only manifestations of underlying issues, not the whole issue themselves.
    I may not have an eating disorder, but I'm a mental health sufferer - for us to get better or find a way to cope, we have to seek the help ourselves, as hard as that is. A plethora of tests would only make matters worse.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    Erm, perhaps with a plethora of standardised diagnostic procedures?

    Eating disorders are strongly correlated with specific personality traits such as neuroticism and environmental factors such as social isolation or child abuse. Some people are more prone to them than others, even due to genetics, but they're only manifestations of underlying issues, not the whole issue themselves.
    Standard diagnostic procedures such as? 'Mental instability' is a very vague concept.

    I agree to an extent with your second point, but let's be honest, the people who mostly tend to get eating disorders - and who I suspect this bill is aimed at protecting - are teenage girls. Most teenage girls feel insecure about their body at some point during their adolescence - certainly every female I know has - and that's perfectly normal. Most teenage girls, particularly in their early teens, also idolise people they see a lot in pictures, and if they're female want to be like them. If those people are ultra-thin, that's how they're going to want to be, and some get eating disorders as a result of that. Those two things aren't 'mental instability', they're simple features of being a teenage girl.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Aye.

    Long term I think the social effect on children and image will be largely benificial. Even if slightly inacurate I think the 'fear' of a fine would dissuade agencies using knowingly underweight models.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Andy98)
    You do realise that in a large number of cases where eating disorders occur the parents aren't very reliable?

    I see what you're saying about addressing the causes, and in one sense this bill does that; this will definitely reduce the number of eating disorder cases. The problem lies with treating the mental health condition itself - it's very hard to treat, even without the minefield of triggers in today's society.

    We do not claim this bill is a perfect solution, it's merely a stepping stone.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    If the parents are unreliable, this will hardly change anything because there's still peer pressure and other factors affecting their development. In fact, parents play a minor role during adolescence when body image insecurities are most common so I was talking more about earlier stages of development which are to set solid foundations.

    ‘Triggers’ are ********. It's an entirely new and silly concept of avoidant behaviour that doesn't solve anything; avoidance never solved anything. Here's a more complex explanation: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...n-mind/399356/

    No, I disagree – it's a step in the wrong direction. A step that is legislating unreasonable state interference for the supposed protection of few whose problems won't be solved, only manifested in a different way.
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    If the parents are unreliable, this will hardly change anything because there's still peer pressure and other factors affecting their development. In fact, parents play a minor role during adolescence when body image insecurities are most common so I was talking more about earlier stages of development which are to set solid foundations.

    ‘Triggers’ are ********. It's an entirely new and silly concept of avoidant behaviour that doesn't solve anything; avoidance never solved anything. Here's a more complex explanation: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...n-mind/399356/

    No, I disagree – it's a step in the wrong direction. A step that is legislating unreasonable state interference for the supposed protection of few whose problems won't be solved, only manifested in a different way.
    Well what would you propose? Tell them all to man up and stop complaining?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Andy98)
    I may not have an eating disorder, but I'm a mental health sufferer - for us to get better or find a way to cope, we have to seek the help ourselves, as hard as that is. A plethora of tests would only make matters worse.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    That's not quite true. I know people who were forced to undergo treatment by their relatives and all turned out to be okay. How do you expect to be treated without a proper diagnosis which can't be obtained without testing hypotheses about the nature of your problems, i.e. using standardised diagnostic procedures?

    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    Standard diagnostic procedures such as? 'Mental instability' is a very vague concept.

    I agree to an extent with your second point, but let's be honest, the people who mostly tend to get eating disorders - and who I suspect this bill is aimed at protecting - are teenage girls. Most teenage girls feel insecure about their body at some point during their adolescence - certainly every female I know has - and that's perfectly normal. Most teenage girls, particularly in their early teens, also idolise people they see a lot in pictures, and if they're female want to be like them. If those people are ultra-thin, that's how they're going to want to be, and some get eating disorders as a result of that. Those two things aren't 'mental instability', they're simple features of being a teenage girl.
    Yes, it's a vague statement because I'm not here to make exhaustive lists. I'm not sure why you want me to provide specific examples – psychometry is a broad field and it ultimately depends on the form of therapy a given psychologist or psychiatrist prefers, but let's say Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale or GAD-7 for anxiety or MDI for depression…

    Health is a continuum and no one is perfectly healthy – that is precisely the reason why some girls just feel a bit inadequate while others, a much, much smaller portion of them starts to eat their hair. Others resort to self-mutilation, others smoke or take drugs, others are promiscuous, etc. Those are different manifestations of practically the same underlying issue: their ‘mental health’ isn't very good and the reasons for that lie in genetic factors and environmental factors. Taking eating disorders out of the equation doesn't change the outcome.
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    That's not quite true. I know people who were forced to undergo treatment by their relatives and all turned out to be okay. How do you expect to be treated without a proper diagnosis which can't be obtained without testing hypotheses about the nature of your problems, i.e. using standardised diagnostic procedures?
    Well of course there's exceptions to every rule.

    I'm not really sure what you mean by standardised diagnostic procedures - I understand the words, I just don't know what procedures you mean. But personally, I find it easier to try and talk about them, rather than be tested.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Andy98)
    Well of course there's exceptions to every rule.

    I'm not really sure what you mean by standardised diagnostic procedures - I understand the words, I just don't know what procedures you mean. But personally, I find it easier to try and talk about them, rather than be tested.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Which is itself part of the diagnosis. If we draw things score to a far more familiar and we'll understood side of things, I.e. physical health, if you go to the doctors with a rash or an infection or whatever how does it start? You tell them what the problem is. They could then go straight to the examination part of the diagnosis, there will almost certainly be questions asked before during and after the physical examination to aid the diagnosis. The exam same is true with mental health, you undergo a diagnosis, just without the physical examination (unless you got a brain scan which perhaps could be considered as such), because the first part of dealing with any illness is to establish what the problem is and how severe it is. Talking about it IS the test.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Andy98)
    Well what would you propose? Tell them all to man up and stop complaining?
    Not instantly like that but yeah, that's the general idea for a start – this so-called ‘safe space’ is hurting them more than confrontation.

    75 years ago, 18-year-olds were fighting in the Second World War. Now they're trying to ban free speech from academia and spend half their wage on grooming products.

    (Original post by Andy98)
    Well of course there's exceptions to every rule.

    I'm not really sure what you mean by standardised diagnostic procedures - I understand the words, I just don't know what procedures you mean. But personally, I find it easier to try and talk about them, rather than be tested.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    The problem with talking is that while it can give your mum a perfectly good description of your day in school, it will definitely not tell the doctor about your rare genetic mutation that makes your brain produce a higher amount of a given neurotransmitter which in turn leaves you with feelings of anxiety and depression (it's just an example).

    This is also the problem with WebMD-like services, ‘support’ online forums and tumblr.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Time to ban ALL modelling for promoting immoral sexuality
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    The definitions are absolutely dreadful and don't consider the matter at hand. For one the definition of minor is interesting, and more importantly for most of the time as a minor the majority of people would be defined by this as severely underweight, the BMI boundaries are for adults, not children.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    A far better solution to the perceived problem would actually be education, from the people I know who have had issues along these lines the issues are not directly with models but actually with low self esteem and their own peers. Further, it makes no provision for Photoshop given that one could easily take somebody who is, say, 20 BMI and make them look 15, along with touching up everything else. Cinematography is also a major issue and likely an even bigger issue, for the most part you don't hear people saying they want to be like model x, rather film star y and as far as I can see no provision is made for this. Film stars often have a lot of time put into them to make them look more desirable according to whatever metric, whether that be on screen or in major public appearances, something that becomes particularly obvious when looking and paparazzi and other photos of people when they do not have a team of people to make them look better.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Which is itself part of the diagnosis. If we draw things score to a far more familiar and we'll understood side of things, I.e. physical health, if you go to the doctors with a rash or an infection or whatever how does it start? You tell them what the problem is. They could then go straight to the examination part of the diagnosis, there will almost certainly be questions asked before during and after the physical examination to aid the diagnosis. The exam same is true with mental health, you undergo a diagnosis, just without the physical examination (unless you got a brain scan which perhaps could be considered as such), because the first part of dealing with any illness is to establish what the problem is and how severe it is. Talking about it IS the test.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Right, that makes sense

    (Original post by Life_peer)
    Not instantly like that but yeah, that's the general idea for a start – this so-called ‘safe space’ is hurting them more than confrontation.

    75 years ago, 18-year-olds were fighting in the Second World War. Now they're trying to ban free speech from academia and spend half their wage on grooming products.



    The problem with talking is that while it can give your mum a perfectly good description of your day in school, it will definitely not tell the doctor about your rare genetic mutation that makes your brain produce a higher amount of a given neurotransmitter which in turn leaves you with feelings of anxiety and depression (it's just an example).

    This is also the problem with WebMD-like services, ‘support’ online forums and tumblr.
    This, not so much. I actually find the online support really helpful - hell I'll get told for saying it but the online support is probably one of the reasons I'm here to have this conversation with you.

    This is the problem. I presume you've never suffered a mental health condition? I've noticed non-sufferers often fail to understand just how complicated mental health is - sure we all know someone, but I feel like you have to go through it yourself to understand the complexity. People treat mental health as something that can be treated like a physical condition, but that just isn't true.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    Welcome Squad
    I'm gonna call it a night, I can feel this debate taking me down a dark road that I don't want to revisit

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    A far better solution to the perceived problem would actually be education, from the people I know who have had issues along these lines the issues are not directly with models but actually with low self esteem and their own peers. Further, it makes no provision for Photoshop given that one could easily take somebody who is, say, 20 BMI and make them look 15, along with touching up everything else. Cinematography is also a major issue and likely an even bigger issue, for the most part you don't hear people saying they want to be like model x, rather film star y and as far as I can see no provision is made for this. Film stars often have a lot of time put into them to make them look more desirable according to whatever metric, whether that be on screen or in major public appearances, something that becomes particularly obvious when looking and paparazzi and other photos of people when they do not have a team of people to make them look better.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I think that saying "models can't be too good looking because it'll make insecure people feel worse" is akin to saying "rich people can't be rich because it's not fair on poor people", so I agree with you on the education point. It's better to bring security to people when they're young through education than something like banning photoshop or thin models. However, I would do something along the lines of banning modelling agencies and such from using models who are dangerously unhealthy in order to stay competitive out of protection for the models themselves rather than anything else.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Andy98)
    This, not so much. I actually find the online support really helpful - hell I'll get told for saying it but the online support is probably one of the reasons I'm here to have this conversation with you.

    This is the problem. I presume you've never suffered a mental health condition? I've noticed non-sufferers often fail to understand just how complicated mental health is - sure we all know someone, but I feel like you have to go through it yourself to understand the complexity. People treat mental health as something that can be treated like a physical condition, but that just isn't true.
    With all due respect, my counter-observation is that ‘sufferers’ tend to consider their condition as something abstract, unique and incomprehensible, while in fact it's nothing more than complex biochemistry which can be altered with different complex biochemistry. The only complication about mental disorders is that the brain is more complex than other organs and yet to be fully explored.

    Nowadays, we have biologically plausible computational models which provide frameworks that can explain syndromes such as autism in terms of rather simple statistical modelling and integrate them with all cognitive processes, something that was unimaginable ten or twenty years ago.

    If you need community support and feel that it's helping, then it's your choice, but I think you should accept what people with decades of research experience have to say about it, and no, merely talking to them isn't going to help you.
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    I think that saying "models can't be too good looking because it'll make insecure people feel worse" is akin to saying "rich people can't be rich because it's not fair on poor people", so I agree with you on the education point. It's better to bring security to people when they're young through education than something like banning photoshop or thin models. However, I would do something along the lines of banning modelling agencies and such from using models who are dangerously unhealthy in order to stay competitive out of protection for the models themselves rather than anything else.
    Is it just me that doesn't find models that attractive? I mean sure there's the odd Victoria's Secret one, but otherwise...

    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: February 24, 2016
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.