Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by high priestess fnord)
    ok so getting underwieght girls then airbrushing their photos to hide all the boney unnattractive bits, the putting them in an ad implying that if you buy x product you will look as great as the woman in the picture is somehow better than implying that drinking is good for you? *finaly takes a breath*
    Yeah, it is. Because then they'll buy the product, not look like Kate Moss as a result, and say "well, that's a pile of crap" and not buy it again. Would you have the same misgivings if the woman airbrushed wasn't so-called 'underweight' but made to look equally attractive (and equally misleading)? If so, you're targetting the wrong issue here.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DanGrover)
    Yeah, it is. Because then they'll buy the product, not look like Kate Moss as a result, and say "well, that's a pile of crap" and not buy it again.
    Error. If that were true, astrology columns would have died a death decades ago.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Agent Smith)
    Error. If that were true, astrology columns would have died a death decades ago.
    Well ok then, maybe they'll keep buying the useless (or who knows, maybe it is good?) skin cream. So what? They'll just be a bit poorer.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DanGrover)
    Well ok then, maybe they'll keep buying the useless (or who knows, maybe it is good?) skin cream. So what? They'll just be a bit poorer.
    Nope, they'll go "Well that didn't work" then 5 months lather [insert name of beauty brand] discontinues old product, brings out new one, so people buy the new one which has a bunch of scientific trade marks associated with it, plus a famous beauty and so the cycle continues. The power of marketing! I work in marketing and I still fall for it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DanGrover)
    Yeah, it is. Because then they'll buy the product, not look like Kate Moss as a result, and say "well, that's a pile of crap" and not buy it again. Would you have the same misgivings if the woman airbrushed wasn't so-called 'underweight' but made to look equally attractive (and equally misleading)? If so, you're targetting the wrong issue here.
    no the point is that young girls are looking at that model and thinking that if they were thinner that they would be closer to that image of perfection, when in reality that way of thinking is unhealthy.

    and "so called 'underweight'"??? are you implying that its not morbidly unhealthy to be that thin?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mercer)
    Fat comedians aren't chosen for their fat. Many are very self-deprecating about it. The fact you say 'hugely successful, too' just shows the attitude: EVEN fat people can be attractive

    With models on the other hand, they're chosen for their skinniness, and it's their looks, not their humour, which is presented as aspirational..
    Comedians should be banned because they're too funny, making the less humourously able amongst us feel that we need to be funnier. If a person watches a model and turns into an anorexic as a direct result of envy then I attribute the responsibility to the person who develops the disorder; models cannot be held at fault for looking good.

    (Original post by Mercer)
    Again, there's no problem with skinny, against fat. There's a problem with anorexic, against healthy.
    Of course.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by poltroon)
    Comedians should be banned because they're too funny, making the less humourously able amongst us feel that we need to be funnier. If a person watches a model and turns into an anorexic as a direct result of envy then I attribute the responsibility to the person who develops the disorder; models cannot be held at fault for looking good.

    Of course.
    what about models who are killing themselves to look like that and therefore are victims as well?

    im trying to work out wether this comment was serious or not :p:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by high priestess fnord)
    no the point is that young girls are looking at that model and thinking that if they were thinner that they would be closer to that image of perfection, when in reality that way of thinking is unhealthy.
    And whose fault is that? The advert still isn't lying, it's not misleading - It's throwing something out there, and if people want to bite, let them.

    and "so called 'underweight'"??? are you implying that its not morbidly unhealthy to be that thin?
    YES THAT'S IT

    I think we've fostered a culture that, far from being transfixed with anorexic starlets, people realise them for the sham they are - ugly. The only people who still think those people are good looking are idiots, and all fads have their stragglers - look at Bon Jovi fans and mullets, for example (quite often the same people, oddly). Five minutes reading a paper or watching TV and you will see many-an-editorial (be it spoken on Loose Women or written in a paper), normally by women, decrying this image, and frankly everyone agrees. There is no social pressure to be unnaturally thin - indeed, I'm sure there is now a taboo against it. There is a social pressure to not be fat, but hell, fat people are ugly. TSR polls (not to mention TV show ones) have shown time and time again that guys like curves, they don't want a skinny bag of bones. You find me a website that says Nicole Ritchie's skinniness makes her look better.

    This culture of fiercely condemning the thin, however, has the unfortunate effect of a backlash against many models, simply for not being curvy. Some girls are just thin, naturally, but are decried for it, and these are the people I meant when I said "so called 'underweight'".
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DanGrover)
    And whose fault is that? The advert still isn't lying, it's not misleading - It's throwing something out there, and if people want to bite, let them.


    YES THAT'S IT

    I think we've fostered a culture that, far from being transfixed with anorexic starlets, people realise them for the sham they are - ugly. The only people who still think those people are good looking are idiots, and all fads have their stragglers - look at Bon Jovi fans and mullets, for example (quite often the same people, oddly). Five minutes reading a paper or watching TV and you will see many-an-editorial (be it spoken on Loose Women or written in a paper), normally by women, decrying this image, and frankly everyone agrees. There is no social pressure to be unnaturally thin - indeed, I'm sure there is now a taboo against it. There is a social pressure to not be fat, but hell, fat people are ugly. TSR polls (not to mention TV show ones) have shown time and time again that guys like curves, they don't want a skinny bag of bones. You find me a website that says Nicole Ritchie's skinniness makes her look better.

    This culture of fiercely condemning the thin, however, has the unfortunate effect of a backlash against many models, simply for not being curvy. Some girls are just thin, naturally, but are decried for it, and these are the people I meant when I said "so called 'underweight'".
    2 secs google got me this. im sure there are far better links out there. its not just stragglers as you put it. we are still having it shoved down our throats that skinny is good. turn on the tv if you dont beleive me, and wasnt the 1st thing that the girls aloud group were told was that they needed to lose wieght if they wanted to stay in the industry? fuzzy memory but i beleive thats right. i have certainly never heard about backlash against models who are thin. there was even a thread recently about a model who died after being told she was too fat and went on a crash diet. even if you were correct, the industry is superficial, so what if you lose your job because the market has moved on? modeling is hardly the most stable career choice. your right there is some out cry against the skinny culture but its all just for show, dip beneath the surface and its all still there.

    and of course the adverts are misleading. they are presenting an airbrushed girl as a role model. yes people are stupid to go down that road but kids arent very sensible at the best of times.

    im not against naturaly thin models or models who simply eat healthily and exersise but your kidding yourself if you think all of them fall into this catorgory.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Blah blah blah. Why does any of that mean it should be banned? Why not give people the freedom to chose to do as they wish? Or does daddy know best?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DanGrover)
    Blah blah blah. Why does any of that mean it should be banned? Why not give people the freedom to chose to do as they wish? Or does daddy know best?
    because its taking advantage of vulnerable people ie the models themselves as well as impressionable consumers. and if for no other reason then so the nhs doesnt have the strain of looking after more anorexics.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DanGrover)
    Blah blah blah. Why does any of that mean it should be banned? Why not give people the freedom to chose to do as they wish? Or does daddy know best?
    Because the actions of the advertisers who promote an underweight image as a good thing cause harm to others in a manner similar, although not necessarily equivalent, to the seller of drugs or cigarettes. It's all in Mill - the concept of "self-regarding" actions etc.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DanGrover)
    Well ok then, maybe they'll keep buying the useless (or who knows, maybe it is good?) skin cream. So what? They'll just be a bit poorer.
    You really don't see a problem with products whose marketing is based on lies?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Now we're talking about two different things.

    On whether we should be allowed to advertise with lies, no, we shouldn't. I don't think anyone is really under the illusion that if you use Nivea skin cream they'll look like 'whoever'. I don't think we should go round assuming everyone's retarded. They never state facts that aren't true.

    As for whether advertisements should be allowed to promote the idea of an underweight image as a good thing, of course they should. It would be morally abhorrent, but we certainly shouldn't ban it. Aside from continuing a trend of a rather worrying precedent, no one is forced to do anything. Everyone does things because they chose to do it - if they don't do their homework first, they should live (or die, whatever) with the consequences of those actions - it's certainly not the governments job to molly-coddle them through life.

    because its taking advantage of vulnerable people ie the models themselves as well as impressionable consumers. and if for no other reason then so the nhs doesnt have the strain of looking after more anorexics.
    If you want to take that line of thought, you'd better want to ban a lot of stuff. You could replace skinny models in this case with high-powered super-bikes (more chance of crashing = higher strain on NHS and they market to people with inferiority complexes), smoking, alcohol, gambling, fatty foods etc. Hell, why not just ban being underweight?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DanGrover)
    On whether we should be allowed to advertise with lies, no, we shouldn't. I don't think anyone is really under the illusion that if you use Nivea skin cream they'll look like 'whoever'. I don't think we should go round assuming everyone's retarded. They never state facts that aren't true.
    Lies may have been too strong a word to use. But the abuse of statistics and the use of what Wikipedia rather endearingly refers to as "weasel words", ie persuasive and subtly (sometimes not that subtle) dishonest language, in beauty product advertisements is appalling.

    As for whether advertisements should be allowed to promote the idea of an underweight image as a good thing, of course they should. It would be morally abhorrent, but we certainly shouldn't ban it. Aside from continuing a trend of a rather worrying precedent, no one is forced to do anything. Everyone does things because they chose to do it - if they don't do their homework first, they should live (or die, whatever) with the consequences of those actions - it's certainly not the governments job to molly-coddle them through life. [/QUOTE]That might or might not be true in most circumstances, but I'm inclined to regard the world of advertising and publicity differently. Of its very nature, it is persuasive and compelling, and thus it's not simply a matter of neglecting to "do one's homework" on the subject.

    Yes, no-one is forced to do anything, but then I can think of numerous example situations that I won't bore you with where there is no element of forcing an action on someone but nevertheless controls ought to be in place.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by high priestess fnord)
    what about models who are killing themselves to look like that and therefore are victims as well?:
    It's their own fault! You are in control of what you do, you choose wehether to do or not to do, therefore you are responsible for how much you eat.

    (Original post by high priestess fnord)
    im trying to work out wether this comment was serious or not :p:
    An off the cuff remark intended to show how such reasoning sets a poor precedent.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by poltroon)
    Comedians should be banned because they're too funny, making the less humourously able amongst us feel that we need to be funnier. If a person watches a model and turns into an anorexic as a direct result of envy then I attribute the responsibility to the person who develops the disorder; models cannot be held at fault for looking good.
    So anorexic models excel at being attractive? Seems you've drunk deep of the problematic attitude we're talking about.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    they can get rid of the models but there will always be the olsen twins and nicole ritchie and all the other skinny celebrities for people to aspire to be as skinny as, and tbh id have thought celebrities were more influential than models.

    like someone has said wer in an obesity crisis not an anorexic crisis. pretty much everyone is subjected to slim people on advertisements but the majority of people arent anorexic. why should everything have to be changed because a few people have suffered badly for it. designers would have to remake and redesign all of their clothes and thousands of models would be out of a job.

    dont get me wrong im not saying oh its the anorexics fault they are the stupid ones or anything, obviously it must be a horrible thing to go through. but surely there must be other issues that make people anorexic not just wanting to look like somone, so getting rid of skinny people on advertising is hardly the answer.a lot of people want to look thinner like someone but it must take more than just that to get to the extreme of anorexia.getting rid of skinny people wont get rid of the mental issues concerned with anorexia.

    and i watch ftv (fashion tv) all the time and i dont recall seeing anyone who looked extremely skinny like bones sticking out all over the place and stuff. theres loads of pictures going around that have been airbrushed so so so much like to the point of its impossible to be that skinny but people still believe its true.if a designer sent extremely extremely skinny people down the run way it would cause too much controversy to bother doing anyways.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by princessx)
    and i watch ftv (fashion tv) all the time and i dont recall seeing anyone who looked extremely skinny like bones sticking out all over the place and stuff. theres loads of pictures going around that have been airbrushed so so so much like to the point of its impossible to be that skinny but people still believe its true.if a designer sent extremely extremely skinny people down the run way it would cause too much controversy to bother doing anyways.
    i dont watch that kinda stuff much but i will never forget the video on a big screen at the V&A with a model dressed in nothing but one tightly wrapped bit of cloth. her face was gaunt and she looked like a colt with those impossibly skinny legs. you could literally see every bone and my entire class too one look and just went "ugh". This was a model for Versace so hardly an unknown name.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by poltroon)
    It's their own fault! You are in control of what you do, you choose wehether to do or not to do, therefore you are responsible for how much you eat.
    ok so in your mind safety rails should not be put up because you would have to be an idiot to go near the edge and fall off. These people have a mental disorder, if they could just pull it together im sure they would.

    (Original post by poltroon)
    An off the cuff remark intended to show how such reasoning sets a poor precedent.
    actually i was going to give you the benefit of the doubt. i didnt think that such a stupid comparison would ever be made other than in jest.
 
 
 
Poll
Black Friday: Yay or Nay?
Useful resources

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.