But honestly, how many chances does this magazine think it deserves?? Last year the April 2009 Shape issue got a lot of heat for totally warping the beautiful Adele's plus-size figure. The photo did not celebrate her size and the best way to dress it, but instead she was photographed lying down wearing a black dress that was covered by a coat so that her shape was hidden....not that it was that big of a deal, what with her stomach being photoshopped so she looked smaller (but super weird and warpy-like) Here's a link to the photo if you didn't see it before.
So April 2010 Shape issue comes out and it is VOGUE'S BIG CHANCE FOR REDEMPTION. But why do something smart and healthy when you can totally just do something ridiculous like, ooooh, saaaaay put a super skinny model wearing a WHACK ATTACK pair of shorts that could only ever be worn by a sample size on the cover? Oh nononononooooooo say the editors at Vogue. Gisele just had a BABY and she does YOGA and she has a B cup even though the rest of her body is supercrazy tiny so she is CURVY. This is a SERIOUS Shape Issue okay?!?!!
Right. My bad Vogue. Never again will I make such a FOOLISH mistake. I mean, you did put Rachel Roy in there as your token large figure (fyi to everyone out there: size 8 is LARGE so don't get it twisted okay??). And thank GAWD you also featured short, tall and thin (although I think the words you are looking for are thin-short and thin-tall but like, no biggie).
Anyways. for the first time in a long time I don't think I'm going to buy this month's issue is basically what I'm trying to say with this post. Because when it comes to Adele v. Gisele I think it's pretty obvious who represents shape, and who just represents plain old skinny.
No comments:
Post a Comment