gaultier swaps size 0 model for size 20 model

Many fashion designers claim that their clothing will only "drape properly" on a skinny, skinny, skinny, woman. Basically, the design the shit to look good on a hanger and they're stuck with that forever. I do applaud the idea of making clothes that would fit on a variety of models, and thus having a variety of models showing them off. BUT once you get into that territory, the problem on the industry-side of things is that the women are less interchangeable, and far less expedable. Now, I don't look at either of these points as bad things, but the industry does.
The whole thing makes me glad I don't buy manufactured clothes. Except underwear on occasion. I make everything I wear, and I make clothes to sell. I haven't the slightest idea what size I wear, but I know what my measurements are. I never label anything with sizes, except sometimes "L","M","S" (mostly referring to size in relation to everything else on the rack. Everything I make is extremely adjustable, too... Unfortunately, all this doesn't count for much since I'm just one little teeny tiny designer working by herself in a great big world of unknowns. If I could employ ANY models, you can be sure they would be a variety of sizes and shapes.

 

I agree with you. I believe that there needs to be a happy medium.

 

Dang Yank, she's not "sorta bigger", she's just busty! She's a doll, no doubt.

 

you know, i love that designers are finally understanding that overweight women are sick of layering themeselves into blazer and straight leg pants. and that just because your breasts are huge doesn't mean your waist is, too. i've had nothing but trouble with people buying me shirts to hide my breasts that cloak my relatively small waist and cover my hips as well. i end up looking pregnant. it's horrible. not everyone whose big is in hate with themselves and wants to wear things that flatter them RIGHT NOW, not 2 years from now when presumably they'll be thin, or whatever. fuck that bullshit.

 

I like the fact that there's someone of a different size on the runway, but like a lot of other people here said, there should be variety of women on the run way...not just "huge" and "tiny." What about us medium people!? I'm basically right average...5'2 and 165. Well, a little heavier than average, but whatever....I'm a size 12-16...depending on where I'm buying my clothes......
It really does bug me, though, when you see, "plus size" model's being featured on TV, and they're all the same size as an average woman.
This kinda reminds me of this new show on TV...it's called "Ugly Betty." I don't know if it's aired in the states or not.....it should be....but that actress America Ferrera is in it....she's in that movie, "the sisterhood of the traveling pants," and it's really pathetic that they potray a girl who's actually completely average as "ugly." And to rub it in, she's working among all these models at a fashion agency or something.....seriously, what the hell!? I think that she's really pretty and is really doing herself a disservice by being on that show...

 

I didn't know there were such a thing as child-bearing thighs

 

haha. seriously, you have to know there's a myth involved with women who have wide thighs being thought to be able to better send children into this world with lesser difficulty, the thought being that the wider a woman's hips, the less difficulty a woman will have with shooting a child into this world. i also thing it has something to do with the fact that sometimes, the wider the thighs, ie. fat, the better fed and therefore better to bear a child to fruition. these things don't just go away because bottacelli (sp?) died.

 

suprisingly, i have little knowledge about fertility myths in women.

 

it really isn't that shocking, now that i think on it. mainly women would have been exposed to the myths, anymore.

 

It isn't that there are myths about it. Women have wider hips than men because they were made to hold up the weight of a baby. Whether you're a bit heavier or a toothpick, women will always have curves, whether it's incredibly noticable or skin stretched over bones.

and I've only ever known ONE girl who had an incredibly difficult pregnancy because she was so so tiny, carrying the child was a serious threat to her pelvis/hip bones... she was bedridden after 7 months, followed by a planned C-section to get the child out of there without such a huge risk factor.
Truth is, yes, women had wider-set hips than men and usually, they're more "padded" for support during and after pregnancy (ever notice how a lot of women carry their kids to the side/up on their hip, while a lot of men will hold them against their chest or in other positions that require more arm strength?).
You can say it as much as you want, but nature made us to do our jobs, and our jobs, primarily, are to have children and keep our species alive.

I could say the reason that humans only have two nipples is because humans are made to carry one or two babies at a time (even though sometimes, some women end up with triplets or more, I understand this). Other animals have more because they have litters. Would you argue with this? Nature made us to do our jobs.

 

well, i have wide hips and they did me no good whatsoever. i had to have two c-sections and got my tubes tied. the myth factor is that the wider the hips, the better ability to deliver babies. it implies that healthy women with narrower hips are less capable of delivering babies. it's not true. my mother always had very narrow hips, and never once did she have trouble delivering. being too big is just as bad as being too small.

 

I understand and agree with this. But these days, a lot of guys (or fashion designers searching for models, or girls judging other girls, etc) will say things like "Hey, she's not bad... too bad she has such big hips." As if having curves automatically makes a woman overweight, these days. Like when someone sees a busty woman and automatically thinks her entire top-half is "big" because of it. WE'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE THOSE. A lot of girls are seeing these images and thinking that they aren't "skinny" or "average" until their hip/pelvis bones stick out, until you can see their ribs between and under their breasts. They shouldn't be using these women, or particularly "larger" women, to give teenage girls an idea of what they're "supposed" to look like. We're supposed to look like healthy women that eat a decent amount, get a decent amount of sleep, do a decent amount of physical activity, etc. every day. Whether you're teeny-tiny or a bit bigger, if you have absolutely no energy or anything because you eat too much junk or because you starve yourself, something needs to change.

People consider my mom a "bigger woman" because she's 5'11 and her weight is proprtionate to her height. On the other hand, people consider me a "smaller woman" because I'm 5'3 and my weight is proportionate to my height. Now that I've hit the "18" mark (quit growing in height when I was 12 years old and taller than everybody my age, but my weight finally decided where it needed to be and stayed there), my mother and I are built practically identical on the outside, I just look like a "mini-mom" compared to her because I'm shorter. Why does this make her bigger, or make me smaller? Why can't we just be women?

 

you're preaching to the choir.

 

haha she's probably considered bigger because she's... bigger than you. bigger does not equate to fat in my mind.

i would also have to disagree that guys would look at a girl with a nice hourglass figure (big chest, big hips) and say 'ah too bad she's got a big rack and "big hips"' - i also don't think i've heard any of my guys refer to the size of a woman's hips per se. but maybe that's just my friends, though i would venture that they're very typical male.

there's a difference between what a normal guy wants compared to what hollywood actresses and models on runways are doing.

 

i've never had troubles, and i'm 'bigger' okay, at the moment i'm still kinda huge from the baby and it's a total pain in the ass. but i've still got a lot going for me.