The Negatives of Plus Size via Curves and Chaos

I came across this posting on Curves and Chaos today. Monique posted a link to an article written by Greta Hagen-Richardson titled "The Negatives of Plus Size" and as you imagine it made me pretty incensed.

Here are some of the choice lines:

1) "Despite my very secure self-identification as a feminist, I find myself a bit out of sorts where this topic is involved. While I oppose the idea of size-0 models as the only representation of the female form on the runway, I don’t think I am a fan of the size-12 models either."

How does being a feminist justify that statement? She has the right to say what she will about models, but the size 12 model has been integral to the market for quite some time. Size 12 models just have not been involved in catwalks as visibly until now, and this fact alone just indicates how ill informed the writer is on the subject.

2) "Let me say right now that I am no size 2 or 4 (or 6 for that matter), so I think I can understand the desire of many proponents of the plus-size movement...However, the sizes that the public consider to be in the plus range, 14-18, are to my mind just as unhealthy as the 0s and 2."

I agree to a certain against about the health concerns of being plus sized. I have said it before, and I will again that being on the high end of plus sized is not healthy. I recognize this fact and it is a cause of great anxiety, but that does not mean I need to be discriminated against by becoming fashion's invisible woman. Also, we are not privy to every woman's history - so who is she to judge their health?

3) "Part of what bothers me about having the size 14 on the runway is the motivation for it. In this economic climate, it would seem that many designers are doing whatever they can to jump on a market that was previously untapped...Perhaps this is a marketing ploy more than a new acceptance. If that is the case, then the inclusion of these new models could be just as damaging."

I agree with her to a certain extent in this regard. The fact is I mentioned it yesterday in my post Square Peg/Round Hole: The Dilemma of the Plus Sized Model. Diversity is a slippery slope and being exploited is sometimes the byproduct of inclusion, but does that necessarily mean we should argue against it?

4) "A few months ago, Glamour magazine drummed up a lot of attention by featuring a photo shoot of several plus-size models in the industry. Among them was Lizzi Miller, star of Glamour’s first nude plus-size photo shoot. In an interview, size 12-14 Miller said that she eats right and exercises daily and that her size is an accurate reflection of her natural weight. I find this pretty difficult to believe. I run between a size 8 and a size 10 and like athletics, so perhaps I am unable to shelve my own bias. But it would seem to me that someone eating optimally (six roughly 300-calorie meals a day, complete with the proper distribution of proteins, veggies, and fruits) and working out daily (could be as little as a 20-30 minute run) should be closer to a size 6 or 8."

This is the part of the article that really pissed me off. I have no idea why she thought it was necessary to bring in her own statistics when discussing the model's weight. It screamed to me "hey I'm thinner than this "fatty" why does she get to model"?

5) "I am by no means condemning larger sizes aesthetically. The plus-size women who have walked the runways thus far have been as beautiful as the typical Fashion Week model fare. Trust me — I am about as awed by Miller’s looks as I am of Agyness Deyn’s."

What a backhanded complement! How many times have you heard "you have such a beautiful place, but..."? Same sentiment - different wording.

I just feel overall this woman had her own issues, and took them out on the plus sized models of the catwalk. She mentioned nothing about the mechanics behind the size 0/plus size debate, which is integral to understanding the situation in its entirety.

The clothes shown on the runway are sent out to magazines for shoots. These are normally the only samples that showrooms have to send out for sample requests, and as such the model sizes on the runway determine the sizes you see in magazines. So, in short the models you see on the runway perpetrate the cycle of thinspiration entrenched in the American psyche.

(Sorry for the brevity in the post today. I have a severe headache, and this was all I could muster up before I had to lay back down again.)

Square Peg/Round Hole: The Dilemma of the Plus Sized Model

The involvement of plus size models in fashion shows are on the rise, but at times I unsure whether to be exhilarated or enraged. Diversity is key to showcasing designs for customers, but I am completely against it being done solely for the sake of notoriety. It reeks of exploitation and commodification, and also an extremely condescending attitude towards the minority being represented.

Take for instance the Jean Paul Gaultier Spring 2007 Ready to Wear Show. He casted a size 20 model and then trussed her up as some sort of Valkeryie sent to consume the souls of fashion's fallen. She looked absolutely awful and extremely out of the place when juxtaposed with the looks that proceeded as well as followed her on the runway. A real statement to me, would have been to create a look that fit with the collection and also looked stunning on her. Instead, we get smug commentary on how the plus sized just does not mesh with the scenery of traditional fashion. The whole thing overall smacks of exploitation and also relied on heavy stereotypical imagery of plus sized women in fashion.

What do I mean by this? Well, have you ever wondered why is almost every plus size shoot either naked, in lingerie, or covered with a bed sheet? I mean take the shots of Christina Hendricks who is just a tad bigger than the majority of Hollywood starlets. I swear I have seen her in her knickers more than well myself lately!

Not that there is anything wrong with shooting curves with appreciation, but the real reason these shoots are so common is the sizing issue. Simply put, sample sizes are holding back shoots do to their restrictive size ranges. Thus, a twisted cycle perpetuates itself further and discrimination becomes customary.

There are some designers like Mark Fast that are trying to be more inclusive. He just showed his latest collection at London Fashion Week, and unfortunately all he deserves for this gesture is a golf clap. This is because after viewing the collection I was left with the following question: If the intention was to include plus size models from the beginning THEN WHY ARE THE GARMENTS NOT FITTING CORRECTLY?

I was lucky enough have interned at a brand where I was present from the initial design process to when the clothing walk down the runway. So, I feel that I am qualified to say that there is no way this would have happened if Mark Fast's intention was to include plus size models from the beginning. If the original samples made for the show were intended to be worn by plus sized models then there is no way the pinching that you see here would not have been addressed during model tryouts. I mean what designer in their right mind would want months of work go down the runway imperfect?

Once again, it is clear that this designer was subverting the plus size model as a means to their own end. In this case, it was all about publicity and I just do not think it was worth it to me as plus size shopper. This is because I much prefer underrepresentation than overexposure of the wrong type of imagery. Hopefully, this will not always be an issue and one day plus as well as straight sized models will walk down the runway arm in arm without notice.

Fashion's Dirty Secret: The Plus Size Fit Conundrum

Confession Time: I went to Parsons the School of Design because I wanted to establish a plus size brand that would appeal to all you chotto coquette's out there.

While pursuing my degree it became apparent that it just was not in the cards as I had serious misgivings about entering the market. One of the main issues that dissuaded me from doing so was the ability to create an appropriate fit for a plus size clothing line.

Why did it? The majority of designers only have access to "straight size" models, dummies, virtual size models, and body measurement data. This is the very reason that you see the people on Project Runway literally weeping when they have to use "real women" instead of models. They have no idea how to approach these body types as they have only learned how to design for a certain size range.

The designers themselves are also not always to blame for this either. In short, it is the costs associated with learning to design and produce an extended size range that is to blame. The additional investment needed is cost prohibitive for many designers, and as such there is a lack of ability to design for plus size frames.



That is also why more often than not many plus size items are "super sized" versions of straight sized styles, and it also accounts for the atrocious fits that abound in the plus size market. As for right now, there is hope that this will change in the future thanks to a joint project by Bekleidungsphysiologische Institut Hohenstein and the Institute of Textile Machinery and High Performance Material Technology at Dresden's Technical University.

They recently just released the results from their study on the measurements of the plus size frame in regards to optimum clothing fit. This is a groundbreaking study as it is the first time "the body measurements of the full-figured [were] comprehensively measured and evaluated scientifically".

What exactly does this mean for plus size shoppers?

"As a result of this effort, the garment industry will have current body measurement data, guidelines for optimised designs, and realistic busts in the form of virtual size models". In short, this means that now ready-to-wear markets will have more accurate information on fits and as such will be able to create clothing that not only fits a plus size frame better but also flatters it as well. Whether they chose to, however, is a completely different subject altogether.