Recently, there have been a few high-profile examples of magazines publishing images of “real” women: plus-sized models, or celebrities free of makeup and/or Photoshop. The ensuing publicity can make it feel that we’ve won body image victories–but let’s look closer at these images to find out how much we should really be celebrating.
February 2009: Love Magazine‘s first magazine cover features a nude Beth Ditto.
April 2009: French Elle’s no make-up edition features eight European models without make-up or digital touch ups.
September 2009: Glamour Magazine features “the woman on p.194” with a belly roll (and a smile).
January 2010: V Magazine‘s plus-size model spread, clothed and nude.
February 2010: Australian Marie Claire puts Miss Universe 2004, Jennifer Hawkins, on the cover nude and unaltered. A cover signed by Hawkins was auctioned on eBay, with proceeds donated to Australian eating-disorder support group The Butterfly Foundation.
March 2010: Tara Lynn graces the cover and the pages of French Elle’s “curvy girl” issue.
April 2010: French Marie Claire releases a non-airbrushed issue.
Just last week: Britney Spears releases unretouched photos alongside the altered images for her new Candies campaign.
A few days later, Kim Kardashian releases nude photos for the May 2010 issue of Harper’s Bazaar sans digital alteration (and felt so empowered that she tweeted about it).
I’ll admit that I’ve gotten excited about more than a few of these body-image events, and looking at this list it would appear that there’s some real positive change occurring. But after news of Kate Hudson’s alleged breast enhancement made headlines less than 48 hours after Britney Spears released her unretouched photos, I had to ask, Do these efforts matter? Can these images combat the images below?
Yes, unadulterated images matter, but their impact is diluted by the millions of adulterated ones. As consumers we are exposed [PDF] to hundreds of advertisements per day that overwhelmingly feature unnaturally (or genetically predisposed) thin women who have been further retouched. Waists are made smaller, torsos and legs are elongated and thinned, thighs smoothed and armpits all-but-disappeared.
In this context, the occasional plus-size model appears deeply incongruous: a spectacle, not a part of a spectrum.
In the cases of Spears and Kardashian, featuring striking women without airbrushing isn’t exactly revolutionary–and some speculate whether these images are actually all they claim to be. Kardashian’s body, at least, comes pre-altered by cellulite removal. These photographs set a new unattainable standard, this one for “real” bodies. Plus, both Spears and Kardashian have published countless altered photographs of themselves, and Kardashian hawks diet pills as a side job.
Without an authentic and consistent message of beauty empowerment in all its diversity, these attempts feel like gimmicks, or what Samantha Moore of Gender Across Borders calls “empower-tainment“:
It’s going to take more than a celebrity proclamation that my “unique” qualities are beautiful, despite what popular media—and the male gaze driving it—say. Because beauty standards are socially constructed, redefining what “beauty” means is a hairy, multifaceted venture that must consider entrenched social forces. Powerful influences such as patriarchy, historical context, consumerism, and media are embedded in the fabric of almost every society. While boosting women’s self-confidence is peachy, it cannot be a successful driver of social change. What we really need to contest is the beauty myth—the illusion that female beauty standards are natural, inevitable, and backed by some concrete “truth” about optimum femininity.
Images that fall outside the limiting standard can’t produce change when millions of taken-for-granted images constantly cultivate our expectations and solidify the standard. Publishing unadulterated images every so often, with great fanfare, does not successfully challenge the normative Eurocentric image of ideal beauty, which includes vast amounts of alteration. Rather than promoting real change and creating a critical dialogue that explores the creation and maintenance of unrealistic, confining and, often, dangerous images of beauty, the announcement of these unaltered photos can easily become a spectacle designed for publicity and ratings.
TOP:Tara Lynn in “curvy girl” issue of French Elle. BOTTOM: Collages by Nasser Samara.
I think the images of the women they really are is better for the society. When I see a girl without make up or a picture of a girl like Britney or Kim without any alterations I see there actually beauty. The pictures that are altered for magazines and such are bad for all people. It makes all females feel as if they are fat or ugly when they aren’t. They see these pictures and give them selves expectations that are close to impossible. Makes girls who are skinny and don’t need to loose any weight go and get eating disorders. Women should boy cot these type of pictures. I’ve never in my life seen a girl as skinny as some of these girls in these ad’s. I live in LA to home of all the models and skinny girl’s. When people go out and show them selves skinny or fat, it can make a person feel better and that’s what these ad’s should try to do.
In a weird way, I actually enjoyed looking through the photos of these NATURALLY beautiful women. I thought I was able to relate to some factors of their body types and not feel a sense of low self-esteem or jealousy when looking through the images. These are the photos of what real women look like, maybe a little curvy and without the helpful lighting, photo shopped images, and a realistic amount of make up. The fact that Kim Kardashian feels empowered to show off her curves while laying naked in front of cameras for the whole world to see is just so contradictory and foolish of her to do. Just because she has some sort of curves, she thinks she is sharing a new concept of body types to the world.
I’m glad there are women out there and magazines out there that releash untouched photos, but I feel like those few untouched photos are nothing compared to ALL the other photos we see and that we’re exposed to. I don’t know how any girl can look at those skin-rail models and want to achieve to look like them, to me that’s not beautiful. Sure they’re skinny but it looks like they’re barely making it alive. I can relate more to the “real” women that are featured above. Everyone has stomach rolls, even woman trainers that have six packs have little rolls or skin rolls when they sit down. To me that’s real and I can relate more to that.
A lot of women and girls are constantly attacking themselves and the way they look because of what they see in advertisements and mainstream media. What a lot of them don’t realize is every single photo or shot has even technologically altered to make the public believe that they are “perfect”. Who is anyone to say which body is or is not perfect?! Yes, there are instances where some of these celebrities will release their unedited photos but what does that say about their character when they still go through with the edited photos for their own external validation. Even still many of these celebrities need to know that they are seen as role models to a lot of women and if they didn’t cave in to mainstream media fake appearances then maybe they could change the way a lot of girls feel about themselves.
I understand how unaltered photos and displaying more “normal sized” women is starting to become more a part of entertainment and less empowerment. It seems like lately people are just trying to be a part of the status quo and a part of this whole movement of displaying bigger bodies- and they’re doing it more for the publicity and less for the actual cause. I don’t agree, though, that displaying these pictures is detrimental to the cause. I believe they help show that not being model thin is not only okay, but actually normal. We don’t all have to be stick thin or have patriarchal society’s version of ‘amazing’ bodies. For a nation where self-harm and eating disorders are sky rocketing and self-esteem is plummeting, it’s important to let people see actors and models in a natural state.
Wow! I actually never thought such magazine company would be out there to do such thing. I believe that NATURAL models can relate to many more people. These pictures give women a reason to be a lot more satisfied with themselves. For once, girls are comparing themselves to NATURAL looking people and do not have to worry about becoming self-conscious when compared to other girls.
This is sad
As mentioned in class, looking at these unadulterated images truly is a spectacle. My eyes immediately spot the body features like folds, curves, and shadows that you normally wouldn’t see on a perfect “model.” However, my mentality while looking at these pictures were of empowerment and a you-go-girl-for-being-brave attitude. These photos do add and contribute to the variety of body types out there. However, they are too few and therefore are forgotten with the next image of a sexy body. If these images became more interlaced with every magazine issue from now on (not just 1 picture out of 100′s in a issue like in the case of Glamour), then it will truly start to be empowering. It will make it acceptable for growing girls or women throughout that all body types are celebrated. There is not one standard mold that all women should fit into. The Eurocentric standard of beauty is only one of many. The diversity of culturally different bodies however is lost or considered inferior because it is not given much standing in mass media. Women are of all different shades and shapes. Mass media has made the Eurocentric model into the accepted standard of beauty. Therefore, it is possible to use this tool to reverse this. And this in turn will reverse men’s perception of beauty so that the 36-24-36 is not the epitome of beauty for all men. Even men will be influenced to find beauty in all body types.
I feel like there are 10 times more magazines that are touched making celebrities look skinnier than untouched one. But knowing that there are some photos that have been taking naturally makes me happy because people can stop comparing themselves to how those women look. It is good to show pictures in magazines of how real women look like. I cant stand looking at girls who are skinny barely can hold themselves together and think that women out there want to be and look like them. A video was shown in class and it was amazing to see how you can totally change a person’s look with computers. Celebrities could release one picture out of a million that was not photo shopped but really what is the message that they are trying to portray?
I think there is nothing better than showing women as they are. Airbrushing and Photoshop effects only deceive people and give them false hope that the ultimate perfection is possible. However, I think that if there women come on these mainstream magazine covers and spreads to flaunt their untouched photos, they should preach that for the rest of their career. That is the only way we can make a change is here. By doing so, women can finally look at themselves and feel confidant in who they are and how they look. It is all about persistence with the message we are trying to send by displaying curving untouched women on magazines.
This idea of ‘perfection’ as it comes up in the media has started to grab my attention more often than it used to after I enrolled in my Women’s Studies class. I will never understand why magazines will show these models which have been digitally altered and retouched. Yes, they may look “perfect”, but when the model herself does not look anything like her own picture what are people supposed to make of that. What magazines are telling people then is to try to live up to photoshopped images. In my opinion, this is absurd because I can guarantee that no matter how much somebody tries to look like the people in these ads, they will never reach that goal and that it because the goal they are trying to reach doesn’t exist in the first place. Magazines should portray more females as well as males in their natural bodies, excluding any photoshop and other digital enhancements. I believe this will allow people to ease up on themselves knowing that if these celebrities are comfortable in their own skins and are having pictures being taken of them, we as people can be comfortable too.
It has to be good for women and the women’s movement to have Britney Spears and Kim Kardashian publishing photographs of themselves that are un-retouched. Even though these are not ordinary-looking women, and most would still feel inadequate in comparison, it is better to see them as they actually are. They also have shapes where other women also do, and even if the photographs can still make other women feel inferior at least they bring Spears and Kardashian into the realm of reality. I would like to see more of this – more women with ordinary or plus-size bodies presented as beautiful and desirable on the covers of magazines. Only in this way will we ever, as a culture, get over the ridiculous idea that women have to be tall and thin to be beautiful.
Having these women pose without the assistance of devices such as Photoshop and some without makeup does empower women to know beauty is not completely perfections. However, Britney Spears and Kim Kardashain do not serve as the norm in society. They are extraordinarily beautiful women, and they still do not serve as normal women. To be part of the media culture, there is a certain standard of beauty these women attain to. They still have a team of nutritionists, trainers, and stylists that create an illusion of “natural” beauty. For an empowering image, pictures of real women having a career without the ideal image of beauty must be circulated.
I wish they would stop photoshopping everything and show us the truth.
Seeing this images of what a “real women” looks like is great, but
I agree that the retouched photos overpower the unretouched ones.
I do not believe that the picture of Kim Kardashian is real.
Everything about her looks flawless, no one in this world is perfect.
I do not think celebrities would admit if they have had photoshopped done to their pictures.
When I see a good looking model with no flaws, it makes me not want to read a magazine because all I would do is compare myself to her. However, when I see average woman with some flaws or an imperfect nose or a zit, I can relate to her more and make me know that nobody is perfect. When I see celebrities without make up they become even more beautiful to me because it shows how confident they are without wearing any make up. Not only does it inspire me not to be self conscious it makes me feel that I myself do not need to wear loads of make up in order to see myself as beautiful. I’m also impressed by Kim Kardashain, being able to show off her curves without hiding it. This shows that there are many different types of bodies and that everyone should appreciate what they have.
As I scrolled down viewing the above images, I began to feel a slight sense of empowerment due to the fact that not only were there images of models I did not recognize, but also ones I see images of almost daily: Spears and Kardashian. It is refreshing to see images of women that I feel as if I can relate to more. However, it is skeptical that these images are completely unphotoshopped, especially the ones of Spears and Kardashian. People see so many more pictures portraying the ideal beauty image that even pictures such as these do not grasp people’s attention enough to make a prominent difference. These types of images would need to be shown on a more consistent basis because consciously and unconsciously, a massive majority of women are comparing themselves to these mainstream “beauties.”
We are constantly being subjected to a million and one images of how to look, act, behave and be seen. This one dimensional vision how society views beauty and the beauty ideal. It isn’t that a single image matters, but the constant reinforcement of thousands of these images that act on each other. They become a norm. Once one imagine, outside that box, appears we are aware of it because it is different, unique and real. That is why adds like the ones shown above matter. They are just a couple magazine shots, but they make people thing and they leave a longer affect of awareness because cut the norm of the images that unconsciously seeps into all out minds. Its beautiful to think that a women can be real and still beautiful, a blemish, fat, paleness.. that makes us, us.
I completely agree with this article. Although these unretouched images are very inspirational and/or authentic, they don’t stand to make change when compared to the millions of images that are the opposite. Our idea of beauty comes from the prolific imagery we’re surrounded by every day which emphasizes on thinness, large breasts, etc. This is used as a tool for cultivation which will need more than a few stray photos to really make change. More images that include real and unretouched women are necessary to realize that this ideal beauty image is unrealistic and unhealthy. The media needs to start putting out accurate information and images so that there could be real change and so we won’t be so critical of ourselves as well as others.
Although I appreciate the effort that magazines make to show celebrities and models au natural, I dont think its going to make a difference. The women that they select to feature in their magazine are all naturally gorgeous women, even without makeup. Yes, its nice to see what these people look like, but in a way its still problematic. Seeing a woman undeniably beautiful without make up makes me want to work on myself even more so I can also look gorgeous without makeup. Even in some of the unaltered photos of models and celebs posing practically naked can have the same effect. When I see that their bodies are still amazing with no retouching, I would want to make my own body like that too because in a way I think it is more realistic since it is untouched. One unaltered picture of these famous women does not change anything because of the thousands of other retouched images of them. Again, I think what they are doing is great and can send out the message that even natural is beautiful, I do not think it is going to change society’s mentality. At least not yet.
I don’t think that the epidemic of eating disorders and distorted body images among girls and women everywhere will not stop until photo-shopping in magazines stops completely. Even retouching a photo to get rid of a simple blemish supports the harmful message that blemishes or marks (things that certainly don’t ruin your face) are unacceptable. I also don’t think it helps that all these celebrities are posing naked and “unaltered” on the covers of magazines. That isn’t going to do anything for anyone’s self-esteem. Kim Kardashian’s job is to be unbelievably gorgeous. I’d think she was beautiful even if looked like she rolled out of bed hungover. She doesn’t represent most of the women who buy those magazines.
And the whole widespread fad of calling girls with curves “real women” and stick thin girls “fake” isn’t helping anyone either. I don’t believe in starving and dieting yourself until your thin, but some girls are naturally like that, just like some girls are naturally curvy. Women come in all shapes and sizes. The acceptability of calling one body type “fake” and one “real” just pits groups of women against each other and continues to encourage girls to be ashamed and embarrassed of their bodies because they will always be under scrutiny.