Skinny Models Banned From Catwalk

They’re crying about discrimination when I’m sure the very same people have been telling thicker women that they’d never be a model unless they lost more weight.

I guess it’s only discrimination when it goes against your beliefs.

Hypocrites!

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
altough, following the theory of “overreaction vs. underreaction”, soon we’ll have fat chicks on stage all over to make the plus size girls not cry at night.[/quote]

Actually, Lane Bryant and Torrid have already had fashion shows.

[quote]Kailash wrote:
It’s a public health issue. Emaciation is disasterous to the body. If a government can ban smoking in bars, then they can ban this too. In fact, if they want to be fair, then I can smoke marijuana or be emaciated in private. Just so long as I don’t smoke marijuana on the catwalk, it’s all good.[/quote]

That’s stupid.

Remember what tobacco smoke is? A carcinogenic gas. Now, sometimes this gas will float around. That’s called a property. Sometimes too this gas will be inhaled by other bar attendees. That’s bad, because maybe these other people don’t want carbon fucking up their lungs.

Being thin does not make other people become thin. To claim that thinness is gas-like is to imply that indivuals watching models will be unable to prevent themselves from becoming anorexic like aforementioned models. That statement rests on the premise that man is unable to think for himself.

Also, a government can do whatever it wants. That does mean it’s right.

And don’t forget the double standards you implied in your statement.

[quote]rrjc5488 wrote:
Majin wrote:
Nothing ever gets solved by banning a commonly occuring fenomena. Spain is the most uneducated and lagging West-European country anyway.

If you’re going to make fun of a country for being uneducated, you might want to spell phenomena right.[/quote]

He was edjumacated in Spain.

[quote]charbreath wrote:
Being thin does not make other people become thin. To claim that thinness is gas-like is to imply that indivuals watching models will be unable to prevent themselves from becoming anorexic like aforementioned models. That statement rests on the premise that man is unable to think for himself.[/quote]

Children watch that shit. Little girls. They develop eating disorders. Society works on the premise that children make poor decisions. That’s why there’s an age of consent, an age at which one can smoke and sign legally binding contracts, etc. Typically age 18.

Anorexic models are a noxious pollutant in the environment of an immature mind. You’re the one with the double-standard: physical phenomena vs. mental.

Someone (me) should tell you now. It’s all one.

[quote]Kailash wrote:
Children watch that shit. Little girls. They develop eating disorders. Society works on the premise that children make poor decisions. That’s why there’s an age of consent, an age at which one can smoke and sign legally binding contracts, etc. Typically age 18.

Anorexic models are a noxious pollutant in the environment of an immature mind. You’re the one with the double-standard: physical phenomena vs. mental.

Someone (me) should tell you now. It’s all one.[/quote]

Yeah, that whole freedom-of-speech thing just gets in the way. I mean, think of the children!

[quote]Kailash wrote:
charbreath wrote:
Being thin does not make other people become thin. To claim that thinness is gas-like is to imply that indivuals watching models will be unable to prevent themselves from becoming anorexic like aforementioned models. That statement rests on the premise that man is unable to think for himself.

Children watch that shit. Little girls. They develop eating disorders. Society works on the premise that children make poor decisions. That’s why there’s an age of consent, an age at which one can smoke and sign legally binding contracts, etc. Typically age 18.

Anorexic models are a noxious pollutant in the environment of an immature mind. You’re the one with the double-standard: physical phenomena vs. mental.

Someone (me) should tell you now. It’s all one.[/quote]

There is a huge fault in your thinking.

Allow me to explain. What if the “gov’ment” turns around and says all NFL players are now restricted to less than 220lbs because it may make some skinny little kid try drugs to get bigger?

Once it becomes OK to restrict things on the basis that other people have no control over their actions as far as copying what they see, soon to follow, no doubt, will be “violence” in movies, people who are too muscular, and any other of a host of issues that people like to blame their actions on.

What the fuck happened to personal responsibility?

People who think like you are the exact reason why ephedrine gets banned and why the media still calls creatine a “steroid”.

Some model being skinny does not make anyone else skinny. If someone develops an eating disorder, it is their own damn fault. the guys logging into this forum weighing 120lbs at 6 feet tall have WHO to blame for it? What model MADE them develop an eating disorder? Someone must have, right? Well, according to you, whoever it was needs to be banned as well.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Kailash wrote:
charbreath wrote:
Being thin does not make other people become thin. To claim that thinness is gas-like is to imply that indivuals watching models will be unable to prevent themselves from becoming anorexic like aforementioned models. That statement rests on the premise that man is unable to think for himself.

Children watch that shit. Little girls. They develop eating disorders. Society works on the premise that children make poor decisions. That’s why there’s an age of consent, an age at which one can smoke and sign legally binding contracts, etc. Typically age 18.

Anorexic models are a noxious pollutant in the environment of an immature mind. You’re the one with the double-standard: physical phenomena vs. mental.

Someone (me) should tell you now. It’s all one.

There is a huge fault in your thinking.

Allow me to explain. What if the “gov’ment” turns around and says all NFL players are now restricted to less than 220lbs because it may make some skinny little kid try drugs to get bigger?

Once it becomes OK to restrict things on the basis that other people have no control over their actions as far as copying what they see, soon to follow, no doubt, will be “violence” in movies, people who are too muscular, and any other of a host of issues that people like to blame their actions on.

What the fuck happened to personal responsibility?

People who think like you are the exact reason why ephedrine gets banned and why the media still calls creatine a “steroid”.

Some model being skinny does not make anyone else skinny. If someone develops an eating disorder, it is their own damn fault. the guys logging into this forum weighing 120lbs at 6 feet tall have WHO to blame for it? What model MADE them develop an eating disorder? Someone must have, right? Well, according to you, whoever it was needs to be banned as well.[/quote]

Damn… you have left me with no reason to post… agreed.

Iam not sure what the world is coming too… The idea that you can not WORK because your body doesnt “conform” to a MATHEMATICAL EQUATION is absurd!

You are entitled to work any job you can physically do. Even if you are skinny, or even a actual heroin addict. Public exposure does not automatically subject you to higher standards. You have the same rights and responsibilities as anyone else. I dont care if the model has AIDS, work it for all its worth.

Maybe Politicians should be the first people to be forced to conform, then sports people, musicians, movie stars watch the public get upset then.

Its easy to pick on perceived elitist minorities.

Unfortunately the mathematical equation thing is true. All throughout school, your marks are looked at. Your GPA your grades, your college entrance ranks. Then when you graduate you get looked at your college marks.

If youre an athlete your times, lifts or season averages are looked at. If youre a model or porn star your measurements get looked at. Unfortunately (or fortunately for some) numbers seems to control a lot of things.

[quote]nephorm wrote:
I mean, think of the children![/quote]

But not the British children.

I’m all for it, but just because looking at things like this is disgusting!

[quote]PGA200X wrote:
I’m all for it, but just because looking at things like this is disgusting![/quote]

I can’t see her abs.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
PGA200X wrote:
I’m all for it, but just because looking at things like this is disgusting!

I can’t see her abs.[/quote]

She doesnt have abs, she has spine.

[quote]PGA200X wrote:
I’m all for it, but just because looking at things like this is disgusting![/quote]

Can you photoshop her up a bit? I dunno…cover her in some Versace or something, make her look glamourous.

X, I’m not swayed by any “slippery slope” type arguments, or general applications of the maxim when these are two very different cases.

In one case, you have the skin and bones model that is the model of death. In the other case, you have big football players, some of whom are healthy and some that are not. Just because a BMI restriction would work on one of the scale, the low end, doesn’t mean that it would work on the high end.

To apply restrictions in one case, doesn’t mean they should or would be applied in all cases. These cases are different.

[quote]Kailash wrote:
X, I’m not swayed by any “slippery slope” type arguments, or general applications of the maxim when these are two very different cases.

In one case, you have the skin and bones model that is the model of death. In the other case, you have big football players, some of whom are healthy and some that are not. Just because a BMI restriction would work on one of the scale, the low end, doesn’t mean that it would work on the high end.

To apply restrictions in one case, doesn’t mean they should or would be applied in all cases. These cases are different.[/quote]

No, censorship is censorship no matter how you try to dress it up. They’re skinny…not murderers. How is that any differenty from the example given of football players? Simply because no one has suggested it yet?

[quote]Miserere wrote:
Majin wrote:
Nothing ever gets solved by banning a commonly occuring fenomena. Spain is the most uneducated and lagging West-European country anyway.

This isn’t the politics forum, so I won’t respond to your comment; but I wonder what you’ve based your opinion on. I have visited/lived in (or am otherwise quite familiar with) quite a few European countries, and would definitely not rank Spain as the most lagging.[/quote]

I’ve actually heard it on a european news station. They just plainly laid it out. I was surprised but they’ve listed several topics which were pretty convincing. I have nothing agianst Spain otherwise and hope to visit it one day.

I wouldn’t be for legislation, but realistically, the organizers of an event, or employers, should also have the right to set some criteria for participation.

I mean, don’t firefighters have to pass physical requirements? I’ll bet they weed out all the skinny waifs who never eat too.

The idea is quite simple you get a girl that is tall and has an unusual beautifull face and extra skinny body.

You’ve got an human hanger!

If the girl had a beautifull body it would be harder to fit he clothes and people would look at the girl not the clothes.

The fashion industry is al about selling clothes not about peoples needs.