Did I tell you I returned a skirt the other day? It was a 6. It was too big. It was from Target. I was so disgusted that a six was too big that I didn't buy the 4. It's called glamour sizing (thanks Nino!). I am not a 4. I am not a 6. I am an 8. I don't like corporations trying to manipulate me into buying more clothes or their clothes because the tag shows a nice size. That's what I feel when I am buying clothes these days.
We have a problem that we need to address.
Things like glamour sizing and THIS do not address the problem.
I know you can manipulate digital images in Photoshop and do this effect. This camera only brings this trick to more people without needing to know sophisticated photoshop skills. That's fine. I'm all about making technology more available to more people. I don't like the digital divide. However, this technology just is sick and wrong. I showed that web page for that camera to a friend and she said, "it's disturbing, but so appealing."
It is appealing and that is what makes it so wrong. I don't want skinny pixels in my pictures, or skinny tags on my clothing. I don't want to live a lie.
(Thanks to My Wonderful Husband for the link to the camera and the title of the entry. Maybe someday I'll get him to do a guest blog entry!)
1 comment:
New Zealand's first woman MP, Mabel Howard, stood up in parliment in 1954 and waved two pairs of outsize (OS) ladies bloomers (one huge, the other much smaller). As a result legislation was introduced to standardise clothing sizes in NZ.
The other day I was shopping with a friend and a shop assistant told her "our sizes are quite large" and I thought of Mabel Howard turning in her grave.
Why aren't politicians waving underwear?
Post a Comment