The fashion industry is still pushing crazy thin body images
The fashion industry is still pushing crazy thin body images
Apologies for the low resolution. It was a mobile ad and all I could get was a screenshot.
You're viewing a single thread.
You cannot tell me that dude (duddette?) doesn't have an eating disorder. That looks sickly and horrible.
I am extremely skinny and look unhealthy and kinda similar to the model in that way, even though I eat normally and I think even very healthy. My dad looks like that too. Being 2 meters tall also doesn't exactly help. Just saying that you shouldn't judge people so easily and you can hurt someone also pretty easily. Some people just have being fat or skinny in their genes.
Absolutely right. I would not judge you if I saw you at the supermarket. But this dude is the face of a fashion and beauty brand. They are pushing this body type (rarely occurs naturally in healthy folks like you) and mostly occurs on people with health problems. In a way they are pushing a non healthy image to many people that are not like you. I would even dare to say you are a very minuscule porcentage of people with this body type that are 100% healthy so this is being pushed to folks that have lovehandles and now they hate themselves.
the important part is the suggestion that you can look like them by buying prada
Yeah, given that people have different body types, making any type the good one or worse, the right one is just wrong, and beauty business plays a big role in the problem.
Thank you. There's apparently been a fine line between promoting body acceptance and shitting on thin body types. Some people seem to think it's not even a natural body type at all and anyone who's thin is just anorexic. It's like we've been completely left out of the equation unless we're being looked down on. Yeah, I'm right there with you on this.
You think what you eat is normal, because that's how your dad eats.
Your dad is also too skinny.
That's not a good metric to judge your habits on.
Conservation of energy would maybe disagree with that last statement
Being 2m tall they have to eat quite a bit more than average, and it sounds like they're not.
Yeah, I'm not much shorter and my daily intake is around 3000kcal. I used to be super skinny too, and that didn't change until I started eating more than what I thought was "normal"
How?
The way I interpret the comment is that they are saying "If you would eat normally, you couldn't be that thin."
It's a reference to the fact that energy cannot be destroyed, only transformed into a different form.
Which would only make sense if every human body processed every molecule ingested in the exact same way
Not really. Metabolism changes don't account for that large of a swing in your BMR unless you have a thyroid issue (which is treatable).
I've been in the same situation as the dude trying to justify that body type, and he's just not eating enough to be a healthy weight. You can't be 6'6" and eat the same amount of food as everyone else. You have to eat quite a bit more.
Except you might not be able to eat that much more if your body tells you you're full. There are a lot of factors to body weight, with studies suggesting a large genetic factor (40-70%. While theoretically you can (almost) always eat more/less and it'll affect your weight accordingly, the difficulty of actually doing that will vary heavily by individual.
It's something you have to train your body for.
It's a reference to the fact that energy cannot be destroyed, only transformed into a different form.
"The way I interpret this comment is" if this is all there is to it, then we should all be the same weight all the time, apparently.
It's amazing what people think they can "interpret" about another whole entire anonymous human being they know literally nothing about, other than "thin."
These comments are totally proving the OC's point though.
Maybe they do, maybe they don't. I think it's a bit distasteful to armchair diagnose someone you don't know, though
It's also distasteful to encourage eating disorders to enter the modelling industry by exclusively featuring models that are extremely underweight, but I guess who are we to judge...
We are the society and judging other people's behaviour is what defines morality. Not speaking up about things that are clearly fucked up as the model industry just shifts the whole moral-scale in their favor.
You're right that it is distasteful to encourage eating disorders, but assuming the model has an eating disorder is also distasteful. Some people are naturally that skinny. The problem is that the fashion industry makes it out to be far more realistic and achieveable than it is. However, it is still a hurtful thing to say. I look like that. I do not have an eating disorder. The OP's comment is insulting to me. I get shit on all the time for my weight and it really sucks. Insulting someone for being fat is horrible, but insulting someone for being skinny is 100% OK, right?
The fact that you choose to take personally what was a comment about a model in an industry that specifically selects for extremely underweight models regardless of how they achieve that weight doesn't mean that it was an insult directed at you. You are not the subject here. You may have a unique metabolism, but the industry projects an unhealthy and largely unattainable image for the vast majority of people.
We aren't ridiculing the model, we're concerned for their health...
That's not skinny, that's starvation thin. The person in the picture is clearly not eating enough, any suggestion otherwise is just giving power to the notion that it's healthy to be that underweight.
Not eating enough food is an eating disorder, regardless of the cause of it.
But when they're extremely overweight from their eating disorder, that's body positivity and needs to be included for those people to not feel excluded?
Why are the only options the extremely underweight or the extremely overweight? What wrong with just using people of average weight? Or even just a healthy weight?
The fashion business seems to thrive on either body positivity or body negativity, but not body neutrality. If you feel neutral.about you body, I guess that doesn't prompt you to spend a ton of money on products to celebrate or disguise it.
Meh, I dated a girl thinner than that. People were always making comments like yours, but to her face.
She had one barely functioning kidney. Dumped her because she was foul tempered, but I heard she got a transplant!
But yes, eating disorder is a fair guess for a model like that.
She had one barely functioning kidney. Dumped her because she was foul tempered, but I heard she got a transplant!
Good to know...
I used to look like that from ages 15 to 30. I was eating 6000 calories a day to maintain my weight. I don't know about that dude (dude is gender neutral), but it is possible they are struggling to not lose weight. Unlikely, but possible.
Someone who eats 6000 calories a day cannot look like this. It is not scientifically possible. That energy has to go somewhere and unless you're sprinting continuously for hours on end it's just not happening.
Yet I did. 135 pounds and 6’2” for 15 years. You are assuming that everyone absorbs nutrition equally or that people burn at the same rate. I was a human space heater and, because my blood pressure was too low to get a driver's license, I was walking up to 7 miles a day. But that exercise probably didn't make a dent in anything.
I'm not here to say what your experiences are. I just have some numbers. The total daily energy expenditure of the average male of that weight and height aged 18-30 who does intense exercise daily is around 3300 calories a day and this is on the high range which means if one were to consume 6000 calories a day and use 3300, they would still have 2700 calories still in their body. A pound of fat is about 3500 calories therefore at that rate you would gain approximately 23 pounds a month. I'm not arguing. Just saying the numbers don't add up.
"average" is doing a lot of lifting there. And, again you are assuming normal absorption of calories. The numbers don't add up because you aren't considering all the variables. What's the calorie need differential between an ectomorph and an endomorph? What role does hormone and thyroid play?
Yes, you are arguing. You might be using math but you are saying I wasn't me.
What's the calorie need differential between an ectomorph and an endomorph?
None. Somatotypes are a pseudoscience and have been completely debunked.
What role does hormone and thyroid play?
The difference between the “fastest” and “slowest” metabolism in healthy people of the same weight is at most 300kcal per day, which is significant, but couldn’t account for a missing ~3k surplus per day
There are however several conditions which cause the body to simply not to process food (malabsorption is the term to look up), which is what must have been happening to you.
It’s very common for people to misestimate their calories by massive amounts, which is why people are expressing doubts, but what you’re describing is a real thing that happens
The variables don't matter because even if they were included, they wouldn't make up for the lost calories. Oh well. It's not important.
Saying variables don't matter is cheating at math and taking a very simplified view of metabolism of food intake. It was very important to me when I was counting every calorie and tried to lose any weight because 5 lb could send me to the hospital.
People have different metabolism rates, especially in younger ages.
You're either lying on the Internet (impossible!) or you had some serious disease that you failed to mention in your comment. Mitchell Hooper, weighing around 140 kg, was eating around 5500 kcal when he won worlds strongest man.
Seriously. No one's eating 6,000 calories a stay and looking like the dude in the post.
No illness. Just unlucky. Why would use use a world class body builder, literally the most exceptional human to ever exist as your point of comparison? That's like saying anyone could play Conan the Barbarian if they just toned up a little.
No, you're missing the point. Point is that even 500kcal less than your claimed daily intake will put into a 100++kg body weight, even if you're an elite athlete.
Unless you eat like Askeladden, there is absolutely zero chance you were eating anywhere close to 6000kcal a day if you didn't have medical condition that tampered with your intake.
Don't spread misinformation, especially about a topic that is already so heavily mired with it.
Except I was and I did. It's not misinformation. It's experience. But thanks for trying to invalidate 15 years of my life with zero information other than a basic understanding of calories and not figuring in any other metabolic factors.
Maybe you did consistently eat 6000kcal and 70% of it went right through your system and into the toilet, but then you had a medical condition that you didn't treat. Maybe a small village of tapeworms in your stomach, but no healthy person eat nearly three times as much as a normal man and stay underweight.
I spent three years going to doctors and at the end of the day it was suggested that I eat red meat salt on my food and drink alcohol to keep my blood pressure up because there was nothing they could do for my metabolism.
So you don't know how to count calories. Just say that.
Except I did. If I got behind I would lose pounds.
You should be studied by scientists then.
Too late now. Besides, all the research is on losing weight, not gaining it.
My brothers were swimmers and skinny and small (and really fast, won national titles) and that combination of young, male, and active does create a black hole of metabolism. I also had a friend who was 6'6" and 140lb but healthy too, poet not athlete. He ate, it's just hard to eat enough to fund that much height.
The model though, that's an aesthetic choice not an aspirational body type. Androgynous and otherworldly is what I think they are going for. It's not mainstream attractive, certainly.
