In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Israel Will Outlaw Anorexic Models

Lauren

Jacqui sent me a link to this article, of particular interest for her as she works (or worked?) with plus-size models in the industry.

The Guardian reports that Israel is in the process of ending the employment of fashion models with eating disorders:

This Sunday, a committee of the Israeli parliament, the Knesset, will decide whether to proceed with a bill to compel model agencies to monitor the health and body mass index (the ratio of height to weight) of models. Models would have to undergo regular medical tests to ensure their body mass index (BMI) is 19 or above. The most serious anorexics can have a BMI as low as seven.

If the Knesset passes the bill, [Israeli photographer] Barkan hopes the effect will be two-fold. First, agencies will be forced to confront a problem they have for long ignored and, second, only “healthy” models will be seen on television, in magazines and on billboards.

Barkan would only employ models with a certain BMI, saying that he employed only healthy models despite being able to hide the signs of eating disorders with good lighting and digital imaging software. Barkan also believes that the fashion industry has a huge part in furthering spectacles that lead to body image disorders, saying, “”I think 50% of the problem can be dealt with by us. If the fashion stores, food companies and other consumers of model services refuse to employ unhealthy women, that will remove one part of the motivation to reduce weight.”

This is one overseas reform I can get behind. First Benneton, then Dove, now Barkan. But unlike the Dove campaign, Barken seeks to remove the spectacle from the spectacle, a reform that will begin to reframe normalcy.

38 thoughts on Israel Will Outlaw Anorexic Models

  3. So far I can’t find anything more recent than the article you linked to, but I did find out that this has been a long time coming – there’s a reference to it on this Canadian site from January 2004. The Knesset site is here, though I find it singularly difficult to navigate.

  4. Pingback: Liberal Serving

  6. Hm.

    It’s entirely possible to have an eating disorder, even a very serious one, and neither lose a great deal of weight nor “look” anorexic. I worry that by placing focus like this on the most visible stereotype of the disease’s effects, the Knesset will make it harder to understand how the disease works. Also, having a bunch of relatively healthy size 4’s on billboards will still give the larger civilian women horrible body complexes, and could certainly cause them to take self-destructive measures to get down to that size. They still won’t see their bodies on television.

  7. But Piny, don’t you think that beautiful images of severely anorexic women – the zero’s and 1’s – that are airbrushed to remove the appearance of “sickness” like protruding bones, hollow faces and sallow skintones have a distinct and more dramatic impact than merely thin models?

    I think it would dull the edge of the blade.

  8. Oh hey, thanks for posting this! I too was curious about the outcome of it, and haven’t heard any updates either.

    Piny, I agree that a self-image problem will still exist, but on the very base level, eliminating (or severely reducing) the number of truly unhealthy models, at the very least, does major improvement to the industry itself even if on the outside, nothing appears to have changed.

    Baby steps…

  9. But Piny, don’t you think that beautiful images of severely anorexic women – the zero’s and 1’s – that are airbrushed to remove the appearance of “sickness” like protruding bones, hollow faces and sallow skintones have a distinct and more dramatic impact than merely thin models?

    I agree that abolishing the most unhealthy extreme of an unhealthy standard will help. But it won’t solve the problem. And it won’t get rid of eating disorders–it’ll just allow people to believe that it has, by limiting the recognized condition and appearance of anorexia to the most extreme, visible version.

    I think it may just present–and approve–a still unattainable standard, merely one that has the appearance of health. The problem is not merely that you believe you have to look unhealthily thin. The problem is that you believe you have to have a body drastically different from yours. If you’re a size twelve, it’s not much healthier to attempt to get down to size four than to size nothing.

    Plus, eating disorders are not all about getting thin or getting emaciated. They’re about controlling your body against the constraints of reality–about forcing it into an impossible regimen contrary to its needs. That doesn’t necessarily mean starvation; bingeing and obsessive workouts are also common. The strategies most commonly undertaken to achieve any of these impossible images are incredibly unhealthy, even before the ED sufferer gets down to an unsustainable weight.

  10. I just checked my BMI: 17.1. Before I had kids, my BMI never ever rose above 16. No effort. No eating disorders. It’s just the family metabolism. (My 5ft.2 grandmother weighed 86 lbs when she got married in her early 20s. I calculate that my father’s body mass was about 17.5 when I was in high school.)

    On the one hand, I understand what they are trying to do. On the other hand, it does have the uncomfortable implication that I’m leading young girls astray just by being, and especially by making any kindof public appearance.

  11. One thing I do nitpick about it is that on one hand, he focuses on BMI (which, as everyone is painfully aware of by now, is a poor indicator of health on an individual level) but on the other hand, he talks about naturally thin models (about 30% of the industry) and having regular health checks with their doctors which would, presumably, look much further into their health than just measuring a BMI number.

  13. One thing I do nitpick about it is that on one hand, he focuses on BMI (which, as everyone is painfully aware of by now, is a poor indicator of health on an individual level) but on the other hand, he talks about naturally thin models (about 30% of the industry) and having regular health checks with their doctors which would, presumably, look much further into their health than just measuring a BMI number.

    That is an interesting lapse. And what would these health checks measure? Sudden weight gain or loss? BP? Blood cholesterol? Some people really are just naturally skinny as all get out–half the people in my family (not my half) are naturally nearly model-thin, even if they aren’t quite in Kathryn’s league.

    One thing I nitpick about is this: are we trying to keep the models from starving themselves to death or ill health, or are we trying to keep women and young women from emulating them through starvation? The latter requires a lot more than telling models that they can’t either have actual eating disorders or look like extremely thin people with severe eating disorders.

  15. (I really should learn to write everything before hitting the “Submit” button)

    And Katherine, I agree with the end of your statement there. Just as plus models and plus-sized people should not feel ostracized merely by “being,” neither should naturally thin models and people.

  16. One thing I nitpick about is this: are we trying to keep the models from starving themselves to death or ill health, or are we trying to keep women and young women from emulating them through starvation?

    To me, it seems like the direct goal is to prevent models from starving themselves to death or ill health. The article doesn’t address public perception much, if at all.

    Which, in my opinion, is not such a horrible thing in and of itself. Models are people too.

  17. Yes, that is a very good point. The problem isn’t that there are a bunch of extremely skinny women modeling clothing. The problem is that there are no other women visible.

  18. Which, in my opinion, is not such a horrible thing in and of itself. Models are people too.

    It’s a worthy goal, but it rankles that the Knesset didn’t decide to address the other big problem as effectively while they were up.

  19. Accepting people’s natural size is supposed to be what “size acceptance” is all about.

    Maybe it’s sick and twisted of me to even think this, but it seems to me that if I were a 23-year-old Israeli model faced with imminent loss of my career — rather than 43-year-old American housewife and editor, for whom size is no issue — and I were faced with the problem of a 12 lb. shortfall (the gap between my weight and a BMI of 19) that no amount of stuffing myself could close, I would get myself some humongous breast implants, and maybe some other artificial augmentation in other places, that would bring the target (employment-necessary) weight within reach.

    Needless to say, this would not produce the “healthy” look they are trying to legislate for.

  20. Urgh. Good point. That hadn’t occurred to me as a potential “solution” to the new standard. Trying to gain weight your body doesn’t want to gain isn’t much healthier, though.

    Would it be better, do you think, to have strict checks on actual eating-disorders–because they’re not hard to diagnose, even on someone who is naturally very skinny–and at the same time force the industry to include women of all sizes, rather than forcing them to move the bar a few inches back towards average size?

  21. Would it be better, do you think, to have strict checks on actual eating-disorders–because they’re not hard to diagnose, even on someone who is naturally very skinny–and at the same time force the industry to include women of all sizes, rather than forcing them to move the bar a few inches back towards average size?

    I think part of the reason that will be difficult is because that’s generally not how the modeling industry “works.” There are basically two sides: fashion (runway and couture) and commercial (print advertising, catalogues, etc.). Fashion is usually a lot more visible, “famous,” and glamorous than commercial modeling, but the crux is that the fashion modeling industry is not focusing around models, or even PEOPLE, whatsoever. High-fashion designers are designing clothes as art — most people in the world will never buy or wear these clothes. Just as some other forms of “high art,” it’s mostly an art form that is meant to impress one another as high-fashion appreciators. These clothes designers don’t design with a human being in mind at all, and the mere existance of these models is so that the clothes can walk down a runway. Therefore, the point of having such extremely thin models for fashion is because they need to be able to fit into the extremely small clothing that is designed for couture shows.

    (now that I’m done rambling) Therefore, the fashion industry in general — the high-fashion clothing designers — have basically no interest whatsoever in improving anyone’s body image. It’s not about people. It’s about the clothes.

  22. Am I the only one who sees something wrong with the fact that they are proposing punishing these women with real or perceived EDs?

    He admits that anorexia can have a multitude of causes but is convinced that the fashion industry can have a major effect on it. “I think 50% of the problem can be dealt with by us. If the fashion stores, food companies and other consumers of model services refuse to employ unhealthy women, that will remove one part of the motivation to reduce weight.” [emphasis mine]

    I want a broader definition of “beauty” as much as the next person, but not at the expense of others. Not when this proposed “fix” doesn’t even address the problem of an imposed beauty standard, whether it be size 0, size 6, or size 16. Not when Barkan, and other companies, profess to be taking on responsibility when in reality they’re just foisting it back on the anorexic models that their industry helped create.

    These women deserve our help, not our contempt.

  23. But a lot of modelling isn’t about clothes at all. There are all kinds of things sold using pix of extremely thin women. But indeed, it’s not about people. Its about commerce.

    (Does anyone else find it the slightest bit ironic that this thread runs simultaneous with the one on braillian waxing? I stopped bothering to remove any bodily hair a couple of years ago when I realized that a woman over 40 who was 5’6 and 106 lbs with long [undyed] blonde hair should have the confidence to wear a high-end bikini without shaving a blessed thing.)

  24. What’s to stop Photoshop-happy retouching studios from resizing the healthy models?

    Don’t get me wrong, though. I am happy as a clam in springtime whenever somebody notices that the current beauty standard makes women sick.

    It seems to me that one can strike a blow for anorexics everywhere by ceasing to fetishize the look of their disease.

  25. They probably even resize models below BMI of 19. It’s actually pretty funny how women’s bodies get photoshopped on improbable, especially when their hands or breasts end up larger than their heads.

  26. But a lot of modelling isn’t about clothes at all. There are all kinds of things sold using pix of extremely thin women. But indeed, it’s not about people. Its about commerce.

    That’s correct, and that was kind of the second half of my comment (which I didn’t post because it was getting a bit long) – that falls under “commercial” modeling which uses a much broader range of people, but is still commerce-based (as you said).

  27. “on improbable” should read “in improbable ways”

    None of what I have aid should be understood to undercut the reality that the fashion industry is insane and does indeed pressure models in exactly the ways the photographer describes. When I was 18 years old and not feeling particularly employable, I was briefly enrolled in a modelling school. I dropped out after being told I needed to lose an inch of my hips to have the “right proportions.” BMI at age 18: 15. I may have been only 18, but I could tell that was nuts.

  28. What’s to stop Photoshop-happy retouching studios from resizing the healthy models?

    Even more legislation? I would support an anti-martians-and-fembots-in-glossy-magazines measure, if only to keep Halle Berry’s vulcanized face from looming in my nightmares.

    Don’t get me wrong, though. I am happy as a clam in springtime whenever somebody notices that the current beauty standard makes women sick.

    It seems to me that one can strike a blow for anorexics everywhere by ceasing to fetishize the look of their disease.

    I agree with this. I just worry about the semantic limits it places on the popular understanding of eating disorders and ED-afflicted bodies, and the implicit approval of “really thin–naturally! we think!–but still seemingly healthy” standards for models. Especially if the average woman would have to make herself nearly as sick to fit into that category.

    Of course, this whole debate is a little, erm, twisted: what’s merely abusive, and what actually kills? The breast-implant sidebar* made it clear that there’s no aspect of this industry that doesn’t place hideously unfair and unhealthy demands on the bodies of its employees and its consumers.

    *I could see a breast-implant approval board being created, and special corollary breast-implant standards to make sure the skinny models aren’t cheating so as to preserve their purging habits.

  29. the fashion industry in general… have basically no interest whatsoever in improving anyone’s body image. It’s not about people. It’s about the clothes.

    That’s true about high-fashion, but clothes are a product, and marketers do intentionally use too-thin models to sell mass-marketed clothes. The logic is that consumers will buy an outfit from the gap because they aspire to look like the artificial images of models the gap uses in its ads. They sell to the aspiration – however unrealistic and unconscious – to look like the model.

    It seems strange to me that this law would be crafted with the model’s well being in mind, but I think it could have an impact on the collect psyche of advertising viewers by removing at least the most extreme anorexic images, though twisty’s totally correct that the photos can (and are) retouched to appear skinnier than the already skinny models…

  30. So, Israel manages to eliminate anorexia from modeling before it manages to eliminate the settlers from the occupied territories. Excuse me while I say “feh.”

  31. I’m with Tekanji on this one.

    From the article quoted:

    “”I think 50% of the problem can be dealt with by us. If the fashion stores, food companies and other consumers of model services refuse to employ unhealthy women, that will remove one part of the motivation to reduce weight.”–Barkan, Israeli photographer

    Fine. Good. Why does Barkan need a law to help this problem? If he thinks it’s so important, why doesn’t he refuse to photograph models that are unhealthy (without getting into the very important problems of defining ‘unhealthy’, for Barkan or for the Israeli government)?

    I know this sounds naive, but really, I think it points to tekanji’s point–this is passing the buck, and passing it to people who are less to blame for the problem than most others (i.e. I would blame modeling agencies and photographers long before I’d blame the models themselves, although everybody has some responsibility for the problem, including consumers of the advertising and clothes).

  32. That’s true about high-fashion, but clothes are a product, and marketers do intentionally use too-thin models to sell mass-marketed clothes. The logic is that consumers will buy an outfit from the gap because they aspire to look like the artificial images of models the gap uses in its ads. They sell to the aspiration – however unrealistic and unconscious – to look like the model.

    Again, this is true, but not of the fashion side of the modeling industry. The side that market that caters to actually selling clothes to the masses is the commercial industry, which works in a slightly different fashion but is still commerce-driven. Marketing studies continually show that people don’t like to buy from stores that use less-than-ideal models (for example, using a plus-sized model in a store that sells a whole range of clothing, from petites to plus yields lower sales than using a petite or an average model for the same store). The question that comes from THIS, though, is which came first? The chicken or the egg?

    Are people finicky about buying from a store that uses a model who is, say, larger than usual because they don’t want to be associated with that, or are they that way to begin with because the stores have done that to us for so long?

    Commercial modeling has its own set of demons, although they already use a much wider range of models than fashion modeling. It’s driven entirely by the stores and what the stores are requesting for their ad campaigns, and the ad campaigns are driven by what marketing data is telling them will be the best ROI.

  33. Pingback: Pandagon

  34. The question that comes from THIS, though, is which came first? The chicken or the egg?

    There’s also the question of whether it’s an allowable practice even if there is some inherent sales-damaging property of fat (or average) bodies. IIRC, the airline companies made related arguments against hiring nonwhite flight attendants: we aren’t racist, heavens no, but our customers don’t want them in the cabins; they won’t be as happy with their service. We’re just giving them what they demand.

  35. “Models would have to undergo regular medical tests to ensure their body mass index (BMI) is 19 or above.”

    Why 19?

  37. I’m a woman with one breast – next month a prophylactic mastectomy will leave me with none. I’ve always had a “model” figure, but when it came to the crunch, staying alive was and is more important. I like myself a whole lot better now, when I’ve finally come to terms with being “flawed but living”, than when I calculated the calories in every mouthful I ate. I’m still a beautiful woman, but now I have confidence that the beauty is within me, my strength and my hope and my pride.
    I worry about my daughter. She’s growing up in a world where “famine chic” is desirable; on the one hand the TV news is full of images of starving children, which are designed to fill us with pity, and of starving women, which are supposed to fill us with envy. I feel we didn’t have this kind of pressure when I was a child, which is perhaps one reason I’ve been able to come to terms with the mutilation of cancer so relatively easily. When I hear my 4-year-old talking about people being “fat and ugly”, I wonder what we as a society are doing to our daughters.

  38. The logic is that consumers will buy an outfit from the gap because they aspire to look like the artificial images of models the gap uses in its ads. They sell to the aspiration – however unrealistic and unconscious – to look like the model.

    I don’t think that’s it, actually. It’s not so much an aspirational image as a punishing image. I think the idea is to make women so miserable with how we look we overspend on clothes and make-up to compensate.

Comments are currently closed.