Wanted: Only Uber-Thin Women With Ginormous Breasts Need Apply

photo credit: xkcd.com

Katie Green has a spectacular rack. Everyone agrees. At least enough people voted her -- and her 30F's (no that's not a typo - can you imagine?) -- to be the winner of Wonderbra's "Real Women" campaign. At first Green was "completely bowled over" by the news that she had been picked by her British countrymen (and women?) despite her "curvy size 12" frame (that's a size 8 US). But it didn't take long for reality to sink in. No, not the reality of posing in her skivvies on thousands of billboards and in international print ads. But the reality of her "weight problem."

Despite being picked for her, ahem, size, Green was quickly informed by her modelling agency -- the one recommended by Wonderbra -- that she need to lose "two stone" (28 pounds) because the average size for models was a UK size 8-10 (a US size 4-6). The agency justified their stance by saying, "We advised Katie that commercial and lingerie models need to be an average size 10 as is requested by the market sector she wanted to model for. This is a healthy size that can be achieved through exercise and good nutrition."

I'm assuming the agency meant for her to lose the weight from places other than her moneymakers -- a feat not easily accomplished unless said goody bags are filled with silicone.

Green, showing a rare display of pragmatism in an insane business, opted to quit rather than pull a Beyonce and drop 20 pounds in 2 weeks. And for that I want to celebrate her. Green said she has aspirations to be a cop -- and not of the naughty variety. I wish her all success in her endeavor. Although I have a feeling there are going to be a lot of young males swerving around her precinct with missing headlights. (Could that sentence have come out sounding any dirtier? You know what I meant.)

A Drop In The Undersized Model Bucket
In a similar and equally tragic-turned-fist-pumping-awesome incident, Kim Brittingham reported via The Weighting Game about her travails with the PR firm for Avenue clothing, a plus size brand. Brittingham, a noted and gutsy size acceptance activist, was invited by the firm to a meeting to discuss her potential endorsement of the brand. Once she arrived however, she was told that the woman who arranged the meeting, Kellie Brown of 5W public relations, had seen Brittingham walk in and immediately canceled the meeting declaring her as too fat to represent Avenue. Despite the fact that Brittingham routinely wears Avenue clothing. Despite the fact that Ms. Brown is significantly plus-sized herself.

So who should sell large-sized bras to big-busted women and plus-sized clothing to plus-sized women if not big-busted and plus-sized models? Apparently the industry only wants "undersized models" - a term aptly coined by Brittingham - to represent average-sized and larger women. In an industry where, as Leslie Goldman points out, Mariska Hargitay calls herself "full-figured" in Self magazine, Eva Longoria Parker is "fat" at a size 0, and Whitney Thompson is a plus-sized model at a US size 6, these examples are the norm and not the exception.

In the past women have been subjugated by groups (men, religions, governments) but now we are doing it to ourselves. And all in the name of fashion.

Comments

[rjmiller]

Wait, they're saying the "norm" and "average" is people that professionally look attractive, work out for several hours per day and never eat? Right...

On the plus side, men are jumping on the boat. These days if a guy's pecs aren't permanently imprinted in his too-tight shirts then he isn't "fit."

[Infokronea]

Excellent blog! And Amen! When I was young, I dropped down to 87 pounds (I was 5 foot 6 inches at the time) and dreamed of getting a breast enlargement in order to be "perfect". I almost killed myself. But, in the end, I walked away from this merry adventure with a touch of wisdom. I stopped buying what the fashion world was selling. That wasn't me. It wasn't even my species. So, when my daughter came along years later, I loaded my home with female fertlity figures (easy enough since I'm an anthropology major) and raised her to believe that real women have curves. Why? Because they do. And the sooner we female humans come to terms with the fact that we aren't Barbie dolls (thank Heavens!), the happier (and healthier) we all will be.

[Badbone]

I'm a man that likes think women. Maybe I’m just a beast. Or uncharitable. But I like what I like.

The difference is, I don’t think that my preference is the only true way to feel. Yet every single time we see an article about women and weight we see the tired old expression about “real” women have curves.

What makes a “curvey” woman real? Why is a thin woman not real? Yes thin is rarer than “zaftig” or a hundred million other euphemisms women employ. Yes thin is difficult to achieve for some women. But the women that do achieve it should be applauded, not insulted as somehow being not real.

Yes ads in magazines are deceptive. Ever look at GQ? I don’t see men that good looking, ever. But do I say “real” men are under 6 feet tall? “Real” men have 20 pounds to lose? Of course not. I recognize the advertisements are putting forth the top 1% of the population. It doesn’t upset me. Why does it upset you?

[chroma601]

There is a wonderful website called The Judgement of Paris that deals with plus sizes and fashion (http://www.judgmentofparis.com/). Please have a look. (I'm unaffiliated)

Here is an example of what's on the site:

The Body as Fashion Accessory

What do full-figured women have that underweight women lack?

Curves, of course.

There could be no better indication of the media establishment’s conspiracy to suppress true, feminine beauty than the nonsensical (and highly suspect) fashion rules that it imposes on plus-size women—i.e., that they “skim over,” “cover up,” “disguise,” and “hide,” their curves.

Could the conspiracy to suppress true femininity find a more obvious means of expression? It is Orwellian doublethink at its worst.

And what is the result of following such rules? Plus-size women end up hiding their most attractive features.

Think about the implications of such a directive:

Hide what makes you beautiful.

Could anything be more insidious?

It would be like gagging the Mona Lisa, to “cover up” her smile; or “skimming over” the Ode to Joy in Beethoven’s Ninth.

Not only should fashion work in harmony with feminine curves, but the greatest goal of fashion should be to function as a “frame for the female figure,” whereby it accentuates and draws attention to the beauty of the womanly curves, directing the eye towards the soft, natural contours of the womanly figure, just as a great frame leads the eye into the beauty of an exquisite painting.

[bittyknit]

As someone who worked as a bra-fitter at a small boutique, I can give some info about the vaguaries of bra sizing. It's surprisingly non-standardized.
A few bra companies do cup-size like this: A B C D E F G
Some do it like this: A B C D DD DDD G
Some do it like this: A B C D DD E F FF G GG etc. (no I didn't leave out the EE, it doesn't exist. Confused yet?), up to a JJ
The common thread is that after a D cup, it all goes haywire.

Cup sizes are in proportion to the band size. To get the same sized underwire in a different band size you would have to change the cup letter: a 34D has the same sized underwire as a 32DD, a 30DDD (or whatever variant from above), a 36C, a 38B, etc.

Additionally, just as some jean brands fit you differently in key areas, bras also fit differently in the band or in the shape of the cup.

I actually am a 30F in one brand, which runs loose in the band; in other brands I'm a 32DDD. I am not particularly petite (size 8 or 10). If you walked by me on the street, you might think that I was a pretty ordinary hour-glass figure. I don't look as though I was destined for the adult entertainment industry, and it's not because I am dressing to hide it.

[JScott]

And what I was wondering even some 'plus size' retailers like Lane Bryant you look at their catalogs and the models look 'normal' not even 'plus' sized, I dunno but to me I dunno why women get outraged by all this as deceptive advertising. But such is the fashion industry I guess. (I'm no authority and I don't play one on TV either)

[Eek909]

I am a little unsure about the sizing 30F. I looked up other pictures of her and she appears to have a very strong, broad back. There is no way that her band size is 30.

I was overweight all my life. When I was overweight, I assumed that I would have to look like a skeleton to fit into a size 4 or 6. This year, I lost a lot of weight with exercise and healthy diet changes. I went from a size 16 to a size 4 .

And guess what? I don't look like a skeleton. I still have meat on my bones, and I feel very healthy and fit.. A size 4-6 is not "uber-thin", for me anyway, and I bet it wouldn't be for her.

It's all about body fat percentage.. For me, it wasn't until I got to about a size 6 that my body fat percentage fell in the normal range. If her body fat percentage is in the normal range, they have no right to ask her to lose weight. If she is in an unhealthy body fat range, then yeah, it's not out of line to ask her to work on her diet and exercise to get to an optimal level of body fat. Asking her to be a size 4-6 is not asking her to look like concentration camp resident.

[Charlotte Hilton Andersen - Huffpost Blogger]

Good point. A size 4-6 is not uber-thin on all women. And you are SO right about body fat percentage being a much better indicator of health than weight, BMI or even bra size. However, Green is 5' 11'' (according to the same article that said she was a 30F) and a size 4 on a nearly 6-foot woman looks much, much different than on a shorter woman. And having very tall friends, I would describe the size 4 look on them as "uber thin". But at the same time the title of my post was meant to skewer the industry that would call a size 6 "plus size" and tell Kim Brittingham that while she's big enough to buy their clothes, she's too big to represent them. There was hyperbole involved in that title;)

And I must say CONGRATS on your incredible health transformation. That must have been an incredible amount of work. I applaud you!

[LongeDeTudo]

Charlotte Hilton Anderson- I like your posts, even though they tend to skew solely to fat chick territory, and not in a funny way like this sentence. That being said, that girl does not have large breasts. Granted, I knows what I likes and not much else, so I admit I don´t actually know what 30 Fs should look like. But Ds are big, so Fs should be bigger, right? 30s are average, or at least not big like 44 DDs, right? So, how can a girl have 30 Fs? Educate us, what do the letters and numbers mean? And if you were just playing with us, and 30 Fs are just nice and not freakishly huge in at least some aspect; why then I think you and this post have just been a little bit intellectually dishonest.

[Charlotte Hilton Andersen - Huffpost Blogger]

You make a good point. I had the same question myself, actually, after seeing her pic. The only source I have for her actual breast size is the article I linked to in the first paragraph. For instructional purposes (bra buying 101?) the 30 refers to the inches around her ribcage, right under her breasts. 30 is very very very petite. Like pre-teen petite. Most women are at least a 32 or a 34. Cup sizes are based on how many inches bigger the fullest part of the bust is than the band size. The cup sizes go up - and this is key - in RELATION to the band size. So a 34 D will be much larger than a 30 D. And presumably, with such a small ribcage, it would be possible for her to be a 30F and still look smaller than an average sized woman, say a 34D, because it is the difference between the two measurements that makes the cup size. And as for "fat chick" territory, I write lots of posts on lots of subjects and the editors publish the ones they like best. Check out my blog if you want more variety.

[Barticus]

Are you sure that's not a typo? I get the image of a beanpole and two watermelons.

[Charlotte Hilton Andersen - Huffpost Blogger]

Read my response to the previous poster. And it may very well be a typo - but if it is, it isn't my typo but the original articles:)

[GrainOSand]

Olive Oyl with big breasts is not appealing (too me anyway). There is something to be said for meat on the bones -- visually speaking of course. The infatuation with thin is a head-scratcher too me. I have the same size waist as I did in high school. My metabolism is such that I eat and eat and cannot gain weight. I can work out for a few hours and my muscles respond such that I look like I have been at it for years (there was a time where I trained everyday -- for years). I have what they call "lean mass". I would like to put on ten to fifteen pounds but I would have to gorge myself, workout like a maniac to build more muscle mass, and supplement with weight gain solutions.

What I would suggest for full-figured women as a man is that definition is the ticket not starving yourself to live up to some magazine image of beauty. Firm up and cut up do not crave a pencil thin body for that is unappealing -- at least to me it is. Pushup, sit-ups, bending and stretching --- ahhhhhhh feels good! In addition, women are meant to have pliable bodies due to the nature of being able to give birth; a stick does not suggest pliability but breakage.

Please do not hurt me ladies if I have been offensive for that was not my aim. I wanted to speak to the infatuation with thin.

[Charlotte Hilton Andersen - Huffpost Blogger]

Well put. I'm glad you said this!