Average-sized models sell just as many products

pacific breeze · November 16th, 2006, 11:10 PM

http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2006/...in-models.html

Models of average size are just as effective at selling products as ultra-thin models, a social psychologist's research suggests.

Helga Dittmar of the University of Sussex in England scientifically examined the claim that thinness sells by comparing different types of advertisements, and presented her research at an obesity conference in Ottawa on Wednesday.

The ads featured the Size 0 models common in magazines as well as equally attractive models who had a body size that represents the average Canadian woman, a Size 10 or 12.

The two main findings were:

* Thin models make many women feel bad about their own bodies, while average-sized models do not.
* Average-sized models were just as effective as thin models for promoting body-care products, makeup and products related to thinness, such as diet foods.

"So really, there is no good reason to use ultra-thin models in advertising," Dittmar told CBC Newsworld on Wednesday.

"Women feel more anxious about their body and their body size, and in turn, body dissatisfaction has been shown to be linked to unhealthy eating patterns."

Recently, fashion shows in Madrid, Milan and London have moved to ban the use of models who are underweight. The British government says the "cult of thin" spurs young people towards dangerous dieting.

The moves may reflect the beginning of a backlash against the belief that thin is beautiful.

Dittmar believes seeing more average-sized models in ads would help prevent body dissatifaction and disordered eating.

"It's definitely a step in the right direction, but I still think we've got a long way to go before we will see greater diversity in body shapes in the media."

Lobelia · November 16th, 2006, 11:19 PM

That's very interesting. I never considered this issue from a financial perspective before.

pacific breeze · November 16th, 2006, 11:46 PM

And it's supposed to be all about the money. I completely believe this study. When I see the half-starved models, it is a complete turn-off for me.

Aella · November 17th, 2006, 05:59 AM

Not surprising. Of course, the odds that the fashion industry will pay attention and change their tactics are thinner than some of the models currently used.

travelbug · November 17th, 2006, 08:58 AM

Who determines what an "average-sized" model is? If average is like they say, size 10 or 12, and the fashion ads start using models that size, will that not contribute to our culture of obesity? Saying that a size 10 or 12 is ideal will tend to make a lot of people think it's OK to be heavier because they're not "models" after all. At least the way it is now, most overweight people know they're overweight because they do see images of much thinner people. But if all they see is people closer to their own size, it becomes more "normal" to be overweight, doesn't it? Which is a dangerous state of mind.

Laurent · November 17th, 2006, 09:07 AM

Is a 10 or 12 in Canada the same as a 10 or 12 in the United States, though?

I was under the impression that the two were different, like it is with the UK & U.S.

cynic · November 17th, 2006, 09:42 AM

I wanna see a picture of Helga Dittmar before I determine if the study is valid..........

suede · November 17th, 2006, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hotncmom

Who determines what an "average-sized" model is? If average is like they say, size 10 or 12, and the fashion ads start using models that size, will that not contribute to our culture of obesity? Saying that a size 10 or 12 is ideal will tend to make a lot of people think it's OK to be heavier because they're not "models" after all. At least the way it is now, most overweight people know they're overweight because they do see images of much thinner people. But if all they see is people closer to their own size, it becomes more "normal" to be overweight, doesn't it? Which is a dangerous state of mind.

size is relative to height as well.

a size 10 on someone 5'7" and taller is not obese
a sizw 10 on someone that is 5' is a different story

I could very well be wrong, but I think people are going to be obese with or without approval.

The truth is, it's not ok to be unhealthy - and unhealthy comes in all sizes.

MgMMD · November 17th, 2006, 12:25 PM

Suede I was going to say...it depends on the height of a woman.
A Woman who is 5'7 and taller- 10 to 12 is healthy.
I am actually knocking on the door of my Weight Watchers Goal ( BMI perfect thank you verymuch). I am 5'5 and I am a size 8.

I think people have a really skewed idea of what is a normal healthy weight.

FoxyMeaghan · November 18th, 2006, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MgMMD

Suede I was going to say...it depends on the height of a woman.
A Woman who is 5'7 and taller- 10 to 12 is healthy.
I am actually knocking on the door of my Weight Watchers Goal ( BMI perfect thank you verymuch). I am 5'5 and I am a size 8.

I think people have a really skewed idea of what is a normal healthy weight.

Okay, so you're not taking into account a woman's build, or lifestyle. Does this mean that a number determines health?

I'm 5'5", 143 pounds, and a size 10-12 depending on clothing brand. I actively participate in martial arts and other sports. So does that mean I'm unhealthy because of a number?

suede · November 18th, 2006, 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FoxyMeaghan

Okay, so you're not taking into account a woman's build, or lifestyle. Does this mean that a number determines health?

I'm 5'5", 143 pounds, and a size 10-12 depending on clothing brand. I actively participate in martial arts and other sports. So does that mean I'm unhealthy because of a number?

No of course not.
Muscle weighs more than fat.

lbs really mean nothing - i'm not really sure why how "we" as a society became so obsessed over such numbers.

pacific breeze · November 18th, 2006, 07:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laurent

Is a 10 or 12 in Canada the same as a 10 or 12 in the United States, though?

I was under the impression that the two were different, like it is with the UK & U.S.

No, they are not supposed to be different. They are getting more so now, especially with designer clothes. A DKNY 6 pair of jeans fits like a 10 on me, and yet I take an 8 normally. I notice that clothes made in Italy and the US (I mean they're all made in China anyway, but I mean the designs) tend to be more generous in the bottom than Canadian or French clothes.

I do think there has been a bit of a backlash against too-small sizes and cuts. A couple of years ago you could hardly buy any clothes in Vancouver that weren't really, really tiny and that reflected the large number of Asians here to a degree. But things seem to be getting a little better now. You can actually find size 8 and 10 and sometimes even 12 in higher-end stores.

Voodoo Child · November 18th, 2006, 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pacific breeze

And it's supposed to be all about the money. I completely believe this study. When I see the half-starved models, it is a complete turn-off for me.

Yep me too. I think some of them look repulsive.

MgMMD · November 18th, 2006, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FoxyMeaghan

Okay, so you're not taking into account a woman's build, or lifestyle. Does this mean that a number determines health?

I'm 5'5", 143 pounds, and a size 10-12 depending on clothing brand. I actively participate in martial arts and other sports. So does that mean I'm unhealthy because of a number?

No, I am saying people have a dismorphic idea of what healthy looks like.

Rondette · November 19th, 2006, 04:04 AM

I thought they used the rail-thin models because it 'makes the clothes hang better' Good book called 'Fashion Babylon' goes into this, at one point in the book it basically says if they could use floating coat hangers down the catwalk that would be perfect.