Message versus profit
Slim young women with peach skin as far as the eye can see. In reality, these women also look very different. In reality, they also have their rough edges. But the images are chased through image editing programs again and again, removing the last remnants of their individuality. Which wouldn't be necessary. Unfortunately, nobody really realizes this. What remains is the stale aftertaste of all the other women who wonder why they don't look the same. Of course, this also affects men, but they are not quite as dissatisfied with themselves and are more likely to have other problems. I'm just talking about penis size. This, in turn, has more to do with the not insignificant consumption of pornographic films. And here too there are masses of unrealistic comparisons.
The special attention paid to images of curvy women in the media first of all emphasizes that this seems to be something monstrous. Look, curves are on public display here! They dare to do something! It almost seems as if all people who are not perfectly built could be happy to finally be considered. And how brave these women are! But why do they have to show courage at all if they are simply showing what many of us see in the mirror every morning and evening? Why can't this be commonplace? Also, I'm not at all sure that the companies have an actual interest in legalizing curves. That they really have a message. It's more likely that they can be sure of media attention. After all, they are venturing into a taboo subject. And let's be honest, in the end it's always about profit.
In this case, there is also no moral condemnation. After all, there is no advertising featuring AIDS sufferers, oil-smeared ducks or child labor. As the Benetton company tried to do in the mid-nineties. After all, it is only curvy women who are used to break down a taboo. Karl Lagerfeld once showed himself with Beth Ditto, who really doesn't have the usual dream measurements. A power woman and also a lesbian. Two stigmas at once. Was he really only interested in this great woman with the incredible voice? Or was it a morally unassailable opportunity to show off once again? Look what I've got here! In any case, he was sure to attract attention. And for those who don't like being confronted with bodies like this: bad criticism in advertising is better than none at all. However, I don't want to hide the fact that there are other ways. The company Dove has gone one step further. In 2005, in collaboration with the "Eating Disorders Assiciation", the US eating disorder association, a workshop entitled "BodyTalk" was developed for working with children and young people. This is intended to help strengthen self-esteem with various exercises, examples and methods. Among other things, a movie clearly shows how photos are manipulated. I know this so well because I ran this workshop myself when I was working with girls.
The responsibility of large companies
So we are still constantly bombarded with images of people who don't really exist. Stupid. And then we also want to look like them. Even more stupid. Permanent dissatisfaction is spreading. And dissatisfaction affects our whole life. Including our love life. Because we can't let ourselves go and enjoy sex if we're constantly thinking about our real or imagined rolls of flab or our possibly undersized body parts. "If only I looked like Scarlett Johansson, he'd want me." But that's not how it works. In my opinion, large companies have a social responsibility. It's not just about environmental protection and fair working conditions. They also have a role model function in terms of moral values. They want our money. We give it to them. But only if they behave respectfully and responsibly. So why don't we let all body shapes appear in commercials or on billboards? After all, that would be a much better reflection of reality. Because there are such and such people: Skinny, thin, slim, full-figured, fat and very fat. They all make up our society. And they all have a right to satisfaction. Also in their sexuality.