Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue features its first-ever plus-size model

5 Feb 2015

Sports Illustrated is featuring its first plus-sized model in its new issue (as paid advertising though).

Most agree that it represents a step forward in celebrating curvy, confident women who can be sexy on the beach in a little bikini rather than the swimwear industry taking its usual approach in trying to find 'artful' ways to cover up and hide body flaws or thicker curves.

Critics are pointing out that model Ashley Graham looks more "normal/average" than plus-sized and she doesn't represent the plus-sized demographic, so this doesn't really have much impact at all.

As well, the SI cover predictably features a typical fit/slim model - Derek Jeter's girlfriend, Hannah Davis.

Would you rather see magazines like Sports Illustrated, or even Maxim or Playboy featuring more of a range of body types or do you think it's still better to cater to the 'aspirational' or fitness 'inspirational/motivational' images the industry has always favoured, while keeping 'plus-sized' or 'normal sized' images to a niche ad here or there or in non-mainstream skin magazines.

It still surprises me how - despite a decade of consumers wanting 'real women' images - the industries are either:
a) slow to implement this or ignoring changing social trends altogether
and/or
b) have implemented it as a trial, only to find real-women images aren't selling the magazine covers or products, even when they are mags/ads geared toward women.

Is society not quite as evolved as it thinks it is when it comes to beauty/body acceptance?

5 Feb 2015

I'm one of the ones would like to see more variety in the bodies we see in the media. Ms.Graham may not be a true "plus-sized" as her critics allege (I don't know her size to tell) but she is certainly a break from the typical model body typified by Ms. Davis. One of the most attractive women I know personally (we're friends and colleagues and I work very hard to keep myself reminded of that fact) is very much a plus size with some of the most extravagant curves I have ever seen and that's actually part of what makes her attractive to me. Seeing someone like her in an SI swimsuit issue or similar would get me more interested in the whole thing. At this point, I've gotten kind of "meh" on the stereotypical "model look" that SI tends to go for. And that does not just go for plus sized women, but also the more slender look that also seems to get overlooked (not busty enough or something, I guess). However, I prefer real women to SI's version of fantasy anyhow so it is not an issue I confront much save when conversations like this come up.

5 Feb 2015

I would love to see Ashley Graham and more women like her in fashion and glamour magazines. I think it's really silly that a lot of criticism of her appearing in fashion campaigns is that she's not "plus-sized" but "normal" because then that means that there are no "normal" women in these campaign and shoots and that alarms me. I think her body should be seen as aspirational because it is realistic and achievable. SI and VS models are not really aspirational at all. They are blessed for starters with small frames and comparatively huge boobs for someone so thin and they starve themselves to achieve that look anyway. It's wrong that women of all sizes should only have women like that to aspire to and men only see these kinds of women in fap magazines which are so unconnected from people they will o out with in real life.

5 Feb 2015

I want to see hot guys, personally. Where are the hot guys in swimsuits?

You can’t truly call yourself peaceful unless you are capable of violence. If you’re not capable of violence, you’re not peaceful. You’re harmless.

6 Feb 2015

Quote by sprite
I want to see hot guys, personally. Where are the hot guys in swimsuits?

they r all over on the other side of the Forum claiming to be the sexiest person on Lush! ... as if a man could be? ...

angel7

6 Feb 2015

Ashley is one of the most gorgeous, down to Earth, fun, sexy, genuine women I know. Size does not define beauty. She has a personality as amazing as her curves!! Congratulations to her for following her dreams, despite those who discouraged her along the way... Perhaps, some day, SI will feature a spread on Ashley. A true to size, gorgeous, relatable, natural woman. And when they do, I will be buying that issue!

8 Feb 2015

I think she looks great. I think her body is well proportioned and she looks very sexy in that bikini. I really don't see much difference between her body and Kim K. except that Ashley's is probably all natural, her pics aren't photoshopped(well not as much) and she looks much hotter!

8 Feb 2015

A lot of things come to my mind when I see this... but to narrow it down I'd say that it's pretty ridiculous to me.

First of all, I just checked the bio of this model: Height: 5'9", Weight: 170 lbs. Now take a look at any weight chart, and you'll find out that this is in fact overweight. And I'm not talking about 'Hollywood overweight' or 'fashion model overweight', this is considered to be overweight by the medical community. At these levels of body fat, a few health concerns arise: it's far from being optimal in terms of overall health (ie. cardiovascular system, blood lipids, cholesterol, insulin resistance, posture, joint health, skin conditions, etc.).

And we should consider her to be some sort of model? Or a representation of what women should strive to be? And the very little willpower necessary to achieve such a physique is supposed to be any 'inspirational'? Give me a break.

As far as I'm concerned, this fitness model (Jenna Renee) is quite a lot more inspirational:

And no, this isn't about simply admiring a hot babe that features sexy curves and a nice ass: this is about giving all you've got to be the best possible version of yourself and collect the many benefits associated with it (ie. optimal health, discipline, self-esteem, pride, attractiveness, etc.). As one of my favorite quotes puts it:

And yet this fitness woman should be considered an evil and superficial trollop, while the ever-magnificent Ashley Graham should stand on some kind of moral podium because of her averageness? It's sad to see that our standards got so low, it really is. Where has the era when we used to work hard for something and be proud of our achievements gone? How did celebrating averageness become the norm nowadays, instead of challenging ourselves? Why should mediocrity be encouraged more than discipline, and how is this supposed to be any profitable? What this whole case screams to me is pretty much: "We're simply too lazy to have a healthy lifestyle anymore! Let's just drop our standards, accept our inertness, and celebrate our mediocrity instead!"

And before anyone starts arguing that being so lean is 'unhealthy', let's observe the bodies of different Olympic athletes:

Anyone sees a pattern here? These women are pretty much the epitome of a healthy lifestyle, and yet their physiques are much closer to the ones of Jenna Renee and Hannah Davis (the model featured on the front page of Sports Illustrated). And these athletes care very little about what they look like: appearance is not the goal at all here, athletic performance is. It just happens that the physique that's the most healthy, athletic and potent is actually a very lean physique. If anyone wants to argue about this with me any further, please go on, it will be my pleasure to prove you wrong.

And sorry to say, but in terms of creating 'misleading imagery' and the likes, this case is quite reprehensible, much more so than a lot of typical bikini shoots. Take a look at these pictures of Jenna Renee up there: two of them are actually selfies taken in her own bedroom. There's no Photoshopping here, at all: what you see is what you get. And any woman who achieves this level of leanness will have a body that's going to be equally attractive.

Now let's examine the case of Ashley Graham. First of all, the very reason that she's a 'model' is because of how she wears fat so well: the great majority of women with such body fat won't look that 'attractive' (in lack of a better term). Most of them will have awkward fat bulges, a round and puffy face, a double-chin, and different skin problems. And then there's just as much Photoshopping (if not a whole lot more) than in any other photo shoot to cover-up her flaws; I just read an article and observed some of her pictures, and Ashley Graham has in fact a significant amount of cellulite on her legs. And of course, she's on the very limit between tasteful/distasteful to promote this 'fat is beautiful' mindset without shocking the audience, but the reality is that if she gained only 5-10 lbs, a lot of people would go "Is this some kind of joke!?". And to top it all, you have these 3 handsome hunks that represent the exact opposite of what's promoted/valued here, and for some reason that's unknown to my weak metacognition, all 3 of them go totally crazy over a body that requires as much effort as they provided themselves by simply signing their gym memberships. Sorry women, but if you have an overweight body, the only men that you're going to attract are going to be overweight themselves; and even then, it's unlikely that they'll give you as much attention as what's shown in this video.

And concerning this whole 'this is a step forward, I'm glad that companies are finally showing some sense of ethics in their advertisements'... ugh, no. It's not. These are the same old marketing strategies that every company uses. Why are hot babes featured in beer advertisements? Because it makes some men buy their products. Why are overweight women featured in bikini advertisements? Because it makes overweight women buy their products. Look no further, it's as simple as that. Trust me, if for whatever reason a certain company realized that showing a hairy ass would be the most efficient way to sell their products, they'd have absolutely no shame in doing so.

I'm sure everyone has seen those Dove advertisements, where they promote inner-beauty and all that:

And I'm sure everyone has also seen those ultra-misogynistic Axe advertisements, where women are walking pussies who desperately crawl to skinny-fat guys:

Well guess what? Dove and Axe are owned by the same parent company (Unilever); they only use different marketing strategies to appeal to different target audiences. So no, neither Dove, Axe, Unilever or any other company gives much of a fuck about how women are perceived by society, nor do they care about what their advertisements promote and encourage: it's only about money, nothing else.

Having said this, why would what the companies are promoting exactly matter? Have we really reached this state of intellectual poverty where our beliefs and values should be governed by all this cheap imagery? Show me a panel that reads "The moon is made out of cheese", and I won't start believing that the moon is made out of cheese: I'll simply think that this statement is fucking ridiculous. The same applies to just about anything else: show me advertisements that promote violence, misogyny, or distorted role models (ie. Ashley Graham), and I'll simply think that it's all very ridiculous and lame. As long as we're responsible citizens who take our own education and value system into our own hands, I don't see why any of this should be problematic. Put your faith in the potential of individuals, not in the supposed 'goodwill' of corporations. These entities have neither a brain nor a heart; in fact, they exhibit the exact same traits as sociopaths, and this is very serious and documented.

And don't wait for companies to offer you some sort of moral ideology, because it won't be pretty. Read, inform yourself, be a clever citizen and a responsible consumer, and you'll see companies changing their ethics and advertisements... faster than you think. In more than a way, all these things that companies/media/artists keep promoting and that we keep buying are nothing more than a reflection of what we value and covet as individuals; in that sense, it actually serves a positive purpose to gauge where our values stand as a whole.

So back to Ashley Graham, I don't have any problem seeing women like her in the media (or in my immediate surrounding); I have a problem when people start perceiving her as some kind of role model when she has very little merit and when her lifestyle is far from being optimal. And I don't exactly think that society as a whole has much of a problem 'accepting' women like her: I see these kinds of women year-round at my office, at the grocery store and on the street, and I don't recall anybody pointing their fingers at them and insisting on how gross they were. Yes, there's some form of pressure and shame in being overweight, but I see it as a form of positive punishment; motivation isn't always something fun and pleasurable. I fear the day when there will be absolutely no guilt associated with living an unhealthy lifestyle, I really do.

Now don't expect to be perceived as attractive as a fitness model if you're overweight (this is what's promoted here, a lot more than 'accepting' fat women), because you're not. And to be frank (and this will likely affect my reputation here), I don't think that you deserve it either. You'll receive proportional attention from the opposite sex as the efforts you invest on yourself, and this holds true for both genders. And yes, you'll also probably feel proportional guilt as the efforts you're not investing. And I don't think (and don't hope) that any marketing campaign will change anything to that.

And if for some reason you believe that plus-size women aren't sufficiently represented in our culture, don't wait for corporations to change anything to that: do it yourself. For a start, you could ditch your fake-avatar and show a picture that represents you accurately. Or you could post pictures of plus-size women on your friends' walls. Just don't expect selfish corporations to make a move if even yourself won't.

8 Feb 2015

Quote by Dancing_Doll
Sports Illustrated is featuring its first plus-sized model in its new issue (as paid advertising though).

Most agree that it represents a step forward in celebrating curvy, confident women who can be sexy on the beach in a little bikini rather than the swimwear industry taking its usual approach in trying to find 'artful' ways to cover up and hide body flaws or thicker curves.

Critics are pointing out that model Ashley Graham looks more "normal/average" than plus-sized and she doesn't represent the plus-sized demographic, so this doesn't really have much impact at all.

As well, the SI cover predictably features a typical fit/slim model - Derek Jeter's girlfriend, Hannah Davis.

Would you rather see magazines like Sports Illustrated, or even Maxim or Playboy featuring more of a range of body types or do you think it's still better to cater to the 'aspirational' or fitness 'inspirational/motivational' images the industry has always favoured, while keeping 'plus-sized' or 'normal sized' images to a niche ad here or there or in non-mainstream skin magazines.

It still surprises me how - despite a decade of consumers wanting 'real women' images - the industries are either:
a) slow to implement this or ignoring changing social trends altogether
and/or
b) have implemented it as a trial, only to find real-women images aren't selling the magazine covers or products, even when they are mags/ads geared toward women.

Is society not quite as evolved as it thinks it is when it comes to beauty/body acceptance?

I think this is wonderful. I am 76 years old and have seen about every type of woman in the world, whatever size. Ms. Graham represents by far a huge segment of the female population who aren't models in the usual sense of he word; young mothers with 2-3 kids and a house to run, no time for Pilate's or long distance running or 24/7 fitness. She also looks really good! C'mon dear friends, give her a break.

9 Feb 2015

Quote by SereneProdigy
I lot of things come to my mind when I see this... but to narrow it down I'd say that it's pretty ridiculous to me.

First of all, I just checked the bio of this model: Height: 5'9", Weight: 170 lbs. Now take a look at any weight chart, and you'll find out that this is in fact overweight. And I'm not talking about 'Hollywood overweight' or 'fashion model overweight', this is considered to be overweight by the medical community. At these levels of body fat, a few health concerns arise: it's far from being optimal in terms of overall health (ie. cardiovascular system, blood lipids, cholesterol, insulin resistance, posture, joint health, skin conditions, etc.).

And we should consider her to be some sort of model? Or a representation of what women should strive to be? And the very little willpower necessary to achieve such a physique is supposed to be any 'inspirational'? Give me a break.

As far as I'm concerned, this fitness model (Jenna Renee) is quite a lot more inspirational:

All I said is I think she looks pretty good. Her body is not much different than Kim K who for some reason most of the world thinks is stunning! I have seen sites that say Kim K is 5'4 and weighs 117lb. Her ass weighs 117lbs, LOL! She is at least 140!!

Should women strive to have a body like her? No

Do I think Jenna Renee has a healthier and more attractive body? Yes

But as far as being 5'9 and weighing 170lbs, I have seen many fitness models who were like 5'5 and 140 lbs which also would be considered by the medical community to be over weight and they looked absolutely perfect with very little fat on their body

9 Feb 2015

Quote by SereneProdigy
I lot of things come to my mind when I see this... but to narrow it down I'd say that it's pretty ridiculous to me.

First of all, I just checked the bio of this model: Height: 5'9", Weight: 170 lbs. Now take a look at any weight chart, and you'll find out that this is in fact overweight. And I'm not talking about 'Hollywood overweight' or 'fashion model overweight', this is considered to be overweight by the medical community. At these levels of body fat, a few health concerns arise: it's far from being optimal in terms of overall health (ie. cardiovascular system, blood lipids, cholesterol, insulin resistance, posture, joint health, skin conditions, etc.).

And we should consider her to be some sort of model? Or a representation of what women should strive to be? And the very little willpower necessary to achieve such a physique is supposed to be any 'inspirational'? Give me a break.

first of all .... this mentality makes me so mad!!

Fuck you and all those who think that women at 5'9" should be 120 lbs or less. There is something that is called "frame" .... just like men, there are variations to frame, how someone carries their weight and what is healthy.

Fuck you and all those who think that fitness is called "skinny or thin" .... because one's fitness is not linked to how they look ... but how their heart health is.

The rest of your post .... would make anyone fall asleep .... like you are droning on and on.

Quote by SereneProdigy
As far as I'm concerned, this fitness model (Jenna Renee) is quite a lot more inspirational:

And no, this isn't about simply admiring a hot babe that features sexy curves and a nice ass: this is about giving all you've got to be the best possible version of yourself and collect the many benefits associated with it (ie. optimal health, discipline, self-esteem, pride, attractiveness, etc.).

Who are YOU to insinuate that Ashley Graham hasn't GIVEN ALL SHE'S GOT to be the way she is?? She may be healthier than the 5'2" 98 lb woman who is naturally a size 0.

Like so many men .... you just look at the visual.

Fuck .... the mentality of some people .... better than the rest.

Grow up.

9 Feb 2015

By Serene Prodigy's "assessment", I would be...what? Overweight? I'm 6' and 185 lbs. Seriously curvy. And for the record, SP, fatty deposits in the breasts and on the hips do not affect overall cardiovascular health. Oh, and I can totally rock a bikini.

Want to spend some time wallowing in a Recommended Read? Pick one! Or two! Or seven!

Drill Day - Tension
Double Oxer - Beribboned And Bowed - Blood Lust - Losing It - My Favourite Word

9 Feb 2015

Quote by VanGogh
Who are YOU to insinuate that Ashley Graham hasn't GIVEN ALL SHE'S GOT to be the way she is??

Quote by Ashley Graham (varied sources)
"I HATE the gym. I do like Bikram yoga and rollerblading because they make make me feel good, and then I take great photos. But I have gone months without working out. It’s been fine."

"I do these crazy workouts* with my trainer three days a week depending on my schedule. I post them to my with the hashtag #curvyfitclub. And I work out hard and enough to the point that I can kind of eat what I want. I do love my green juice and veggies... but I will also literally go fat girl on a big pizza-pie and then take the crust and dip it in Nutella."

"It’s not like I have a burger or pizza every night. But I’m also not munching on greens all day. I eat steak. And I’m going to have a potato with it too."

*Definition of a crazy workout, according to Ashley Graham. Note that it takes 15 minutes to perform, and the absolute absence of any challenging weight/resistance:

Quote by Jenna Renee (varied sources)
"I eat clean year round, every day except for special holidays or my birthday. And yes people give me a hard time, yes I get picked on, yes I get the stink eye at restaurants when I try to order plain chicken with no salt or marinades but it’s all worth it in the end."

"I train hard, I lift heavy and I do cardio 4 to 5 times per week. I stay on a clean eating regimen year round so I’m always about a week or two out of being shoot ready. I’ve found that this way works best for me and my personal goals, rather than “bulking and cutting” phases."

Jenna Renee's diet:

Meal 1: Water, 5 egg whites, 1/2 cup oatmeal 1 or 2 cups of coffee
Meal 2: Water, protein shake
Meal 3: Grilled chicken breast, green beans
Meal 4: Water, protein shake with an apple and peanut butter or a homemade protein bar
Meal 5: Bison steak, 1/2 sweet potato, green beans
Meal 6: 6 egg whites and some fat free cottage cheese (6th meal is only when needed)

Jenna Renee's sample workout (arms day). Note the challenging exercises and various advanced techniques:

1. Straight bar bicep curl superset with cable rope triceps extensions (4 sets 10-12 reps)
2. Preacher curls superset with skull crushers (3 sets: 15 reps, 12 reps, 8-10 reps for third superset upping weight)
3. Dumbbell alternating bicep curls superset with overhead dumbbell triceps extensions (3 sets: 20 reps, 15 reps, 12 reps third set upping weight)
4. Cable bicep curls with ropes, 3 drop sets then 1 burnout set to failure. For drop sets: drop weight 3 times for each set, trying for 10-12 reps for each.
5. Side bends on the hyperextension machine (no weight): 3 sets of 25 on each side superset with bodyweight lunges (30 lunges total for each set)
6. Cable ab crunches 3 sets of 15 reps

Jenna Renee's diet:

Meal 1: Water, 5 egg whites, 1/2 cup oatmeal 1 or 2 cups of coffee
Meal 2: Water, protein shake
Meal 3: Grilled chicken breast, green beans
Meal 4: Water, protein shake with an apple and peanut butter or a homemade protein bar
Meal 5: Bison steak, 1/2 sweet potato, green beans
Meal 6: 6 egg whites and some fat free cottage cheese (6th meal is only when needed)

Jenna Renee's sample workout (arms day). Note the challenging exercises and various advanced techniques:

1. Straight bar bicep curl superset with cable rope triceps extensions (4 sets 10-12 reps)
2. Preacher curls superset with skull crushers (3 sets: 15 reps, 12 reps, 8-10 reps for third superset upping weight)
3. Dumbbell alternating bicep curls superset with overhead dumbbell triceps extensions (3 sets: 20 reps, 15 reps, 12 reps third set upping weight)
4. Cable bicep curls with ropes, 3 drop sets then 1 burnout set to failure. For drop sets: drop weight 3 times for each set, trying for 10-12 reps for each.
5. Side bends on the hyperextension machine (no weight): 3 sets of 25 on each side superset with bodyweight lunges (30 lunges total for each set)
6. Cable ab crunches 3 sets of 15 reps

9 Feb 2015

Quote by VanGogh

Who are YOU to insinuate that Ashley Graham hasn't GIVEN ALL SHE'S GOT to be the way she is?? She may be healthier than the 5'2" 98 lb woman who is naturally a size 0.

Like so many men .... you just look at the visual.

Fuck .... the mentality of some people .... better than the rest.

Grow up.

This, and....yay.

Big Hugs

I love her face, it's gorgeous. Way prettier than cookie cutout Derek Jeter's girlfriend.

Sorry, but you turn me off so much Serene Prodigy.

Kim K makes me puke by her behavior, for the record.

9 Feb 2015

Quote by HeraTeleia
By Serene Prodigy's "assessment", I would be...what? Overweight? I'm 6' and 185 lbs. Seriously curvy. And for the record, SP, fatty deposits in the breasts and on the hips do not affect overall cardiovascular health. Oh, and I can totally rock a bikini.

This isn't SereneProdigy's 'assessment'; this is a medical assessment:

And fat deposits in the breasts and in the hips might not be the most hazardous, but they usually come along fat deposits in the waist and between the internal organs, both of which being far from healthy. Not to mention that fat is generally a pretty good indicator of an unhealthy lifestyle (ie. diet, physical inactivity), which can lead to a vast array of medical problems.

Quote by ]If you are overweight you may develop hypertension, diabetes and atherosclerosis. These conditions will put you at high risk of cardiovascular disease.

Previously, it was thought that fat was inert. Now scientists understand that fat, especially intra-abdominal fat, has significant impact on our metabolism.

You have intra-abdominal fat if you have a big belly. This fat affects your blood pressure, your blood lipid levels and interferes with your ability to use insulin effectively. You use insulin to process glucose derived from food, our body's primary fuel. If you cannot use insulin properly you may develop diabetes, a risk factor of cardiovascular disease.

As you get fatter, your risk of developing Type 2 diabetes and hypertension rises steeply. Statistics show that 58% of diabetes and 21% of ischemic heart disease are attributable to a BMI above 21.

Quote by [url=http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/health-topics/topics/obe/risks
National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute]Being overweight or obese isn't a cosmetic problem. These conditions greatly raise your risk for other health problems:

- Coronary Heart Disease
- High Blood Pressure
- Stroke
- Type 2 Diabetes
- Abnormal Blood Fats
- Cancer
- Osteoarthritis
- Sleep Apnea
- Obesity Hypoventilation Syndrome
- Reproductive Problems
- Gallstones

9 Feb 2015

Quote by daddysweetheart
Sorry, but you turn me off so much Serene Prodigy.

I can deal with that, no worries. thumbup

9 Feb 2015

Since this is Sports Illustrated, it would make sense for fit bods to take centre-stage. Fitness is so often associated with a super lean frame that's visually appealing and more often than not, this is the case. But then you also have the less idealised bodies of Serena Williams and Leah Gilbert who win Grand Slams and make triathlons look easy. Fitness needs to be associated with actual athleticism, rather than just being physically trim IMO. I think bulkier models who have earned their fitness stripes should have the chance to grace the cover/content of SI.

That said, Ashley Graham might not be the best candidate under that paradigm, simply based on SP's gathered information on her health and diet regimen. So the point that Ashley Graham should not be upheld as a role model in fitness is a valid one. However, I think the gorgeous girl is still a great model for women to be less critical about their own bodies.

The issue here seems to have evolved to be 'body image acceptance' vs. 'perfect body aspiration'. (And everyone in one camp obviously disagrees with everyone in the other.) The thing is, I highly doubt that Jenna Renee's crazy regimen would give Ashley Graham, Jenna Renee's kickass body because diet and exercise can only go so far. Genetics do factor quite heavily into one's physiological frame and biochemical metabolism. Still, this shouldn't mean that Ashley Graham should quit trying to attain a better body than the one she currently has. (I'm not giving her an 'A' for effort when she's dipping pizza crusts into nutella!) Ultimately, I feel women should be supported in working towards/maintaining the best and healthiest possible body that they (as individuals) can have. Sports Illustrated and co. aren't helping by projecting a collective definition of health and fitness that's not applicable to all. Unilever's marketing tactic isn't really helping either, since it might lull women into a lazy sense of acceptance.

So while I try and walk that line between accepting my body and striving to hone it, please, SI, continue feeding me pics of those awesome hot bods. Oh but every so often, throw in a variation, ie. a gorgeous fit girl who might not fit the stereotypical mould of your models.

10 Feb 2015

Quote by shrpsf
Since this is Sports Illustrated, it would make sense for fit bods to take centre-stage. Fitness is so often associated with a super lean frame that's visually appealing and more often than not, this is the case. But then you also have the less idealised bodies of Serena Williams and Leah Gilbert who win Grand Slams and make triathlons look easy. Fitness needs to be associated with actual athleticism, rather than just being physically trim IMO. I think bulkier models who have earned their fitness stripes should have the chance to grace the cover/content of SI.

That said, Ashley Graham might not be the best candidate under that paradigm, simply based on SP's gathered information on her health and diet regimen. So the point that Ashley Graham should not be upheld as a role model in fitness is a valid one. However, I think the gorgeous girl is still a great model for women to be less critical about their own bodies.

The issue here seems to have evolved to be 'body image acceptance' vs. 'perfect body aspiration'. (And everyone in one camp obviously disagrees with everyone in the other.) The thing is, I highly doubt that Jenna Renee's crazy regimen would give Ashley Graham, Jenna Renee's kickass body because diet and exercise can only go so far. Genetics do factor quite heavily into one's physiological frame and biochemical metabolism. Still, this shouldn't mean that Ashley Graham should quit trying to attain a better body than the one she currently has. (I'm not giving her an 'A' for effort when she's dipping pizza crusts into nutella!) Ultimately, I feel women should be supported in working towards/maintaining the best and healthiest possible body that they (as individuals) can have. Sports Illustrated and co. aren't helping by projecting a collective definition of health and fitness that's not applicable to all. Unilever's marketing tactic isn't really helping either, since it might lull women into a lazy sense of acceptance.

So while I try and walk that line between accepting my body and striving to hone it, please, SI, continue feeding me pics of those awesome hot bods. Oh but every so often, throw in a variation, ie. a gorgeous fit girl who might not fit the stereotypical mould of your models.

I agree with most of this. But I do believe that fitness and leanness are related. The leaner you are, the more athletically-advantaged you are; and the more implicated in athleticism/fitness you are, the leaner you tend to be. Just look at the sample of female athletes in my previous post (or do a quick Google search yourself): fitness and leanness go hand in hand in the great majority of cases.

Now concerning your case-examples. First Serena Williams:

That woman is actually impressively lean: just look at her muscle definition (especially her abs). She's thick indeed, but this is all rock-hard muscle with very little fat. As a matter of fact, her body is a lot more 'out of reach' than the one of typical fitness models: she had to pack on a lot of muscle in addition to keeping low body-fat levels. I agree that her physique stands out as compared to the usual 'fit physique', but then again women that focus more on losing fat than building muscle (ie. the great majority of them) will be a lot more likely to end up with the usual slender body that's promoted by Sports Illustrated anyway (assuming that they're dedicated enough).

Now concerning Leah Gilbert. Yes this is an inspiring story, and yes it should be presented to women in a similar situation as a source of motivation. But the matter of fact is (and I'm going to be perceived as very difficult here): she's still overweight. All the health concerns associated with carrying an extra-amount of body-fat don't suddenly disappear because you engage in a physical activity: she's still at risk of developing heart diseases, diabetes and osteoarthritis. And I wouldn't exactly describe her as an 'athlete' either: running a half-marathon (13 miles) isn't really an extraordinary feat. A lot of 'average' people do that, her case simply attracts attention because of her weight. She has a lot of merit for losing weight and engaging in physical activities, and I applaud her for that and she totally deserves the attention given to her by the media, but I'd still encourage her (and other women) to aim for better in terms of body-fat levels.

Concerning the 'genetic component' of body-fat and fitness levels, I don't quite believe that it's as significant as many would want it to be. First let's debunk this 'big frame' or 'big bones' myth. Look at these x-rays of obese people:

The bone-structure of these people isn't any bigger, larger or bulkier than the one of lean persons. The standard deviation of the average human height for each specific gender is around ± 3 inches (which means that 75% of the population have a height that falls between a difference of 6 inches, ie. 5'6"-6'0" for men). That's a deviation of only 5%. The thickness/weight of bones is very similar to this in terms of standard deviation. For women that weight 120 lbs, a 5% deviation represents ± 6 lbs, and 75% of women with a similar height will fall between 114-126 lbs. Only that much difference is accountable for 'thick bones', all the rest is fat, pure and simple. I challenge anybody here to show me a picture of a woman that has very little fat with a 'thick' bone-structure. Go on, I searched for one myself and could never find it.

And regarding weight-loss and muscle-gain, here are two examples of people who were not 'genetically advantaged' (or rather perceived as such), and who achieved great results nonetheless. And you could easily find hundreds of similar examples.

First Briana Christine, mother of 3 children who lost 100 lbs in one year with a proper diet:

Then Aziz Shavershian (aka Zyzz), skinny-boy turned greek-god. Yes, he used steroids along the way, but he still gained a significant amount of muscle naturally prior:

So no, I don't believe that genetics have that big of an impact on body composition. Some people are more disadvantaged than others for many different reasons, but you can still achieve an impressive (or at least healthy) physique if you're motivated enough.

And concerning 'body image acceptance' vs 'perfect body aspiration', this is in fact quite a paradox. What does 'body image acceptance' mean exactly? It seems to me that a lot of women only accept their 'body image' as long as it's perceived as a 'perfect body'. The case of Ashley Graham is pretty indicative of that: a lot of women would want this kind of body to be perceived as 'perfect'. The great majority of people are in fact tolerant to a body like Ashley Graham has (myself included), only it doesn't mean that it will be perceived as perfect, ideal or optimal. Are women okay with that? And do they 'accept' the fact that a lot of women will still have a body that will be healthier and better looking than theirs? That's not the impression that many women give me, to be honest: a lot of them only accept a 'perfect body aspiration' as long it's very close to their own actual body.

And ironically, as much as Ashley Graham is trying to promote that 'image and beauty is not really important' mentality, she does in fact the exact opposite. It's still all about beauty and appearance, you only swapped a beauty-ideal for another. And even if Ashley Graham became the epitome of beauty, you'd still have plenty of women desperately striving for beauty: what about women who suffer from acne? or those who have a severe skin condition? or those who were born with an ugly face? Are we going to put them under the spotlight too and perceive each one of them as 'equally attractive'? Well that's not going to happen: beauty and attraction are deep-rooted within our genetic code and you'll always have people that will be more attractive than others. Even birds who have x1000 times less neurons than humans engage in these rituals. You can choose to jump in the competition enthusiastically by taking care of your body and your appearance, but the competition will always be there; and magazines aren't going to change that any time soon.

10 Feb 2015

Without making a long song and dance here confused1

.... we are talking about the SI Swimsuit edition.

Swimsuits!

Nothing at all about this edition is about fitness. It's all about the skimpiest (did they get away with that?? comments) swimsuits ... and in past editions, some of those swimsuits were painted on! Hell, most men never buy any other edition except for the Swimsuit Edition!

I know SereneProdigy and many others here are totally in tune (and in love) with Jenna Renee's diet and workout. But that is not the "normal" .... most people want to enjoy their food and (hopefully) enjoy their workout to have some balance in their life and bodies. I'm all for moderation.

I applaud, any woman who is curvy and confident with herself, to do what is the norm with a skinny waif.

I am not alone to say .... woohooo Ashley .... you go girl!!

Van

PS .... The BMI charts are not 100% correct .... there are problems with them that are noted by medical professionals, as follows:

BMI does not account for body frame size; a person may have a small frame and be carrying more fat than optimal, but their BMI reflects that they are normal. Conversely, a large framed individual may be quite healthy with a fairly low body fat percentage, but be classified as overweight by BMI. Accurate frame size calculators use several measurements (wrist circumference, elbow width, neck circumference and others) to determine what category an individual falls into for a given height. The standard is to use frame size in conjunction with ideal height/weight charts and add roughly 10% for a large frame or subtract roughly 10% for a smaller frame.

10 Feb 2015

Quote by VanGogh
Without making a long song and dance here .... we are talking about the SI Swimsuit edition.

Swimsuits!

Nothing at all about this edition is about fitness. It's all about the skimpiest (did they get away with that?? comments) swimsuits ... and in past editions, some of those swimsuits were painted on! Hell, most men never buy any other edition except for the Swimsuit Edition!

I know SereneProdigy and many others here are totally in tune (and in love) with Jenna Renee's diet and workout. But that is not the "normal" .... most people want to enjoy their food and (hopefully) enjoy their workout to have some balance in their life and bodies. I'm all for moderation.

I applaud, any woman who is curvy and confident with herself, to do what is the norm with a skinny waif.

I am not alone to say .... woohooo Ashley .... you go girl!!

Van

PS .... The BMI charts are not 100% correct .... there are problems with them that are noted by medical professionals, as follows:

BMI does not account for body frame size; a person may have a small frame and be carrying more fat than optimal, but their BMI reflects that they are normal. Conversely, a large framed individual may be quite healthy with a fairly low body fat percentage, but be classified as overweight by BMI. Accurate frame size calculators use several measurements (wrist circumference, elbow width, neck circumference and others) to determine what category an individual falls into for a given height. The standard is to use frame size in conjunction with ideal height/weight charts and add roughly 10% for a large frame or subtract roughly 10% for a smaller frame.

I totally agree. The swimsuit issue is all about filling out a bikini. The vast majority of its models have not been pro athletes.

I get that Serene Prodigy has a preference for slender girls, but it's really not necessary to justify a preference by giving a bunch of lectures about health and fitness with outdated charts.

Serene Prodigy, I'm sure 99% of swimsuit models are still going to fit into your very narrow definition of female attractiveness, so maybe you should stop fretting about how standards are slipping and go drink a protein shake to calm down.

10 Feb 2015

Sorry people, but this thread has in fact nothing to do with swimsuits...

Dancing_Doll presented this case with questions that opened up for a weightier discussion (no pun intended), and I'm sure that she would have asked the exact same questions if this model appeared in a sex-shop advertisement, in a romantic movie or on the cover of an erotica novel. This is about the physiques that we instill as models, and yes, fitness and health have a lot to do with it.

Besides, I'm not quite sure how the charts I presented are supposed to be any 'outdated'. Do health standards/references come as some kinds of fads?

Anyway, I'm off smoking a pack of Marlboro; believing that cigarettes are harmful for your health is so last-year. Eh?

10 Feb 2015

Just what I really appreciate.
A 'Full Figured Woman' is a real 'Woman'.

10 Feb 2015

Quote by SereneProdigy
And we should consider her to be some sort of model? Or a representation of what women should strive to be? And the very little willpower necessary to achieve such a physique is supposed to be any 'inspirational'? Give me a break.

No, some people just think she looks beautiful. Like some some others think skinny catwalk models look beautiful.

Quote by SereneProdigy
And before anyone starts arguing that being so lean is 'unhealthy', let's observe the bodies of different Olympic athletes:

Quote by SereneProdigy
Anyone sees a pattern here?

Well actually, those are three Olympic athletes and one bodybuilder. But I guess the pattern here is that being the best you can actually have very diverse looks and that form follows function glasses8

=== Not ALL LIVES MATTER until BLACK LIVES MATTER ===

11 Feb 2015

Several body types can exist within being physically fit. I played football for 13 years. I always played a 'skill' position, wide receiver, running back, quarterback, linebacker and defensive back during all those years. So I was muscular and lean, but we had offensive and defensive linemen with much thicker physiques. But those big linemen had to run just as many laps, just as many windsprints, do the weight lifting workouts as the rest of us. Most of those 'fat' guys could often out sprint and run twice as far as several 'lean' athletes I knew, and often could run much further than tennis players, some baseball players, and any of the guys on the golf team and any boxers.

My Sports Illustrated Swimsuit edition just came in the mail today. See y'all later.

11 Feb 2015

Quote by SereneProdigy
Sorry people, but this thread has in fact nothing to do with swimsuits...

Dancing_Doll presented this case with questions that opened up for a weightier discussion (no pun intended), and I'm sure that she would have asked the exact same questions if this model appeared in a sex-shop advertisement, in a romantic movie or on the cover of an erotica novel. This is about the physiques that we instill as models, and yes, fitness and health have a lot to do with it.

Besides, I'm not quite sure how the charts I presented are supposed to be any 'outdated'. Do health standards/references come as some kinds of fads?

Anyway, I'm off smoking a pack of Marlboro; believing that cigarettes are harmful for your health is so last-year.

I am sure Dancing_Doll would have posted this in the Think Tank if it were supposed to be a weighter debatable thread.

This is the "En Vogue" forum. What is debatable here in this forum? Dark blue jeans or stone washed jeans? Hobbo attire or couture fashion??

It's really all about .... what do people perceive as being sexy? A few have answered ... some long winded, some with little fanfare.

Enjoy those smokes!

Regaeman Man

11 Feb 2015

Quote by BiMale73
Well actually, those are three Olympic athletes and one bodybuilder. But I guess the pattern here is that being the best you can actually have very diverse looks and that form follows function

It's a bit convenient that you chose this particular section of that photo shoot, and not any of these:

And that obese athlete is a weightlifter, one of the very rare sports where you don't have to carry your own body whatsoever. Plus, he's 5'9"/370 lbs, and the generous amount of fat that he carries has absolutely no positive impact on any of his performances.

You decide if that's healthy (I had to double the width of that chart to include his weight, by the way):

11 Feb 2015

Quote by SereneProdigy
It's a bit convenient that you chose this particular section of that photo shoot, ...

Grabbed it from a slide show online that had only that one photo from what now turns out to be a whole collection.

Quote by SereneProdigy
You decide if that's healthy

I don't think top sport is healthy at all. It's way too extreme.

=== Not ALL LIVES MATTER until BLACK LIVES MATTER ===

11 Feb 2015

So women, let's reverse the situation here...

Would you like more men like these to appear in magazines, advertisements, romantic movies, porn flicks, or posted on your Lush profile?

They're quite similar to Ashley Graham in terms of body-fat and men have their physical insecurities too, would you be willing to accept their bodies too? And would you be thrilled if every man looked like this while being perfectly comfortable and satisfied with his physique, with no intention whatsoever to modify it?

Because frankly, if I look at the 21 pages of this thread, there's a lot of attention given to David Beckham, Hugh Jackman, Channing Tatum, Gerard Butler and Johnny Depp, but not much love for Seth Rogen, Jack Black or Jonah Hill: Your Favorite Celebrity Crush

Do women only look at the visual?

11 Feb 2015

Quote by SereneProdigy
So women, let's reverse the situation here...

Would you like more men like these to appear in magazines, advertisements, romantic movies, porn flicks, or posted on your Lush profile?

They're quite similar to Ashley Graham in terms of body-fat and men have their physical insecurities too, would you be willing to accept their bodies too? And would you be happy if every man looked like this while being perfectly comfortable and satisfied with their physiques, with no intention whatsoever to modify it?

Because frankly, if I look at the 21 pages of this thread, there's a lot of attention given to David Beckham, Hugh Jackman, Channing Tatum, Gerard Butler and Johnny Depp, but not much love for Seth Rogen, Jack Black or Jonah Hill: Your Favorite Celebrity Crush

Do women only look at the visual?

I wouldn't mind. I'm not here seeking men who look like models or actors or who are athletes.

study

:d/

It's ALL in the mind!!!!!!

My 2 cents

11 Feb 2015

Quote by silveranode
Just what I really appreciate.
A 'Full Figured Woman' is a real 'Woman'.

So... us thin gals are faux women? dontknow

You can’t truly call yourself peaceful unless you are capable of violence. If you’re not capable of violence, you’re not peaceful. You’re harmless.

Are you sure?