Posted: Jul 14, 2015 6:30 pm
Thommo wrote:Renee Somerfield is 178cm and weighs 52kg, which is not incomparable to Marathon runner Paula Radcliffe, who is 173cm tall and weighs 54kg, although slightly skinnier.
So, I am not sure we can look at her and say she's unfit or unhealthy. But she's certainly very far from representative of the distribution of "fit" women as a whole.
So? Why would advertisements have to use models that are "representative of the distribution of fit women as a whole?" And, there is nothing unfit in her appearance. The funniest accusation I heard was when women were claiming that SHE was sending a message of "unhealthy body image" -- and what was needed was for overweight women to be depicted...so as to encourage... I guess... a healthy body image...
Thommo wrote:
A decent comparison could be made with Mo Farah, who is a male distance runner, who also features in advertising, though for his achievements rather than his body, I suspect.
Runners don't have the best bodies. And, a "general fitness" model or competitor has more of an all-around fit body shape. Just google "fitness model" https://www.google.com/search?q=fitness ... qICh0y2gvy - as many men as women come up, and they tend to be extremely fit looking models -- like athlete level fit. That's not to be compared with the average person on the street. These fitness models monitor their food intake down to the grams and ounces levels, and they work out in regimens that most of us could not even complete, for several hours a day.
Maybe what happens is that some folks look at the fitness models or the idealized images featured in ads and think it's a commentary on their own bodies, which it really isn't. It's more or less an example of how offense is usually taken, not given.