Body By Glamour Spoils You For Choice

Glamour Don't

On page 160 of the December issue, Glamour invites you to “design your best body,” explaining that the difference about — weight training? society’s expectations? democracy? it is unclear — today is “you can pick your look.”

So. Big decision time. Do you want to be a tall, leggy blonde like Gwyneth? Or a tall, leggy blonde like Cameron? Are you confused by the many, many options here? We can go over them again. Slowly. Does it help to know that Gwyneth has wee little muscles (aka “mini”) while Cameron’s bulkier brawn was apparently named after a feminine hygiene product? No? Then however will you decide? 

Surely, you aren’t still wasting time loving the body you currently have, no matter how lacking in blonde legginess it may be. Glamour set us all straight on that notion months ago.

Oh lady mags. Surely, we can raise the bar just an inch or two more?

PS. Thanks to Kate of Her Two Cents for the tip (and the scan!) on this.


Filed under beauty standards, Glossed Over.

8 responses to “Body By Glamour Spoils You For Choice

  1. headdesk
    I gave up on reading women’s magazines years ago. They don’t inspire me, they make me want to kill myself. Which may be their secret plan–to have all us fatties shoot ourselves so we wouldn’t be uglying up their Barbie World any more.

    • Oh see, this makes me very sad — as a women’s magazine writer and general fan, I actually do believe we’re capable of doing a lot of good and know many women’s mag editors and writers who are putting together fantastic stories that push all kinds of boundaries every day.

      But whenever I try to have THAT conversation — about why we need women’s magazines, about how this media creates a space for conversations that the rest of the mainstream media won’t have, and often brings stories to a mass audience that otherwise wouldn’t get even a watered-down version of it — … my girls go and do a piece like this. And it kind of shoots my argument about making change from the inside full of holes…

      headdesk, indeed!

  2. I have given up on reading women’s mags too (at least the ones that have this sort of “fitness” content- home/food/lifestyle I’m still on board). I just can’t fathom why real women are putting this out into the world. I mean how depressing must it be to be the editor who worked on this? I would love to hear about how she feels about her own body- let alone how she feels about putting this out into the world. That sounds judgmental, which I don’t mean. It just makes me sad to think of the time and energy that someone/people put into making this page- who were most likely women! Why are we doing this to each other? Okay, I’ll stop now.

  3. haha, great post. Made me laugh! I think I want muscles, but bigger than Cameron’s.

  4. trc

    just like @Amy P > I just can’t fathom why real women are putting this out into the world. <
    and my Le Sigh 'standard reply' *its the system* doesnt change anything either.
    (because, lets be honest – besides being self-explanatory – what would advertisers and *the system* would want to sell to *women* who are 'healthy at their genetic weight/body-style'. duh)
    and yes, i have also/stopped reading/touching any soc. womens mags decades ago and e.g. prefer sciene/tech and books like Cordelia Fine's.
    and also yes, i think your post is hilarious 😉

  5. Oh, my. Wow. I am offended and dismayed! I can’t stand when magazines give any misconceptions about weight training (i.e, there is NO SUCH THING AS A MINI MUSCLE!) and I even more can’t stand being made to feel somehow ‘wrong’ for being short and brunette. There are some really idiotic journalists out in magazineland.

  6. midnightsky

    It both is and isn’t about the way you train. Some people are just going to have lean, long muscles, and some people are going to get lots of mass. This applies to both men and women. I would never tell my 5’8″, 130-pound boyfriend to bulk up — it’s not going to work. He could eat all the food in the world, and he’d just look like a slightly bigger version of a runner. He’s just a svelte guy. On the other hand, I know some big broad-shouldered types that would look absolutely malnourished if they tried to go with the lithe ninja look. You have to train to your body type, to maximize what it can be.

    Those photos are also artistically wrong. Both the actresses’ heads are too big for their bodies as per typical human proportion — and I bet they’re definitely not in real life. Also, their arms are the same width here. So who’s bigger than who? Ah, Photoshop.

  7. bodiesdontmatterhere

    Hahah, I posted under the “Why telling everyone your weight might rock” article that I’m 5′ 5 1/2” & about 110 right now. I haven’t dieted in 4 years, I eat a balanced diet, and exercise when I can (college makes it hard for me). But THIS is exactly the kind of shit I’m talking about that fucked me up in high school. I had huge muscular butterfly swimmer arms and shoulders and a size zero waist/hips. I started starving myself/throwing up to get rid of MUSCLE! Because, like we see Cameron here, the ideal muscular woman was not as muscular as me. I felt like a freak female body builder that were commonly disparaged by my friends when seen/talked about. I mean, REALLY–these are “Maxi Muscles?” That’s hilarious. “Maxi Muscles” DONT fit in sample sizes.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s