“Why can’t I look like that?”
It’s a question we’ve all pondered from time to time. In a culture consumed by its media, the pressure to “look good” is something that is always hanging over our heads.
It is hard to remember that those perfectly bronzed and chiseled models are often photoshopped versions of the real thing. I challenge you to find a living and breathing human that doesn’t have blemishes on his or her face or who is perfectly toned and tan all year round.
Advertisements intentionally target the desires and insecurities of the consumers in their campaigns to suck the buyer into purchasing the product that will supposedly correct these natural human flaws. This is clearly an effective strategy, especially for cosmetic companies. You really can’t blame them, though. This is a great plan, but they should not feature photoshopped models in their ad campaigns if they are going to do this.
Show us what the product really does, not how well your computer software can manipulate the model’s appearance.
This year lingerie brand Aerie released the “Aerie Real” campaign in which the company proudly chose not to retouch the models in its advertisements. What you see is what you get, and I love the idea of that. The photos in the ads show healthy looking girls (for once) with real blemishes, curves and tattoos.
“They’re still models, they’re still gorgeous, they just look a little more like the rest of us,” Juju Chang of Good Morning America said in an interview with the line’s style and fit expert Jenny Altman. @@ names checked @@
Women are constantly told that they should be skinny, voluptuous and curvy. The funny thing is that these expectations could not contradict themselves more if they tried. The latest thing that society seems to be obsessed with is the “thigh gap.” The theory is that the bigger the thigh gap, the skinnier you are. False. The size of the “gap” is determined by the width of your hips and the shape of your pelvis.
So sorry, ladies, but this one is seemingly out of our control.
Another negative aspect of media that tends to be overlooked is tabloids exploiting celebrities in unflattering swimsuit pictures. I’m sure people feel less than sympathetic for these public figures, but it is such a messed up concept when you really look at it.
The second a celebrity or model steps out of the advertisement or commercial and on to the beach, paparazzi swarm, trying to catch an unflattering glimpse of the star’s body.
When magazines publishing these “real” photos of the stars in a condescending manner, they are sending the message to Americans that if you aren’t toned and skinny, you shouldn’t hit the beach and you sure aren’t worthy of being in a swimsuit.
The reality of it all is that the majority of the images reflect the everyday person. So, according to these magazines, if you’re not retouched and superhuman, you’re just not good enough.
All of these societal pressures have nothing but negative effects on men and women, resulting in eating disorders, insecurities and more.
According to Sky News, in 2008, a group of doctors and psychologists petitioned that digital retouching be banned from advertisements aimed at the 16 years and under demographic due to the increase in eating disorders and dissatisfaction of appearance occurring in adolescents.
To be fair, I think that advertising firms should stop retouching their models and products to make them more appealing to the eye. Instead, they should follow in the footsteps of Aerie and celebrate natural beauty, not digitized beauty.