Modeling Industry Versus Realistic Physical Role Models
For quite some time now, there has been controversy on what image supermodels portray to audiences, especially to younger, more easily influenced audiences such as teens. Many people complain that the supermodel look is not real, nor is it realistic. Models are seen as a being too skinny, even anorexic. With this people have labeled them as not being physically “realistic” women. But who are realistic women? Does being a realistic woman require a certain height and weight? What is normal? Perhaps what people are failing to see is that “realistic” and “normal” are very relative terms.
First of all, what does a physically realistic woman look like? If you asked ten people that question, it is likely you would hear ten different answers. This proves that there is not a definition for what a “realistic” woman really is, or should be. A woman is simply an adult female, but a “realistic” woman has many varying terms depending on who is defining the expression. Not only will the definition change when asking different people, but the definition will also change when asking people who are from different regions. For instance, Africa’s version of a physically realistic woman greatly differs from England’s definition of a realistic woman. In several African tribes, it is normal for women to “butch” their hair and wear it short for their whole life. This looks as though they shaved their head, and they do this because it is cooler and easier to manage. African women also have a stronger build because they do daily chores such as carrying water and mashing corn to make cornmeal. In England, however, it would be considered very odd for a woman to shave her head, and most women are not physically muscular. Both regions have physically different ideals for women. Therefore, the term “realistic” varies.
Keeping in mind that the term “realistic” is relative, the modeling industry would have a very difficult time...