I don’t want to buy a dream, I want to buy decent clothing!
This article by Andrew Heasley starts off with the usual run-of-the-mill slag off the fatties crap. What could have been given a really positive spin has in fact been snapped up as just another opportunity to remind the world that fat people live on donuts.While there is some positive content, those parts obviously didn’t come from Andrew Heasley.
a 'plus size' mannequin amongst the mannequins generally used by Myer
Myer (BIG department store in Australia) has introduced dress dummies in sizes 18 and 20. And if you listened to Heasley, you might think the world was going to stop turning because of it. Thank the gods that Myer CEO Bernie Brookes has a bit more sense than Andrew Heasley, even if Brookes is only doing it for increased profits (of course he is doing it for increased profits, that is his job after all).
At the moment the ‘plus size’ mannequins (that is size 16 and above) are only utilised in the plus size section of the store. But that makes sense to me. Why would you put a size 20 mannequin in the children’s section? If there are no clothes over a size 16 in the pertinent section then it would be ridiculous to have display mannequins over a size 16 in the same section. Having them in the plus size section however, is a GOOD thing.
However , just as one a commenter points out, if Myer are serious about appealing to fat women, they need to seriously reconsider the placement of their plus size range and what that range actually consists of. There are plenty of fat-haters on their soapboxes commenting though so don’t go there unless you have the sanity points stored up and ready to use. The comment from an alleged ‘doctor’ is particularly galling.
Oh, and notice how the ‘plus size’ mannequin in the picture has no head, or arms, or legs for that matter, but the ‘normal sizes’ mannequins do? Dismembered fatty is ok apparently…
Yes I did notice that even the mannequin is a headless fatty! (And also, a size 14. When the story is about size 20. What is that about?)
For reasons of convenience I buy a lot of clothes at Myer. This may explain why I don’t have nearly enough great clothes.
I have noticed that Autograph are also using “plus-size” mannequins. They’re probably about the same size as the one in the picture above. They look good in the Autograph clothes – better than their old skinny mannequins did.
However, they too are headless. At least they have arms, and most of their legs.
Headless fatty up there in that photo is a much healthier tone though isn’t she? The skinny ones look like they’re painted zombie grey. I’ve just noticed the razor blade clavicles on them too. Yuck.
Ah, headless fatty, how much I hate that. It’s such objectification, but this is the kind of objectification that bothers me most. “You are not standard beauty, therefore you are not human.” It makes me ache.
Something I was talking about the other day on my blog: If there is enough demand for clothing to warrant a Plus Size Section, why the hell does it have to be separate? Why can’t we have the same clothes in the same style, just made to fit us?
It really bothers me.
I want to buy clothing that does cost a small fortune!
Yeah, the donuts dig in the FIRST LINE? Fail.
Also, because they’ll be using plus-size manequins in the plus-size department, Jennifer Hawkins will have to get fat?
Yep, it’s true, it’s not just that we want clothes and representation that fit our fat bodies, we want to make the rest of the world fat too! And a few manequins will do this! Oh yes, our plans, they are all coming together! Bwahahahaha!
the fat-hate bias of the article from the outset clearly influences all the fat-hate diatribe that follows. as for that “dr” stealth, i think they are a fuckwit. people like that should be stripped of their medical licence – knowledge, empathy, compassion and a – excuse the pun – broader view of the issues, surely are more important requirements in a doctor than just being a fat hating jerk. sure in some cases fatties are fatties cos they eat crap and don’t exercise – but so what? if i knew you and you did that, well, it’s none of my business. if you exercise and eat healthily and are a fattie, so what again?
i think this article took an opportunity to once again stir up public hatred of fatties, an opportunity that seems to have been well received. fatties, we are the niggers, the homos, and the suffragettes of the maligned past. we are the last bastion of “socially acceptable” targets for hatred and prejudice.
[...] exist instead of having to cater to your needs, or be near you. You don’t need clothes or shop mannequins that look like you because the rest of us don’t like to be reminded that actual people look [...]
All fatties MUST want everyone in the world to be fat, right? It goes right next to the idea that fat people automatically hate anyone who is a smaller size – we must be oh so envious of their bodies; we must, after all either be “in denial about how fat we are” or be desperately wanting to lose weight as we scarf down seconds and thirds and then eat a pile of doughnuts (because, y’know, all fat people just laze around eating crap all day because *gasp* fat people NEVER eat fruit and veggies or exercise!).
This article is doing nothing but the usual shit stirring against fatties. What gets me are the comments about how those dreadful, tax wasting fatties are trying to consider their body size to be NORMAL and ACCEPTABLE. Honestly, whose perception of normal and acceptable are we going by here? And what happens to us “unacceptable fatties” anyway? Do they lock us away, so that the acceptables don’t need to see us until we’re like them or will there be some larger scale form of the Biggest Loser?
There is an emphasis on diversity nowadays but what about size diversity?