Lisa Ricard Claro – Author

Romance is good for your heart!

The Goldilocks Girls

Posted on Mar 9, 2010 by Lisa Ricard Claro   8 Comments | Posted in fashion · Goldilocks · models

The fashion industry swallowed a dose of reality and recently decided to embrace overweight models. This is fine with me as I, like most, find the models whose shapes mimic a McDonald’s french fry to be unattractive and unrealistic.  It is about time someone in the fashion business pulled his/her head out of the loom and admitted what the rest of us already know: emaciated bodies are unhealthy, and most of us don’t fit into a size 00 anyway. 

Here’s what bugs me, though.  See, being a chunky monkey isn’t healthy, either.  Why must the fashion industry run to extremes? Why can’t the models be height and weight appropriate? The classic runway model is 5-feet 9-inches or taller in her bare feet and weighs 110 pounds or less; according to the height/weight chart at Diet Bites that is nearly 20 pounds underweight.  The heftier models run about 20 pounds overweight.

I’d love to see models of any and every height who look like they eat right and follow a regular exercise regimen. The average American woman may not choose broccoli over brownies or exercise in front of the tube while she feeds her NCIS habit, but if she did, then a model’s figure (the models who populate my rose-colored world, anyway) would be attainable for all of us with hard work and some willpower at the pantry door. If nothing else, our teenage girls might be inspired to look healthy rather than hefty or half-weight.

I even dubbed my models with a catchy name.  They would be the Goldilocks Girls, not too fluffy and not too flat, but juuuust right. 

Funny thing, but the New York and Paris fashion gurus have yet to solicit my opinion.  I think they’re just miffed because I compared their super models to shoestring french fries.  But you know what they say…if the shoestring fits…

Til next time –

8 Responses to "The Goldilocks Girls"

  1. Comment by Linda O'Connell
    March 9, 2010 at 11:38 pm  

    I believe that the Barbie doll craze created image problems that have led to eating disorders with our girls. I see it in preschool! "Mama, am I fat?" These little girls dress like mini fashion models, not children. They don't play with baby dolls anymore after age five. Sad how quickly we are forcing children to grow up.

  2. Comment by BECKY
    March 10, 2010 at 12:06 am  

    So true and so clever! Love the last line!!I think I was about 13 when Twiggy was THE Newest Model!! Talk about a shoe string. Talk about girls' self images….And I was an overweight, unattractive, unpopular, mousy-brown haired, pointy glasses wearing, somewhat miserable girl. My older brother had a couple of favorite names for me: Spaz, and The Tank. (The Tank because I was short and kind of square shaped….Who knew years later being a Square Person with funny pants would be popular??)

  3. Comment by Lisa Ricard Claro
    March 10, 2010 at 1:06 pm  

    Hi Linda – I agree. Our society expects too much and offers too little with regard to female self-image. Even for those of us who try to keep our kids age appropriate, the celebrity culture sure pushes back.

  4. Comment by Lisa Ricard Claro
    March 10, 2010 at 1:12 pm  

    Hey Becky – Well, m'dear, just one more thing we have in common. I was "Tank", too! I was 11 when my big brother and sister decided Tank was a fine nickname. I struggled with acne forever, too. Talk about an image blaster. Glad those days are over, and I wouldn't want to be a kid in today's environment.

  5. Comment by BECKY
    March 10, 2010 at 4:26 pm  

    Lisa, this is just gettin' too freaky!! :oTwilight Zone..♪♫♪!

  6. Comment by Cathy C. Hall
    March 10, 2010 at 7:38 pm  

    Good news: I was waaaay under the weight for my height! Bad news: I was looking at the men's chart. (Seriously, I was :-)More seriously, the model industry has glorified a body type that is extrememly unhealthy (as you pointed out so eloquently) and the TV industry has made the situation even worse. Consider the teeny-tiny women who dominate prime-time…when you see these actresses in someplace real, like a basketball game, they're kinda scary looking. It's enough to make a mom scream. (We're mad as heck and we're not gonna take it anymore!)

  7. Comment by Lisa Ricard Claro
    March 10, 2010 at 11:38 pm  

    HA HA! Oh, Master Y, you always make me laugh. Thanks for that. The prime time ladies…yeah, scary skinny. And the models, same thing. I worried about my 16-year-old when she got into acting/modeling last year–right out of the gate a photographer told her she needed to drop weight to 110 or less. She is 5'6" (she can do commercial modeling, too short for runway) and weighs a healthy 120, still on the thin side, but that's just genetics. She decided he was nuts and quipped (while eating her second Taco Bell Crunchwrap Supreme)that she guessed she'd be perfect as a plus size model (the sarcasm is also genetic). Ironic, all this scary skinny stuff, considering that Marilyn Monroe, arguably the biggest sex symbol ever, wore a not-so-small size 16.

  8. Comment by Kathy at Oregon Gifts of Comfort and Joy Welcomes You!
    March 11, 2010 at 9:06 pm  

    Hi Lisa, I agree with you. Normal is great … why doesn't that get more press? I love watching the old movies and looking at the older sculptures, where women really look like women look … kind of soft and womanly.Kathy

Leave a Comment

%d bloggers like this: