This mannequin was photographed recently in La Perla's SoHo store by a passerby who then posted to Twitter with the message: "How does La Perla think ribs on a mannequin is ok?!"
After many complaints, the store released a statement saying the mannequin has be removed and will not be used again at any La Perla boutique. OK, at least they responded swiftly and got rid of it. That's the best they could do, I guess But since when are protruding ribs a sexy statement?
Since at least 2009, I guess, since this image has just surfaced from a shoot Lady Gaga did for V Magazine:
Not only did they liposuck all the fat from her body to make it look like she hasn't eaten in a week, they PHOTOSHOPPED ON A VISIBLE RIB CAGE. They put an entirely different head onto her body, too. They also made her breast higher and smaller and brightened up her tattoo.
I'm not anti-Photoshop. I've got no problem with the brightening of the skin, smoothing out of cellulite, removing bags under eyes, etc. That type of Photoshopping is expected in the industry.
But Gaga's body already looks super skinny in the before picture. And Gaga is known for speaking out against eating disorders, since she suffered from one herself. The V Magazine photo came out in 2009, before Gaga became a body-image truther, but she spoke out last November about her Glamour cover, saying "I felt my skin looked too perfect. I felt my hair looked too soft."
To be fair, I don't remember her saying anything about this extremely Photoshopped Vogue cover in 2012.
The new image isn't even a photograph anymore, it's an illustration. She looks like a purple satin lamp. Nobody's thighs are 6 inches around.
Whenever I see photos of myself retouched, it's always for my skin. I know that they're going to take out bumps and discoloration, but I hate when it's over the top. Sometimes I feel like I'm tricking people into hiring me because my photos look one way but I look different. I've never felt as pretty as my portfolio because I've never had the perfect skin that gets Photoshopped onto me.
This image was for a beauty shoot and the retouching was a little out of control. This was when my acne sucked, but he even made my nose symmetrical. I didn't want to use this for my portfolio because I felt it looked absolutely nothing like me:
Emaciating people in photographs is ludicrous, but I also hate it when commenters and critics rush to call any photograph that shows a woman's clavicle or ribcage "disgusting." Some women are just naturally thin. We're so mired in Photoshopped images that we don't have any idea what different kinds of bodies look like naturally.
A few years ago, super skinny model Karlie Kloss had her ribs Photoshopped out for Numero Magazine. What they did to Karlie doesn't really make sense to me. Usually clients just hire girls with the body type they're looking for. I've never come across photos of myself that were Photoshopped to make me less skinny, but I've been turned down from many jobs for not being big enough to fill out the clothes. It happens often.
Karlie is gorgeous the way she is. How can an industry require models to be skinny, but not to have visible or protruding bones? All these edited images just keep fueling our unrealistic beauty standards, whether we expect women to be skeletal or completely boneless. Can we at least agree to keep our Photoshopping to things that are actually on the outside of our bodies? My bones and internal organs have very little to do with fashion.