4.9.09

A bit of a rant

I saw this on A's blog (shut up, vita) and it made me pretty fired up so I thought I would write a post about it here. I tried to resist the whole MasterChef phenomenon for AS LONG AS I COULD and then I got really into it and disconnected the phone whenever it was on and yelled at Boy if he tried to change the channel/talk to me/breathe loudly when it was on. ANYWAY, Julie was one of my early favourites and I was really happy when she won. Sure, I guess there was some of that Australian-mum-done-good hype going on, but that didn't stop me from shedding a little tear when she won (bye bye, credibility).

So she got a deal writing for Australian Woman's Weekly and her photos turned out... like this:




Now, for those of you who don't know, Julie usually looks something like this:

I guess to echo the point that A. has already made, why do magazines feel the need to make this beautiful, talented woman into someone practically unrecognisable? It reminds me of all the fuss over Therese Rein when she lost weight, I read that some magazines were saying that "now she will be able to keep up with Michelle Obama and Carla Bruni". She's an amazing businesswoman who is worth millions of dollars (without the help of her husband) and yet the Australian media went nuts over photos of her in a gym.

As you all probably know, I want to be a journalist when I graduate, so I guess Photoshopping is something that I will have to get used to seeing all over the place. It also might be pointless me writing about it, since next week I will probably feature some ad or a photoshoot or a promo photo where the model's ever last imperfection (and last five pounds) are probably eliminated. I just think that when people have achieved so much and are already inspirational, why do people feel the need to pressure them into losing a few extra kilos, or to Botox their foreheads, or to completely change who they are?

What do you think?

Love your non-Photoshopped blogger,

x

4 comments:

  1. I am so there with you, Tara! I'm sure it's fun for her to play dress-ups for a day, but what is with that midriff? There was either some industrial strength girdling (which I really thought we were past) or some serious photoshopping. I also think they've done something to her nose with the ps. For Pete's sake, we all know what she looks like, we watched her for weeks on the tele. Don't insult her innate fabulousness and our intelligence by doing this to her. And yes, maybe you will have to get used to ps, but you don't have to like it. And you are allowed to say so. Long live the internet for that, I say!

    ps - you have to love the verification 'word' for today - 'hypess'!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Woo, Thanks for the little credit there ;)

    Obviously, I completely agree with you and also as someone who aspires to be a journalist, I'll have to probably get used to seeing photoshopped images everywhere, but hey, maybe we can campaign for no more photoshopping in the media! (As if that will ever happen, though.)

    Therese Rein is a very good example of this. She sort of proves to the media that you don't have to be a stick figure to be uber successful, and as you said, she had her millions before K-Rudd got the top job. Not that the top job pays millions anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  3. i agree 100%. photoshopping julie like that was so unnessecary. makes me angry actually!!!

    ReplyDelete
  4. I received this month's issue on AWW via the post and was shocked to see how photoshopped Julie was!

    I'm sure us girls don't mind being dolled up once in a while, but is really sad to see Julie photoshopped to the max.

    By the way, I like your stylish blog!

    ReplyDelete

Thank you for your comment! x