France bans models that are "excessively thin"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Jockeys have had minimum weights since forever. No outrage.


Why do people like you not understand the difference between a standard imposed by private industry/organizations versus government laws?


Do you understand the term "occupational safety"?

BTW jockeys weights are set by the state racing commission, i.e. government.


I do understand the term occupational safety. The problem with over-regulation is that we get things like the homeless being denied donations of day-old bagels because of carb content.

There are some women that are naturally tall and gangly. Others do starve themselves. At what point is the cut-off point regarding personal choice?

Wow really? You don't know much about the industry do you? Most of the models are underage and there have been deaths and serious health issues. Guess in your world your kids would be at the coal mine for a 12 hour shift. Its Sunday, maybe you should get back to work?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jockeys have had minimum weights since forever. No outrage.

Why do people like you not understand the difference between a standard imposed by private industry/organizations versus government laws?

Ah, yes.

Standards imposed by industry = good
Standards imposed by government = evil

Because industry can do no wrong, but government is evil, so say the Gods of Libertarianism

Never mind that, unlike government, industry is unelected and unaccountable to the public, never mind that all that evil government regulation out there is in response to industry abuses.

What? The difference is that the government enforces its rules at the point of a gun, while you are free to ignore private industry/association standards. Don't like the PGA's golf rules? Start your own golf association and tournaments. When the government acts, it must not infringe on your constitutional rights. Private actors by definition only govern their on groups, property, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Jockeys have had minimum weights since forever. No outrage.


Why do people like you not understand the difference between a standard imposed by private industry/organizations versus government laws?


Do you understand the term "occupational safety"?

BTW jockeys weights are set by the state racing commission, i.e. government.


I do understand the term occupational safety. The problem with over-regulation is that we get things like the homeless being denied donations of day-old bagels because of carb content.

There are some women that are naturally tall and gangly. Others do starve themselves. At what point is the cut-off point regarding personal choice?

Wow really? You don't know much about the industry do you? Most of the models are underage and there have been deaths and serious health issues. Guess in your world your kids would be at the coal mine for a 12 hour shift. Its Sunday, maybe you should get back to work?

It's insignificant.

"According to the National Institutes of Health, obesity and overweight together are the second leading cause of preventable death in the United States, close behind tobacco use (3). An estimated 300,000 deaths per year are due to the obesity epidemic"

Anorexia and bulemia? Not even in the top 100 causes of death. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_causes_of_death_by_rate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've always been naturally very thin (and tall) so this amuses me. I wonder what BMI they have set. Hopefully something reasonable like 17%.

Are you being purposely obtuse?

17% BMI is at the low/normal range. Anorexia is another story, genius.

Let me share a visual so that you can "get" the point.

She looks healthier than this:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've always been naturally very thin (and tall) so this amuses me. I wonder what BMI they have set. Hopefully something reasonable like 17%.

Are you being purposely obtuse?

17% BMI is at the low/normal range. Anorexia is another story, genius.

Let me share a visual so that you can "get" the point.

You haven't made a point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've always been naturally very thin (and tall) so this amuses me. I wonder what BMI they have set. Hopefully something reasonable like 17%.

Are you being purposely obtuse?

17% BMI is at the low/normal range. Anorexia is another story, genius.

Let me share a visual so that you can "get" the point.

She looks healthier than this:

Not a fat apologist, but if I saw these two on the street, I'd definitely be more worried about the skinny one. That level of body fat is super unhealthy for a female.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've always been naturally very thin (and tall) so this amuses me. I wonder what BMI they have set. Hopefully something reasonable like 17%.

Are you being purposely obtuse?

17% BMI is at the low/normal range. Anorexia is another story, genius.

Let me share a visual so that you can "get" the point.

She looks healthier than this:

I'd say both are the extremes, which is what the fashion world likes.

Try to stop being stupid for a minute, ok?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've always been naturally very thin (and tall) so this amuses me. I wonder what BMI they have set. Hopefully something reasonable like 17%.

Are you being purposely obtuse?

17% BMI is at the low/normal range. Anorexia is another story, genius.

Let me share a visual so that you can "get" the point.

You haven't made a point.

And you have?

I'd say that visuals do indeed make points. And there are plenty of malnourished, underage models being used to promote a clothing line.

some additional info - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/zoe-malliaros/post_3346_b_1497264.html
The Issues with Underage and Underweight Models

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/theslice/why-the-modeling-industry-should-unionize
The Catwalk Sweatshop: Inside Modeling's Overworked, Underpaid, Unprotected Labor Force

One supermodel was advised to eat only a rice cake a day, while others are offered subtle hints, often backed up by contract stipulations, to lose inches. Related health hazards are also present; 68 percent of the workforce suffers from anxiety and/or depression, noted the same survey. A quarter profess drug or alcohol dependency, and around a third said they lacked health insurance (although the survey took place in 2012, before the Affordable Care Act was implemented).

Feel free to post again when you have something smart to share.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The BMI requirmen under the EU law is 18

honestly that is high for a minimum. i had a bmi of 17.5 in high school and now i'm just under 18 in my 40s. i don't diet, never been anorexic - just naturally thin, but there are plenty of women thinner than me, especially in france.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Jockeys have had minimum weights since forever. No outrage.


Why do people like you not understand the difference between a standard imposed by private industry/organizations versus government laws?


Do you understand the term "occupational safety"?

BTW jockeys weights are set by the state racing commission, i.e. government.


I do understand the term occupational safety. The problem with over-regulation is that we get things like the homeless being denied donations of day-old bagels because of carb content.

There are some women that are naturally tall and gangly. Others do starve themselves. At what point is the cut-off point regarding personal choice?

Wow really? You don't know much about the industry do you? Most of the models are underage and there have been deaths and serious health issues. Guess in your world your kids would be at the coal mine for a 12 hour shift. Its Sunday, maybe you should get back to work?

Is modeling a choice?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The BMI requirmen under the EU law is 18

honestly that is high for a minimum. i had a bmi of 17.5 in high school and now i'm just under 18 in my 40s. i don't diet, never been anorexic - just naturally thin, but there are plenty of women thinner than me, especially in france.

pp here - and I would add that I look absolutely nothing like the girl in the photo. that looks like a BMI of 14 or 15.

[Anonymous]

BMI calculators put a BMI below 17.5 as anorexic.

PPs who say that obesity is the cause of far more deaths are IMO a bit off point. Those deaths are throughout the general population and include deaths from long term diabetes, heart conditions, etc which can be the result of obesity.

Among young people, there are few deaths from obesity because it hasn't done enough long term damage yet. On the other hand, anorexia can and does cause deaths among young people.

I say this as the mother of a DD who has had an anorexia range BMI for a year owing to a nonpsychiatric medical condition. You bet her doctors are very worried and watch it very closely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've always been naturally very thin (and tall) so this amuses me. I wonder what BMI they have set. Hopefully something reasonable like 17%.

Are you being purposely obtuse?

17% BMI is at the low/normal range. Anorexia is another story, genius.

Let me share a visual so that you can "get" the point.

So why limit it to modeling? Why not pass a law imposing jail time on anyone that falls below a BMI of 18? Also I don't think anorexia is a bigger problem than obesity. About 10,000 times as many people die from obesity-related desires. Any-skinny laws like these are passed by jealous, fat legislators.

Because we can't outlaw personal behavior. But we cannot event an industry from forcing people to starve in order to get a job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've always been naturally very thin (and tall) so this amuses me. I wonder what BMI they have set. Hopefully something reasonable like 17%.

Are you being purposely obtuse?

17% BMI is at the low/normal range. Anorexia is another story, genius.

Let me share a visual so that you can "get" the point.

So why limit it to modeling? Why not pass a law imposing jail time on anyone that falls below a BMI of 18? Also I don't think anorexia is a bigger problem than obesity. About 10,000 times as many people die from obesity-related desires. Any-skinny laws like these are passed by jealous, fat legislators.

Because we can't outlaw personal behavior. But we cannot event an industry from forcing people to starve in order to get a job.

You can't do either in the U.S. The EU law would unconditional in the U.S. under the first amendment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've always been naturally very thin (and tall) so this amuses me. I wonder what BMI they have set. Hopefully something reasonable like 17%.

Are you being purposely obtuse?

17% BMI is at the low/normal range. Anorexia is another story, genius.

Let me share a visual so that you can "get" the point.

So why limit it to modeling? Why not pass a law imposing jail time on anyone that falls below a BMI of 18? Also I don't think anorexia is a bigger problem than obesity. About 10,000 times as many people die from obesity-related desires. Any-skinny laws like these are passed by jealous, fat legislators.

Because we can't outlaw personal behavior. But we cannot event an industry from forcing people to starve in order to get a job.

You can't do either in the U.S. The EU law would unconditional in the U.S. under the first amendment.

No, the us airline industry had weight requirements for flight attendants up until 1990. The army has them. Certain sports have them. It's not unconstitutional because weight is not a protected class. Unless weight is used to discriminate against a certain protected class of individuals, if it relates to the job you can do it as a company. And certainly governments do it.