Athleta’s older, white haired model
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
just f right on off love |
Anonymous
You're disgusting. |
Anonymous
As someone who looks more like the larger model, that photo is helpful to me. It shows me how the cut of the short cannot accommodate a round belly and the fabric will pull and wrinkle to make them look too tight. Maybe a different person my size would think they are a flattering length or would be ok because they have a flatter stomach but a thick bottom. |
Anonymous
Can you please stop not understanding sarcasm?? OMG. |
Anonymous
No, I don't think you understand how this works. On a toothpick, it just hangs there. How does that let you see how it's supposed to look unless you have ZERO curves? I'm sorry, but no, you're wrong. Most women have curves. You are the outlier. You are also a disgusting piece of shit for judging fat women, but that's a whole different story. - Size 6 here. |
Anonymous
So why do you think we should only see it on a size 0 model then? How are we supposed to imagine what it will look like on a size 10 woman if we see it hanging loose on someone who weighs 100 lbs? You are crazy. |
Anonymous
That's.....why they have TWO different sized models. But you're offended because they didn't put the skinny model first. OMG, get a life. |
Anonymous
All the photo tells me is that the obese model really shouldn’t wear shorts. |
Anonymous
| Why on earth would companies cater to thin people when the average woman is a size 16? Most look closer to the size 20 model, so that’s what should be more represented if they want to make money. |
Anonymous
| Dang, the thins sure are steamed that fat women now have access to the same clothes as them lol |
Anonymous
|
I am all for size inclusivity with models but I agree some brands are not really being inclusive when the options are just 5’10” size 2 or 5’10” size 20. Neither of those is average and while for me the size 2 will be a little closer, I think it would make more sense to include a size 8 or 12.
I think if a garment comes in anything above a 16 (which thankfully more brands are doing), it is important to show a 16+ model in the item because as PPs mentioned, they actually cut clothes differently for this range. One thing I’ve seen for petite sizing that is like to see for all sizing is an explanation of what the fit differences might be for different sizes. Like some brands will explain that their petite sizes are cut with shorter hems and sleeve lengths, but also some differences in dart placement or princess seaming. That’s useful if, like me, you sometimes got petite clothes and sometimes don’t. I think it would be useful to explain how they change a pattern for a size 22 versus a size 8. On topic: I think the older Athleta model is really stunning snd I particularly appreciate seeing her in activewear because it’s only recently that older women were “allowed” to be athletic. I find it inspiring. Agree fit and lighting are bad but that’s really common for these photos, regardless of the model’s size or age. Some brands cheap out on photography. |
Anonymous
This! I can't believe those who are upset that she has wrinkly skin and age spots (or that they weren't photoshopped away). The whole point of inclusive advertising is to be more realistic and appeal to a variety of ages, ethnicities, body types, etc. |
Anonymous
All your comment tells me is that you are an asshole. |