#AerieREAL, Yes? No?

In the introduction of Revolting Bodies, the author Kathleen Lebesco writes about the politics behind the revolting part of fat bodies. How it’s language and medical terms have devalued and elevated the word into its political aspect. In my last post I wrote about Emma Watson, and specifically how it was interesting to see the reaction against the #HeforShe camping. Most interesting the agents that want to maintain the status quo in this blog post I want to further that, in the way that Lebesco wants to explore her topics. But most interesting while trying to read her works and especially in chapter 5 where she talks about the industry and consumenrism within the idea that a new market for heavier women is opening instead of creating change and trying to allude that is okay to be fat it rather distorts with no message behind it and rather makes it so they can make a profit rather than help the stigma that goes behind being fat.

This chapter made me think of the Aerie campaign, #aeriereal where they have marketed their underwear using models without retouching, because in their ideal world no one looks like models.  My critique within it, its that just because you show a women with less photo shopped arms and more belly than the other models doesn’t  mean that it is okay. Lebesco mentions this in her book just because you have something marketed towards a certain group of people doesn’t mean that it’s okay and it does indeed represent that group of people, in regard to lane Bryant and this can apply to aerie campaign.

It is interesting to see the public climate that this campaign was built on, at this moment there are more agents working for social change, there is a need to be more inclusive. Jennifer Lawrence made it cool for some girls to voice that is okay to express how much you’re supposed to want the plate of French fries. Or at least a person watching her movies think it’s cool she talks about not being Hollywood Skinny. Jennifer Lawrence is revered because she is so honest and authentic. New generations that think different and young girls that express they don’t look like models, these are people aerie wants to target. I have seen those ads first hand and was skeptical of them as soon as I saw them, because aerie might have not chose to “photo shop” their models to look even skinnier but also they’re still models. While some might praise aerie for being so open to other body types, and not photo shopping, they are still not doing a good job on representing other kinds of women. Yes, having a woman of color in their campaign and a redheaded woman might seem like diversity, but I have never seen someone short, or a heavier model, or someone with type of different skin or blemish. What this campaign says, yes we won’t photo shop our models till skinny and tall as possible because they are not only worth for the bodies but because real and majority of women don’t look like that. But it falls short from creating any type of change, because while might it be a baby step if aerie did in fact use some photo shopping but not all. That women are allowed to have a little bit of a belly, some laughing lines. They still have to have luminous skin, blemish free, and look good in their panties. The campaign falls short of completing all of this, and it is in my jaded mind that probably it was just a marketing scam to people that want to see something different and included in those giant billboards that have coy, thin women looking adorable and sexy at the same time in lingerie.

The campaign might allow for some awareness but doesn’t do the active changing job that is needed to change the idea of women and how much they should want their bodies to look thin, and bikini ready. It doesn’t change that there are TONS of other types of bodies are beyond a size 2 or 4. It doesn’t bring anything to the table that might change the discourse of how we think of heavier people.

The aerie campaign does little to incorporate anything about visibility of other types of bodies or systematic change that one day we will accept other bodies instead of capitalizing them. Whether it is from the dieting and lifestyle industry that tells women they are not enough, and they should police themselves, be better, taller, skinnier. It just once again leaves the models to look “normal” and show how real they are, but silences other types of women.  

In the same chapter Lebesco also mentions that maybe industries that do acknowledge other types of bodies, and plus size bodies are a small win even if the company just wants to make money of the type of branding they are using. They are still bringing visibility and a small area of discourse that yes, women don’t often look like haute couture models. But it is not enough, Lebesco mentions another author saying the following:

“  When they disdain from blending in in favor of cobbling together a look from scattered resources available and becoming more brave about appearing in ways that defy the “tasteful” intentions of the commodifiers of corpulence, fashion is revolutionary; its newfound ability stymie fat oppression.” (73)

in other words,  how I interpret this, is that when one person that is being oppressed because of their body type takes charge. Takes fashion and creates them as their own accepting of their own bodies and without the commodification of the production and brand they are making a change. The industry and capitalistic ideals, tell us about the private and public the idea of image and how it is within ourselves to make ourselves better because we need to reach perfection, while spending money throughout it. But when we break away from the these ideas we can make a change on the discourse of the body and change in that case, the industry idea of being and always looking “tasteful” for anybody type. 

#realtalk with a aerie model, and how she wants women to be confident and own their bodies.