Comments on: Jackie Frank hits back at critics over unretouched Hawkins cover

By: Carly

Carly — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 09:08:54 +0000

Aaaaah forget the details.
This is purely and simply a PR exercise.
That has worked very very well.
Evidenced by all the discussion above!

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 14:45:02 +0000

And….as always…..all the fuss fades into the flurry of yesterdays’ dramas, superceded by time, lulled by the futility of popular opinion on the subject of the ‘ideal woman’. So now we know again, deep down, that she is very slim, she is young and she is ideally…almost flawless (whatever that means) Oh and i forgot…in australia she is white.
heh heh!

By: Chris Harris

Chris Harris — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 10:37:23 +0000

Was Marie Claire out to trump Madison for some reason?

The biggest FAIL here is that Jen is presented as the “isn’t great that the the average girl can get here gear of for a magazine and she’s comfortable with her flaws”
I’m sorry but Jen is not the average girl, shes one of the most recognised women in the world, she is blessed with great jeans, has time to maintain excellent diet and fitness and is a lingerie model for god’s sake!

Had this been presented for what it is “Jen gets her gear off like never before” and not wrapped in some sweetness wrapper about the average body image, then there would be little to be discussing and Marie Claire would have sold just as many rag mags.

All the power to Bianca Dye et al for standing up for women and what is acceptable, beautiful and healthy. Its all more than skin deep and if the young women rising up in today’s world can be confident and happy with who they are it will be a better world.

I think there’s a lot more to come on this subject.

By: Lisa Moulton

Lisa Moulton — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 05:56:35 +0000

Everyone is missing the point. Jennifer Hawkins is beautiful, she’s fantastic. But SHE DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY IMAGE RE-TOUCHING. Hence the whole purpose of the supposed exercise (no not selling mags – yeah right!) was wasted.

By: Pom

Pom — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 04:47:35 +0000

Jen looks amazing on the cover and she works hard to look like that (combined) with amazing genes. However if the point is to represent the average Australian, Jen probably isn’t it, but she does represent some of Australias fabulous looking women. I think its great that she isn’t retouched, but would have liked to have seen her without make up too, but thats a small point.

Maybe Jackie Frank should do the same with Kate Cebrano who probably represents a larger proportion of the female population, who is also stunning and body confident.

We shouldn’t slag people off because their size. Most people work their arses off to be slim and shouldn’t be dammed for it – thats not promoting positive body image! And by the same token some larger women are also incredibly fit, will never be a size 8 should not be berated. At the end of the day women should care more about being healthy and confident and be passing this on to their daughters.

By: infokill

infokill — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 04:25:29 +0000

Why is she wearing makeup?

By: A

Wed, 06 Jan 2010 01:57:44 +0000

People want to look at (and look like) healthy, attractive people.

So what?

They look better, they are more sexy, they are more appealing and they will sell more products because of it.

Sure, they aren’t the norm and not representative of ‘average people’ but commerce isn’t based on presenting the ‘average’ just to improve peoples self esteem. If people feel great about themselves then they won’t buy as much.

If you have body image issues then maybe you should work at it, or be comfortable knowing that plenty of people look like you. Plenty of people have cellulite and expanding waist lines, but that doesn’t mean we want to see it on a billboard or on the cover of a magazine.

Let’s not use ‘body image’ as an excuse to justify being unhealthy.

By: Jeannie

Jeannie — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 14:18:38 +0000

Madison and MC have all just jumped on the bandwagon. Glamour in the US ran a real women naked story and sales soared. Now these Aussie mags are trying the same thing. It’s as simple as that. If Glamour had seen a similar uplift by running celebrities with sunglasses and Uggs on, then Madison and MC would have blindly copied that too.

By: lia

lia — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 08:43:02 +0000

This is ridiculous, sorry no matter who u r size or shape attacking Jen is just pathetic, she is a modek, she is stunning and deserves to be on the cover! She would have her own body issues and I think Dye has missed the point! Bianca, as someone who puts themselves out there as a “natural” woman why is it that you have hair extensions, fake tan, fake nails and get botox??? R u presenting an achievable natural image to the average woman?? Maybe it is time to celebrate and support All woman and not pick and choose who deserves it based on their looks as after all we R ALL faking something!

By: david

david — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 08:24:58 +0000

Oh I thought marketing strategists, magazine editors and a few advertising executives were really disguised aliens on a quest to infiltrate “mankind” by feeding us more and more images of alien-like models thus grooming our collective acceptance of them before their official arrival.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 07:04:56 +0000

There’s are marketing strategists out there that ‘really know’
That’s right, if people didn’t buy the products, they would stop churning out this crap and that is the bottom line….We are sold images and products that cater to our fears and desires. Fear of not being good enough and the desire to be someone other than who you are. The psychology of consumerism is alive and well and cleverly understood. It’s big bucks to know your market.
It’s at the heart of every popular image or product ever presented, not just to women, but to the whole of mankind. The ‘awkward truth of the human psyche’ is very much known and used to the tune of billions. Know your market!

By: DD

DD — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 05:02:49 +0000

@Susan Boyle. Please tell me that they are going to keep airbrushing you on your album covers. I think the real deal would be just too much for me to handle.

By: David

David — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 04:59:07 +0000

hmm the idea of a common reality is a bit dicy Anonymous – are you claiming authority on that one? Think it’s all fairly subjective really. Maybe the whole debate about fantasy versus reality / the authentic body over the inauthentic really misses the mark anyway but none the less it’s been churning out artistic pursuits, as you’ve mentioned over many millennia and who knows if anyone’s really figured it out? Think about it though – if everyone looked like Jen, Jen would be Mrs Average and Roseanne Barr would be the hot “archetypal image…” Maybe we’re all just racing around like headless chickens trying to claim our little pedestals in vain hope everyone will one day look up to in awe and say: that person’s really unique.

Maybe then the appreciation of difference rant is not so far from the “everyone is equal” one because while clinging to these ideals, were still throwing all our interest / resources / adoration into objects that are hard to attain to the majority – all the while the whole industry and system pockets bucket loads of cash from the whole endeavor. Perhaps that’s the awkward truth of the human psyche? But who really knows…

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 03:00:08 +0000

I predict that our society is about to stop objectifying women – ALL TYPES of women and holding up one ideal over another.Since It’s all about selling women a look and then the products to achieve that look , it’s very transparent and it’s looking quite primitive now – i believe it all began back in the day when women were considered property. We made a big boo-boo when we allowed the production of magazines for pre-teens..effectively primping and influencing the next generation to ensure consumers! PRIMITIVE!
Leave beauty to the varied and marvellously individual perspective of the artists that bless our society with their inspired talents and insights..put that variation onto the catwalks and mags (if we must have them) and honour the beauty of difference that makes life interesting!
Our time and energy could be better spent on deeper more constructive and creative pursuits..which would include all shapes sizes colours and ages as the multi-faceted images of humanity.
I don’t have any fashion mags in my house, but occassionally one finds it’s way in (i know people in that industry) and i flick through it and they seem to be all the same magazine with the format and contents slightly altered..Boring.
The issue of real woman or unreal woman is really strange when you give some extra thought. We are talking here of perspective and not a common reality.
Here it comes, the awkward truth of the human psyche.

By: Linda

Linda — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 02:59:12 +0000

I have to agree with Size Whatever. Why do larger people think that its ok to tell smaller people that they are too thin and need to eat more, when they would be offended if a samller person told them they were fat and needed to lose weight. It is also amusing when bigger people say to a smaller person “you’re lucky you can eat what you want”. The perception is that if you are thin you can eat what you want without puttng on weight. Apart from being offensive that simply isn’t true for most people. Its quite simple really, if you over eat you put on weight, if you don’t eat enough you loose weight and if you eat just right, you stay the same. Everyone is different and unless there are medical issues most people should be in control of their body and what they consume.