Is Hawkins too beautiful to be ‘normal’?

while jennifer hawkins has a healthier body than biance dye and probably works very hard for it (as most ‘born beautiful’ people do), using any model (whether swimsuit/lingerie/catwalk) as a positive example for body image is absurd and counterproductive to the cause – not because they are slim but because young girls associate them with extreme dieting

Seeing these pics of Jennifer Hawkins makes me want to get into shape and actually inspires me. Bianca Dye’s face and voice makes me want to vomit and cringe with embarrassment.

Jen is gorgeous, and comes across as more ‘real’ than most celebs – but she’s lost a lot of weight since she got into the spotlight. That’s normal when looking good is your job – but it’s not “normal” for the average female to have to put so much focus on image.

Get a life people!

do you mean get a life like Jen, or one like the hundreds of thousands of girls with eating disorders Neale? If you have a teen stats tell the story … there’s a high chance they will suffer from an eating disorder – particularly as a female. That’s worth discussing.

Check out Tory McGuire’s article on http://www.thepunch.com.au – good yarn

The first thing my husband said when he saw a TV news item featuring Jen’s untouched pic was “A model, representing the typical Australian woman and talking about healthy body image? Yeah, right..”

Skinny, fat, short, tall, blonde, brunette blah blah blah – I think they’ve still gone about it the wrong way!!

The problem this debate creates – beauty Vs personality. And yes you can have both!

Jen Hawkins looks hot, her career is based on looking hot and is incorporated into her lifestyle which seems hot.

Bianca Dye, she’s not bad looking but her flaw filled photo does not mean bold and beautiful either. Her overly confident attitude does not leave alot to be desired though.

Lets get real
– Sarah Murdoch, looks hot but has genuine personality and is real. Her untouched photo was inspiring (yet I think over publicised).
– Deborah Lee Furness (Hugh Jackmans’ wife) – not a size 8 but bold and beautiful!!

Healthy Lifestyles are what should be promoted. So if your thin and work at being thin, or your healthy and fit but a size 16 then be loud and proud and everyone should follow!.

mmmmm all this thinking makes me hungry…

I’m sick of this misleading “so-and-so bares all” garbage.

If that’s the promise, then aren’t I entitled to expect full pelt?

Or, Marie Claire et al should lead with something more accurate: “Jennifer bares a midriff, some shoulders and a tantilising bit of thigh”

I will be reiterating this point elsewhere.

Bianca’s reaction is the exact same one that me and my mates and the women in my office have had over the last 48 hours.

I don’t know what is more offensive – being told that Jennifer Hawkins’ body is supposed to inspire a sudden wave of affection and comfort towards my own, clearly non-supermodel (but not unhealthy either) body, or Jackie Frank’s feverishly self-congratulatory publicity push.

If this is about reassuring people and promoting positive body image, they picked the wrong girl. People feel comforted about their bodies when they see people who are like them.

This might come across as biased because I am clearly not Jen-like, but I don’t think girls/women that look like or can identify with Jen Hawkins were the target audience they had in mind (or are the ones most in need of a body image boost). Girls/women who look like and can identify with Bianca Dye are.

And don’t even get me started on the “Bianca is fat/unhealthy/promoting the wrong image/jealous and bitter” claptrap. The point of the article and shoot was not aspiration, it was about feeling OK to be in your own skin, whether it be flabby or dimply or uneven. Bianca is not fat. Not everyone who has a pot belly or is a size 14 is fat, or unhealthy.

I’m 25, I’m average height, I go to the gym or exercise at least three times a week, I eat very healthily due to food allergies and intolerances I have and I’m slim – but I have a pot belly, (not just one of those teeny ones that people roll their eyes at either, a proper one. Always have, even since I was a kid) flabby bits, cellulite, crease, rolls and all kinds of other things that mean I’d rather beat myself to death with a flip flop than head to the pool in a bikini this summer.

If you tell me I am fat I’ll punch you in the face. But there is no way in hell looking at that woman’s naked body makes me feel good. I have fat, chubby, ‘normal’, skinny, tall, short friends and colleagues who all think the same thing.

Sure Tiffani Wood seems to have gotten away comparitively unscathed, but she wasn’t on the front page of the sunday papers and in the nightly news with her catatonic editor banging on ad nauseum either.

Calling a fold in the skin of the hip a ‘flaw’ is ludicrous! Surely creasing of the skin is natural, we aren’t Barbie. And this whole purist feature became redundant when she had her hair and makeup done. The converse to this is that calling a woman who is a size 14 + and perhaps overweight ‘normal’ thus deeming anyone who strays from this abnormal is in itself defamatory and discriminatory. Get over the whole idea of making ‘norms’ haven’t we yet learned there is NO SUCH THING.

i dont get it – so are the ‘uproarers’ suggesting that she should have been retouched?

she has been on magazine covers before – no biggie.

Before I start I need to say that I’ve always been naturally thin and have never had to worry about my weight. I eat what I want when I want – and I love to eat! so when I saw Jennifer H on the cover of Marie Claire without the airbrushing, I thought great, she really did look like a real woman – TO ME.

And I guess that’s my point, it’s all subjective. I thought she looked healthy and not one of those Kate Moss anorexic wannabes living on a diet of drugs and booze.

Bianca has been saying over and over that she has no problem with Jennifer Hawkins. She has a problem with the magazine’s choice to use someone so ‘perfect’ as a representative for Australian women. We should be celebrating diversity and the fact that women come in all shapes and sizes.

Hawkins is better-looking, skinner, more beautiful than everyone else… that’s why she’s a model. It’s her job to be that way.

NEXT

No, tbone, we’re not saying she should be retouched. We’re saying she shouldn’t be being held up as a woman whose “uneven skin tone” etc, makes her ‘flawed’ and therefore real. If we start considering such inconsequential things flaws, and comparing ourselves to people who make money from the way they look, then we’re all up the shitter.

PS. I feel for Bianca Dye copping it for getting all this publicity. We all know that once a media ball like this starts rolling, the case study/spokesperson gets requests for further interviews. I think it’s unlikely she has her publicist shopping her round for this, but if she does – good luck to her, look how successful it’s been.

A Underwood … good point, and this is not really a debate about who looks good and who doesn’t

It’s about the appropriate representation of a cause which kills and wrecks the lives of a lot of young women and increasingly men.

It’s like Brad Pitt coming clean about his “ordinary life” …

This type of behaviour from Jennifer Hawkins is just not acceptable. How dare she look good without airbrushing!!! Doesn’t she know that she is now directly responsible for all the “normal” girls out there feeling like crap? All pictures of fit or otherwise good looking people should be ordered removed from all types of media immediately. That includes those pricks who have the gall to work out and display their naked six pack abs when I don’t have the same even though I’ve paid the $199 for an ab roller (It’s supposed to work without effort right?). And don’t even get me started on talented people. Where’s my perfect singing voice? Why can’t I dance with the stars?

Seriously. Harden the fuck up!!!!

Jooja … exactly, so don’t choose her to represent the everyday woman on this topic.

She’s fine as a clotheshorse, but she’s not typical in any sense.

Talk about a PR shit sandwich.

Poor old Marie Claire – the whole ‘untouched celebrity photo’ is so yesterday, and has been done to death already by Woman’s Day and Madison.

Jennifer Hawkins is not representative of the average Australian woman (which is a size 14, for those wondering – ie. Bianca Dye – and size 14s can vary from toned and buff to pudgy with a ‘pot’). Hawkins is a pretty girl who has a nice body, but she is by no means what’s considered average/normal – makeup or no makeup, she wouldn’t be gracing the cover if she was!

A more convincing role model might be someone, ANYONE, other than a fashion model – how about an achiever from another field who has a healthy body weight and doesn’t earn a living from what they look like or what sport they play. Then maybe we could work on creating a smarter nation instead of a country of celebrity wannabes. ‘Nuff said.

i think the issue with this whole thing is that Jennifer hawkins is a model. a gorgeous model at that. I admire her for working hard for her amazing figure and for putting her body in the spotlight, however when i look at the picture of jen, i dont look at it and go “wow-she is so real” i look at it and go “great- the supermodel/former miss universe looks hot with and without makeup and clothes. Damn why cant i look like that”. i think that jen posing on the cover of marie claire is a step in the right direction, however i think that women like bianca are just as positive role models for women because they are comfortable in their own skin. Maybe the fashion magazines like marie claire and madison and vogue should think about using a diverse range of models if they want to promote positive body images for women, so that women of all shapes and sizes can identify with someone in the magazine. Choosing a tall, skinny, gorgeous model as the person we all need to aspire to be is doing noone any favours.

People are missing the point a little – yeah, Hawkins is not average. But the point is that she’s on the cover without the extensive airbrushing that would normally go on (and sure they’ll still have used good lighting, makeup etc, that’s still not Hawkins in the true raw state).

To make it clear: usually magazines would consider Hawkins to be so flawed she needs considerable retouching just to be allowed on a cover. THAT is what is so ridiculous.

The “normal” image of any model on a magazine cover is retouched beyond what is in fact humanly possible. Hawkins has a little fold at her hip/tummy, because all humans have that when they bend. But usually that would be airbrushed out, leaving an image of a non-human freak.

So all the people screaming about this – would you prefer to keep things as they are, where women/girls are expected to live up to something that doesn’t actually exist? Or would you at least like to see models as they actually are – sure they’re not average, but at least we could see them as humans.

Ripe Stuff … I didn’t choose her for anything. Role “models” should be someone you know, who you trust, who’s opinion you value; not someone you see on TV or in magazines whom you know essentially nothing about (other than they look good are are good at what they get paid to do).

My my, such a fuss about such a basic thing. No doubt everyone has heard of Darwin’s theory of evolution. But many forget that there are two types of adaptations that occur. Not only do species adapt to better survive, but they also adapt to better attract mates. Jennifer Hawkins and her ilk display high levels of visual attraction in that they are seen to be sexually desirable. People can be any shape and size they like, but the mating game sorts people into a pecking order. Jennifer would no doubt be very high on that order. Those that would like to compete for the same mates might do well to emulate those that are more naturally endowed.

Titus, hopefully evolution will include emotional and intellectual development in order to “attract a mate” as well (our main purpose in life, afterall)

Well Ripe Stuff, our main purpose as a species is to continue it. Emotional and intellectual developments are also a result of evolution, and again, serve only to increase the survivability of the species. Of course we have developed a very necessary veneer of sociability to further enhance our survival, but the niceties of society are the first things abandoned when people are truly threatened. I’m sure we will see interesting examples of this as the planet becomes less viable, and people have to compete for basic necessities such as water, food and somewhere to live.

Since when did size 14 and 16 women get the monopoly on body image problems? Who knows how many women looked down at their comparatively flat chests in dismay after looking at Bianca Dye’s nude photo shoot? Or how many size 6 and size 8 girls out there are traumatised by the fact that they have been taunted with the names bones or Anna Rexia, and have to shop in the children’s department at Target.
Face facts people, she might have been Miss Universe, she might be a model and celebrity, but she is, in fact, flesh and blood, and, actually, real.
We might not all look like Jennifer Hawkins, but I know a hell of a lot of beautiful women, size 6 and up, whose smiles still dazzle whether they are cleaning the house, wiping up their child’s vomit, heading out for a night on the town or going to the beach.
I know the argument is more about media responsibility when it comes to body image, but if the message is be the healthiest you can be, then it can’t be all bad.
Also, big thumbs down to Cameron on the today Show this morning, when he said he found Bianca Dye’s photo shoot to be more attractive than Jennifer Hawkins’ shoot because he had higher expectations of how Jen would look, i.e. her ‘real’ wasn’t good enough for him … that sort of attitude (and contradiction, because the whole point of their segment was slamming Marie Claire for choosing Jen for the cover), is why so many people have body image problems.

It’s Marie Claire.

It’s a fashion mag. It’s always filled with hot chicks. It promotes looking and feeling good. That’s what it does.

Looking good is as much about attitude as it is about image.

If you want buff, pick up Women’s Health.

Jen, you’re the goods and an inspiration. Keep it up.

How about we stop blaming all our problems on somebody else? Got a body image problem? You have 3 options:
1. Change what you don’t like if it’s within your power to do so.
2. If you can’t change things or you just aren’t willing to pay the price then then next best option is to accept that you look the way you do and move on with yout life.
3. Whinge and whine. Make excuses. Blame everybody and everything but yourself.

Option 1 is the one that most people would like to take but they really struggle with it. You have to realise that there is no way you can get what you want without paying the price. And when it comes to your body, usually most of the price is not measured in $$$.

Option 2 is almost as good and requires far less effort. I think everybody eventually must take this option.

Unfortunately, option 3 is the road most taken, usually after many lazy, half assed attempts at option 1.

So should a girl be any less REAL because of her taut belly and mile high legs??? I think all women have insecurities, be it skinny women or larger ladies. The point that is being missed here is that Jen Hawkins is willing to bare all…minus the photoshopping, so that thousands can see HER OWN perceived flaws….and be totally comfortable and cool with this…

I am skinny but there are still bits and pieces I would like changed if i had a magic wand….as a celebrity who makes her living by being flawless and perfect, it’s a brave step for Jen Hawkins to show us all of her HER warts and all…

bianca looked great, jen looked great…because they had the confidence to take it all off and take some great shots….SIMPLE AS THAT!

I don’t really have an opinion but I know that seeing Jennifer Hawkins look like that without airbrushing made me feel like crap.

Greg – you’re an idiot. For many young women your Option 1 can have devastated effects – anorexia and such. Not clever.

The whole point of the discussion is if you are healthy and happy then you are beautiful, no matter what the size. All I want is to see a representation of this in the media – Jen and Biana included. Young women can look to the media and say I’m okay because I’m healthy, eat well and exercise. More discussions like this might make that a reality.

p.s. i’m happy and healthy and don’t fit into the Jen or Biana ‘look’. I’m happy with my size.

J: And what are you going to do about that?

Thank you Marie-Clair , now that i have a benchmark for what a natural, normal body looks like, i shall begin to nip, tuck, pump and purge with abandon.

honestly – what can i do as an individual? Besides voice a few comments, it’s not until media outlets can make real money from this, will there be any sort of change. It’s unfortunate but the population appears to like to watch pretty people. Suggestions?

Alicia – No you’re the idiot, along with all those anorexic, surgically manipulated morons who continually try to take the easy way out (there isn’t one, trust me). The sooner people accept that being healthy takes EXERCISE AND A HEALTHY DIET at minimum, not just some stupid product or a brief period of extreme fad dieting, the better.

You’re right in saying that being healthy makes you look BETTER, but unfortunately this does not always = beautiful. You can’t simply deny reality and say everybody is beautiful. That’s as stupid as saying that everybody who plays soccer is as good at it as David Beckham (or whoever you’re favourite player is).

You have to have the courage to face reality if you are ever going to truly overcome your body image problem.

Thank-you Jackie Frank and marie claire for being such avid supporters of healthy body image amongst women. marie claire has always been at the forefront of issues that are topical and relevant to Australian women and I was thrilled when I saw Jen Hawkins was to feature unretouched on the COVER.

Whilst Hawkins is cetainly not your ‘average’ woman it’s fantastic that marie claire is taking action to ensure real women get to see that even the most beautiful women in the world have some flaws – and that it’s okay.

Being a model Hawkins is subjected to more pressure than the average women to look a certain way and has her own body issues to deal with. Well done Jen, in a world of cover models airbrushed to perfection I’m sure it took a lot of courage to appear unretouched knowing your body would be scritinized by media and the public.

You know what Greg, in some round about way i think we’re on the same page, sort of. The world is filled with people trying to find the easy way out with fad diets, following models and celebrates to see how to become just like them. You may not like it but that’s reality. Just look at sales for women magazines and fad diet companies. You’ve really just proven my point, the only way to get these people to realise its about healthy eating and exercise is through their role models. Although ultimately it is consumers who choose who is featured in media, the people who run them have an opportunity to try something different too.

You are right there is no easy way out. but showing people other people who are achieving ‘achievable goals’, not a retouched ‘photoshop’ look will help put them in the right direction.

Alicia – yes we are pretty much on the same page. We only really differ in that you appear to think that watering down the solution so that it’s easier for people to take (ie. making the goal posts a lot bigger instead of kicking better) is an acceptable solution. Didn’t we just come in as the fattest country in the world last year? Do you think 2nd place is that much better?

Being healthy is not fat/obese. Yes, encourage good eating choices and exercise like Jen did in her article but if a size 14 or 16 woman says she is eating healthy/exercising who am i to say she isn’t because she doesn’t fit the ‘norm’ size? I’m far from Jen’s size (i’m size 10) with all my lumps and bumps and i’m am in the healthy weight range for my height. You don’t see girls like me featured in the media. I’m not saying drop the goal posts completely but make them wide enough so normal girls can fit in and hopefully be role models to others around us.

I wonder how many woman would pick-up ANY woman’s mag if it only featured size 12-14 woman? It’s a good start anyway to address the problems woman face with unrealistic images of perfection when no-one is or ever will be perfect unless there is a complete change of mindset to being happy with what you’ve got rather then trying to strive for the unachievable …look at us guys….we gave up ages ago but at least we’re happy !! Forget the perfect body and let’s work on the fixing the nagging….!!

Titus – your theory falls down badly. Loads of fat, skinny, ugly and average people are breeding all over Australia, it seems there’s someone for everyone! Attraction for most males and females does go beyond the face and has a lot to do with hip width (that adage about child-bearing hips has some truth), mirroring facial symmetry and self confidence.

The Dude – (sigh) tsk, tsk, LOTS of women would pick up a magazine with a size 12-14 model in it. What most people fail to acknowledge is that when people dress for their size (and 12-14 is NOT fat, lots of tall people fit this size range) they look as good if not better than any size 8-10.

Anyway, this pic isn’t truly ‘untouched’ – both Jen and Bianca wore face makeup and I bet they had body makeup as well to hide blemishes. They may not have used digital airbrushing but no one’s talking about fake tans or body makeup! Then there’s flattering camera angles and lighting (catch an episode of Gok Wan’s/Carson Kressley’s ‘How to look good naked’ and you’ll see what I mean). And yes, both gals look good – but when forced to choose who they can better relate to, I think Bianca wins hands down.

By the way, there’s no ‘bravery’ in baring all for a professional model – they drop their gear every other day for catwalk changes and photo shoots in front of loads of strangers (hair/makeup/photographers/clothes changers). Their profession is 100% based on their looks, so the self confidence is a given. For once one of them doesn’t get the benefit of an airbrush occasionally – so what?

Frank’s bare-faced PR grab has generated plenty of chatter (mission accomplished) but perhaps not the kind she was after, i.e. painting her as patron saint of body images.

There is a very simple solution….stop buying woman’s magazines with skinny, diet ridden articles and maybe the publishers will start producing material closer to what real Australian woman’s ideals are….but i doubt it will happen….

I think Jen looks amazing. She was born that way and is embracing it (literally). I think we should all embrace ourselves, whatever genes we were given.. Get over it!

Image sells. How about for one month, everyone stops buying fashion/beauty magazines!

Remember, the readers hold the power – the editors/photographers/makeup artists use their talents to sell the magazine but the audience hands over the cash for it. If you don’t like what you see don’t buy it, if you do, and subscriptions prove many do, then buy it.

I challenge jackie frank to really make the cover “real” that would include no hair and makeup. Jen’s a beautiful girl without any of it so why don’t we celebrate that.

I think people are forgetting the context of this PR stunt, as pointed out quite rightly by blogger, Aaron Darc (who is himself in the advertising industry) that this is different because it is directly trying to be a voice for girls who suffer from anorexia, which is about the need to be as thin as the images in magazines… which Jennifer Hawkins well and truly epitomises. Well worth a read… http://www.aarondarc.com

Jackie, I’ll get me kit off for yer, but only if you pay for me eyebrows to be done.

If Bianca was thinner, I wonder if she’d have the same opinions as she did yesterday?

Looking at JH there – she looks at least a healthy size 10 to me. Her thighs are a little chunky actually – she’d be too big and denied real catwalk work in Paris, Milan etc – but that may be just my perception as I’m naturally slim (as another poster said). What makes me laugh is the adulation Hawkins gets by everybody – as if they have never seen a commonly pretty, beach blonde before! At least now I get why she is so popular …

I find the whole business of magazines promoting the fact that they are featuring ‘real/ normal sized’ women completely self congratulatory.

When they can feature ‘real’ women in their titles and not have to point to the fact that they’re actually doing it, then we’ll be getting somewhere.

I love Jennifer but she should not have done this! Whatever you do Jen, please don’t do playboy like elle Mcpherson, I loved her too, but changed my mind after she bared all!

I think its amusing that there is so much hoo ha over a bunch of covers! Come on, once you open the mag, there ain’t any more untouched chicks inside…Please, spare me the media madness and the way it induces ridiculous community furore! If magazines make you feel bad – don’t read them!

has anyone considered whether this scandal was engineered by marie claire to assist their ailing sales magazines are dead no?

I think Marie Claire got what they were aiming for – publicity and increased sales of their magazine. Nothing the fashion magazine world has to offer is authentic. It’s all trend based I.e what’s considered desirable at any particular moment in time. It is a vacuous, little world where what is considered beautiful and desireable one minute, is boring and unfashionable the next. A simple solution would be for women to stop buying these magazines. Insecurities about body image would be greatly helped if they didn’t ‘read’ fashion magazines that perpetually tell them they are not good enough. Having said that, I think Jennifer Hawkins looks fantastic (even with good lighting,careful styling of the photo, hair & make up) just a shame she feels the need to go nude to prove her point.

Sales figures will be interesting. I’m an occasional M-C buyer but will deliberately give this one a miss so as to not buy into the saga. I fear I’m in the minority though.

Vicki, sales will be strong. It’s a winning cover. The shame of it is that it’s now been unmasked as a cynical pr stunt, and consumers – particularly those who are predisposed to reading the ‘intelligent’ articles in marie claire – will be put off by it.

great PR – haven’t seen this much talk about around magazine title for years.

add to this the whirl around the tiger woods 2006 pics in vanity fair and magazines are right back in the news this week, showing the power of the medium if done smartly.

The only Reason Jen is willing to do this is because she believes she has an amazing body, and so she might have, but to me personally, this sort of promotion of woman’s health makes me feel very bad about myself. god knows most women in Australia, even the whole world, feel terrible and would never show their body, edited or unedited, in public. you need to be the sort of cocky person that Jen is to get yourself out there, also, you need people to lust after you, and that’s all it goes down to in the end, isn’t it? lust.

can’t we for once have a role model that…ISN’T a model??

We all want someone to look up to that we can also relate to. Whilst Jen has a heavenly chorus following her every step and praise shining down on her, there are women who actually work hard to make a difference in the country but would never get the attention or the understanding Jen receives. Lifesavers, salvos, Doctors and nurses. But who is our role model? A super model who’s only skill is looking good. and that’s not skill, its luck. and possibly more fortunate genes, which also isn’t something you LEARN.

In fact, Lets ban all Magazines that focus on beauty, they ruined life for my generation and for all the generations before me.

*angry*

If anyone’s seen Jennifer Hawkins in real life you’ll see that she is really much skinnier than the average girl. Absolutely gorgeous but no where near what is considered average or the norm. Who’s that editor of Marie Claire…? She’s a [removed for offensive nature].

I don’t understand how anyone under a size 12 is no longer considered “real”. Perhaps the word we should be using is “average”. But I digress…

I think we’ve missed the point here people.

The fact that we need a “special” front cover or “special” feature on positive body image and “real women” (see first paragraph) is what’s telling.

Why can’t the fashion publishing industry put their money where their mouths are and just include size 6 – 16 models all the time, without trumpeting their horns (ooh, look at us, we are trying to make a difference by creating a song and dance of including larger fashion models – hooray for us! etc etc)?

Changing the ingrained culture of fashion publishing (and fashion in general) using rail-thin, flat chested models will not be easy, but how does it help to condescend to “average” sized women (not obese, not fat, not unhealthily thin) that they are somehow special cases that require specialised targeting to show that they are understood?

I am a size 14, but thought Jen Hawkins looked great on the cover of Marie Claire. I thought Bianca Dye’s photos were beautiful too. And that is, IMHO, the point. Celebrate the diversity of what is actually healthy.

Jen hawkins shouldn’t be singled out for this. She is simply going about her business (the business of modelling). The fashion mags (like all mags) simply respond to sales, and a cover story like this will deliver on that objective.

I realise I’m coming into this conversation a little late, but it should be pointed ut that there is nothing natural about Jen. Google her before and after shots.

Try this girls..!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cCN3NVZj4A&feature=related