While doing my morning ritual of coffee and article browsing, this headline caught my eye, “What Would Barbie Look Like with Real-Woman Proportions?”
Curiosity, my life long friend, nudged at me. Then I set to wondering if they make these dolls in various stages of a woman’s life. Your Why-Don’t-I-Have-Boobs-Like-All-My-Friends years, the Freshman Fifteen years (oh…hello boobs, nice of you to show up now…real nice..), After Pregnancy years (bye boobs..just when I got used to having you), Most-Stressful-Time-of-My-Life years (bye bye appetite, say “hi” to boobs for me)….and so on. What about that 50+ stage? You know, where your waist becomes wide as your hips, your butt flattens out…. Your silhouette becomes less hourglass and more Lego-like.
So I clickety-clicked to see Real-Woman Barbie. The article was interesting enough but what struck me most were all the headlines and ads surrounding the article. This is supposed to be a thought provoking article about a subject to help create awareness about positive and realistic body images but…….look to the right.
All around the article were blurbs about weight loss and dieting. As far as we’ve come….we really haven’t come that far at all baby.
I also stumbled upon this:
Yes ladies….. we apparently fall into shape categories. Check out those characteristics, “neat hips…flat bottoms..” If you are an apple shape, you are basically a butt-less sphere on a good pair of stems. Get a sight of the thigh gaps that the figures are all sporting! At least they have that going for them. Otherwise, maybe we should just take our flat-chested, saddle bagged, no-waisted, no-butt selves and fling ourselves off a Chico’s billboard.
Do you think men EVER think about what body shape category they may fall into? Most likely not but if they did…it would probably go something like this:
So ladies, lets take a page out of the Man Manual and stop labeling ourselves with ridiculous descriptors associated with kindergarten curriculum. Wickedly clever sounds so much more interesting than….. lean column. Wouldn’t you agree?