Eating Disorders & Pop Culture: thoughts...

Today's moves to ban overly-skinny models from its catwalks received world-wide applause, inspiring many key countries to follow the suit or at least discuss the issue. Other organizations are now calling for the U.S. and Australia to ban waif-like models who present an unhealthy body image. Here is some thoughts of anonymous bloggers:

The drumbeat for healthier body image portrayals grew even louder last year when former supermodel Tyra Banks, who now weighs 160 pounds, appeared on her talk show and on the cover of People in a bathing suit, railing against the super-thin standards she herself upheld in her former career.

With curves rivaling Marilyn Monroe, readers of Glamour voted actress Scarlett Johansson with the sexiest body last year, and actress Kate Winslet, lauded for her refusal to lose weight to conform to an unhealthy ideal, has since become Hollywood’s celebrated new poster girl.

So, where am I going with this? It seems as if the pressure to ban the current breed of size-double zero supermodels is finally catching on. For the record, a BMI of 20-25 for a woman is normal. Below 17.5, which describes most fashion models, is symptomatic of anorexia.

The latest to come on board: the Anglo-Dutch consumer product group Unilever, which makes Lipton teas and Skippy peanut butter, as well as Dove and SlimFast products.

“Unilever has adopted a new global guideline that will require that all its future marketing communications should not use models or actors that are either excessively slim or promote ‘unhealthy’ slimness,” Ralph Kugler, president of Unilever’s home and personal care division, said on Tuesday.

The company said it will not impose strict criteria for models and actors, but all brand directors and agencies would be expected to use a BMI of between 18.5 and 25 as a guideline.

Of course, it remains to be seen if Unilever is truly concerned about the image of health it’s brands projects, or is merely conforming to manipulative marketing tactics.

All these moves by fashion shows and corporations mark a positive step forward, but speaking as a recovering anorectic/bulimic who never wanted to look like a supermodel or Barbie, I doubt it’ll do much to reduce eating disorders.

Super-skinny models are only the reflection of cultural mores in society. They’re not the cause. Regulating the size of models is only a band-aid, feel-good, superficial approach to addressing more serious public health issues.

Would the ban on super-skinny models have helped me, as my disorder was forming? Doubtful. I never read glossy women’s magazines and my fashion sense bleeps so far under the radar, it’s catatonic.

Girls who emulate models on the catwalk or in advertisements do so out of reasons other than Kate Moss-envy. Many eating disorders fester out of some kind of deep-seated psychological need that isn’t being met. Food becomes means of control to preserve a world that is increasingly becoming out of control. New research also shows many an eating disorder to have biological and organic origins. The sad fact is, there is no one cure for eating disorders.

I’m still for banning super-skinny models, don’t get me wrong. We shouldn’t glorify eating disorders or parade them about as images of beauty. But to address and correct the larger, underlying reasons why women develop eating disorders requires a far greater effort to banning bags-of-bones in the media.