Bianca Dye Vs. Jennifer Hawkins

[Josh]

So I'm sure everybody has heard about the current debate involving the Jennifer Hawkins posing "untouched" on the cover of Marie Claire as a supposed "good role model" for healthy body image.

Many people, including the busty radio presenter Bianca Dye, have slammed the whole thing saying that it is exactly the same thing magazines always do in regards to planting ridiculously slim women cover-to-cover across their pages.

Bianca recently did a similar shoot for a rival magazine, Madison, hoping to portray a more "normal" look at the common Australian woman who is more in the size range of 12-16 than 6-10.

What's everybody's thoughts?? Just wondering.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Thread is useless without pics

 

[Josh]

*sigh*


Bianca Dye


The other chick

 

[Matteh]

Well, obviously i prefer the model...

 

[G.I.Joe]

Haha yeah, first one is probably more representative of the general population (healthy or not is debatable), I'd prefer the second one though.

 

[Ikki]

I find it hard to fathom that the "Bianca" photo is propped up for realism or something along those lines. I don't find it particularly representative of what you can encounter day to day in real life. Sure, there are all shapes and sizes but I meet plenty of girls who don't have unhealthy lifestyles (crash dieting, etc), who aren't perfect but in pretty good shape that don't look like Bianca - meaning much better. Who are we lowering the "standards" for again?

 

[Julian87]

You only ever hear average size debates from fat chicks tbh.

You don't get born as a size 16.

 

[Ikki]

Bianca Dye slams nude Jennifer Hawkins body image shoot for Marie Claire | News.com.au

"She was born beautiful. She has not had to go through any stress to look like that," Dye told Confidential.

"Jackie Frank is one of the most respected editors in the country and I am in shock that they would say Jennifer Hawkins is a natural role model. Its like we've taken 20 steps backwards."

Was just Googline and found those comments by Dye. I reckon Dye has little clue as to how hard it is to maintain that shape and whilst there may be certain physical attributes that are genetic, I am sure Jennifer has had to go through a lot of work to look the way she does. Maybe it's this mindset that has caused the bitterness. BTW I didn't know looking good and being fit weren't positive goals to go for.

 

[Burgey]

Bianca's point about body image is, broadly speaking, pretty true. But Jeez she's let herself go.

Don't see why it's ok for Dye to show herself as representing a certain shape of woman, but not ok for Hawko. Some people put on weight easily, some eat like horses and don't.

 

[Jono]

The debate is ridiculous. I'm hardly a fan of the way magazines portray both women and men, but the fact is, Hawkins was untouched in that photo shoot (as far as we know). Why get all upset over it? She's like that, she works out, she eats well... good on her.

We shouldn't have to be proud that the current average size is now 16. And even if we should, why does that mean Hawkins can't pose?

 

[silentstriker]

It's interesting that while the average size of the population has been getting bigger in much of the western world, the average size of the models and actresses have been getting smaller. That can't be a healthy fascination - we're way too fat in real life, and way too thin in magazines.

In any case, I of course prefer the model, but Bianca doesn't look bad. She is what a normal woman in their thirties or forties looks like. Once you get out of the university age, that's what normal people look like. And importantly, she doesn't look unhealthy in terms of being overweight. I bet that's a natural weight for most women to be able to maintain and be healthy.

 

[age_master]

Bianca Dye needs to get some exercise in my opinion.

 

[cpr]

Look, at £3 a mag and 2 min a pop, I know which one i'd rather be staring intently at

 

[howardj]

The debate is ridiculous. I'm hardly a fan of the way magazines portray both women and men, but the fact is, Hawkins was untouched in that photo shoot (as far as we know). Why get all upset over it? She's like that, she works out, she eats well... good on her.

We shouldn't have to be proud that the current average size is now 16. And even if we should, why does that mean Hawkins can't pose?

Agree totally.

Not every chick who is in shape crash diets or has unhealthy eating practices.

I've never thought Hawkins has an unhealthy body shape. That she watches what she eats and no doubt exercises, is something to be admired and emulated. Eating what you want and not exercising is not.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Hawkins has "doesn't eat anything" shoulders for mine, but meh.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Yeah, her shoulders are what we're all looking at.

 

[Ikki]

Yeah, her shoulders are what we're all looking at.

gold.

 

[Josh]

16, agreed, is a bit large. I've never dated (until now) any girl who was smaller than a size 12. I'm actually having trouble coming to terms with it, tbh. I prefer my curves. What size is Hawkins alleged to be, anyway?? 8??

 

[Linda]

I agree with Bianca to an extent. The fact is, Jennifer looks perfect in her untouched photo... and good for her, she no doubt works hard to keep it that way (although you cant tell me she isnt wearing body makeup). However, if the idea was to promote healthy body image for young girls and women (which the editor claims) how can you use someone who is effectively a freak of the species? As a girl, looking at that certainly doesnt make me feel confident about my body - esoecially considering I cant pass it off as 'shopped!

Luckily, I know Im hot and dont need a magazine to convince me. Ha.

 

[howardj]

pics?