No doubt about it, the writers for
Yahoo Shine know how to rope in a reader. The teaser under the headshot of an attractive
young woman was something like: “What’s different about this mannequin?” Oh, so
it was a mannequin. I clicked on the pic.
I thought the article would be about
how a certain H&M store in Sweden is using lifelike robots as mannequins. I
was wrong. What’s causing all the buzz—or what has “gone viral” or “set tongues
wagging”—is that the mannequins are a lifelike Size
12. In addition to “sparking an internet praise-a-thon,” the use of these
mannequins has raised a criticism: “Will this just encourage obesity?”
I’ll have to say, this particular question
was not what first popped into my mind for many reasons. First, Lane Bryant has
used “plus-sized,” “full-figured,” or my favorite Precious Ramwotse euphism “traditionally-built”
mannequins for years. The concept is not new. I guess what makes these
mannequins so special is that they’re being used in a more mainstream venue—a
store that caters to the youthful and “hip”—as opposed to the old and hippy.
Second, I don’t consider a Size 12 to be obese. A little overweight, maybe, but
not to the point of being unhealthy. And when the average size of women these
days is a 14—as the article states—a Size 12 could actually be considered the “new
small,” couldn’t it? Anyway, that’s the reasoning I’m going with.
So while the obesity question didn’t
occur to me, here are some that did:
·
What’s
with the Princess Leia hairdo? I’m so hoping this isn’t a fashion forecast. But
maybe because this store is in Sweden, the Viking-opera-singer look works.
·
Why
the socks? Are the mannequin’s feet cold, but not her bare legs and midriff? Has she just smeared Vaseline on her heels and doesn't want to get the platform
greasy? Are slouchy, stretched-out socks the latest in sexy boudoir attire?
If so, I’ve been sexy all this past winter and didn’t even realize it. I don’t
think my husband did, either.
·
If
this model is supposed to be so lifelike, where’re the muffin tops? I know they
claim to make panties that don’t create these, but I’ve yet to find any that follow
through on this promise and still stay up without a belt or suspenders.
·
Along
this same line, where are the wobbly bits? If we’re truly going for lifelike
here, let’s show a little cottage cheese.
·
Why
the shawl? Actually, I know the answer to this—to hide the wing-dings. The only
time I’ve bared my upper arms in public in the past few years was to go
swimming. And I wouldn’t have done it then if they made swimsuits with sleeves.
Maybe you can answer some of these
questions for me. Or maybe you have questions of your own. Or maybe you just
don’t give a rip about what marketers tell women they should look like and you’re
happy with yourself whatever size you wear. Please comment!
PS If you know where I can find those magic no-muffin-top panties, I'd really love to hear from you!
