red3blog:juicyjacqulyn:chanceofanxiety:juicyjacqulyn:chanceofanxiety:juicyjacqulyn:thepsychoticfucki
red3blog:juicyjacqulyn:chanceofanxiety:juicyjacqulyn:chanceofanxiety:juicyjacqulyn:thepsychoticfuckingbiotic:chanceofanxiety:thepsychoticfuckingbiotic:chanceofanxiety:thepsychoticfuckingbiotic:chanceofanxiety:thepsychoticfuckingbiotic:chanceofanxiety:#aerierealAerie girls are also a limited range of sizes!How is a 32AA-40DD limited.Your size isn’t carried, and mine isn’t commonly carried either?? Sorry to give you bad press.We started carrying your size in store. We have more bras in your size. My size isn’t carried in store, but they’re working on changing that. It’s a process. This is a positive thing.Okay, I just don’t like this “real” nonsense as a part of marketing. The implication is that girls/women who aren’t “aerie girls” aren’t real.There’s a lot of opposition (I.e. Sluts vs. “Normal girls,” girls who wear “too much makeup” vs girls who wear “just enough makeup” vs girls who “don’t wear enough makeup” etc etc) that goes on in marketing toward women and all it ends up being is that everyone feels like shit.It’s not slut shaming, “aerie girls are real girls” is just saying we aren’t photoshopping our models. We aren’t only showing girls in one size. We’re showing girls from a size 0 to a size 16 with all their natural beauty showing through. We’re not saying we’re better, we’re trying to start a revolution about marketing for women.I never ever said ANYTHING about slut shaming. Okay thook so then since I’m WAY over a size 16, am I not real?THIS is part of the problem, because “real” always ALWAYS excludes actual real women, and it’s highly problematic.Will these women also be be woc? Women of different abilities? Etc?Because so far apparently no woman over 16 is real according to this information, so I don’t doubt others will also be excludedI said 16 as an example, I am in no way saying that sizes over my EXAMPLE will not be included. No need to jump to conclusions.Except as of right now, no one on the site looks to even be a size 16and considering how I’ve never seen someone my size on ANY clothing site EVER except for small businesses like chubbycartwheels.com, it’s pretty safe to “jump to conclusions”I mean, you don’t even carry DDD bras, why should I think you would show a model over size 16 or even 20, much less in the 30+ sizingsThe campaign has not even LAUNCHED yet. Of course you don’t see anything on the website yet.Oh so you know of a model over size 16? over 26? or maybe even size 36?Maybe its all well and good that they are going to hire a few non-thin models, but the fact that this is a “campaign” that needs to launch is kind of demonstrating the problem here. Treating inclusion of even a limited range of body types as a gimmick doesn’t really change the status quo. Its like when Special K decides to run a campaign on body positivity in September. Maybe it looks not horrible when isolated, but come January you can be sure they’ll be launching a fat shaming campaign again.It is fair for people to reserve praise until seeing the campaign.It is fair for people to object about the way “real” is routinely used to body shame (fat and thin bodies) and promote cis-normative expectations.It is fair for people to be unimpressed if the campaign only opens the door to size inclusivity a crack.It is fair for people to be pissed off if their size remains excluded in the midst of self-congratulatory campaigns.It is fair for people to criticize the track record and current status of brand irregardless of what hypothetical future campaigns may be promised. -- source link
#fatshaming#fashion#exclusion