Top Shop forced to take down anorexic campaign.
Anorexia: A coping mechanism or are women just vain and gullible?
It oughtn’t be happening, after all we’ve all supposedly had long cathartic talks about how bad it is- but it seems one of the UK’s top fashion houses Top Shop couldn’t help itself. The glorification of the anorexic girl.
dailymail.co.uk: Topshop was last night blasted by eating disorder groups after using a painfully thin size-zero model on its website.
The pale young woman with a gaunt face is seen on the fashion stores homepage wearing tiny clothes that hang off her skeletal frame.
It is believed that she is wearing the kind of controversial size four clothes – or American size zero – that have caused outrage in past.
On the surface one is beguiled to wonder why would a fashion house make this glaring faux pas? Is there really a demand, pressure to embody next to nothing but the bone looking girls as a fashion staple? Has it all just been a hypocritical exercise where fashion houses ‘pretend’ that they listen concerned about the negative stereo images that are created, the boundless existence of young women who are literally killing themselves to look like ‘idealized’ mannequins only to turn their back and do what they please anyway?
Helen Davies from the Anorexia charity Beat said: ‘For girls to see pictures of models who are this thin suggests that it’s OK to be like that but it’s clearly not.
‘This is not the sort of thing we want to see in magazines and on the internet. It’s a constant battle against eating disorders and Topshop is not helping matters.
‘For girls who see these kind of images it can be very damaging. The size four clothes are obviously available in the Topshop stores, which implies again that it’s healthy to be that size.
‘Images like this are effecting young girls more than ever before. Topshop needs to take some responsibility and use healthy models.’
But of course the question is why aren’t fashion houses like Top Shop and similar ones failing to take responsibility? Is there something we’re missing? Or does it come down to the idea no matter how
