I couldn't put it better than CherryQuinn has. Won't stop me putting my $0.02 in though
So what I'm aiming for may be the "idealised" version of myself, but I'm happy with that. I know how I looked when I was 112lbs and fit, and I liked it. I'm not going to wake up one morning 5'10" with legs up to my armpits looking like Gisele, but I CAN be small, and strong. I'm not "curvy" because I'm overweight, I'm just overweight. I'm not big boned, I'm probably more mesomorph than anything because I can gain muscle faster than some men I know (it's ridiculous). It's just how I work with what I have, which is all anyone can do.
I am kind of over the "real women" thing too. I often hear that real women have kids, and as I don't want them, I'm a bit fed up with being judged as being "less than" for that reason. That's probably a big factor. What I DO agree with is the fact that a lot of women we see in the media, especially advertising, are NOT real. They started out real when the images were transferred to the photo editor's mac, but they become more like CGI every day. I do Photoshop. I can do retouching. I can shrink someone in a photograph and make it look "real", but I know what the image originally looked like. Learning that was a powerful thing: models really do not have skin that looks perfectly like velvet! Someone has actually gone through that image and taken out every individual pore. Every. Single. One.
I'm completely in agreement that we should stop airbrushing photos that are aimed at kids in advertising. Imagine growing up and thinking a human being can look like that?! Healthy role models come in all shapes and sizes. But, that includes women who are more skinny, straight up and down, or whatever.
In short, I like the idea, but apart from whether an image has been airbrushed or not, anyone with lady bits (including anyone who's had them taken out, added on, or snipped) is a real woman
