Chicken or the Egg?

The title says it all. Your head can spin when you face certain discussions. In our world, there is a cause and effect for everything. But identifying which is which...that's when the noggin starts twirling.

I read a really well thought out journal entry today. If you'd like, you can check it out here:

The basis of a lot of discussion is one that comes back and goes away, and comes back again with alarming regularity, the discussion about beauty in our society, or more precisely, at what weight is a woman considered beautiful. But who is making the decisions? Are we trying to fit into really tight clothes because the designers tell us to, or are the designers making really tight clothes because we tell them to?

Right now the catch-name is "pencil thin" for models. That's pretty accurate, as a lot of these women do closely resemble the ol' No.2, complete with the eraser. Their heads appear to be the biggest part of their bodies.

The thing that's driving me nuts is, everything in our economy is driven by supply and demand. (well, except for petroleum prices, which is just idiotic speculation that's eventually going to cost a lot of people a whole lotta cash, but that's for another day). When you watch these Fashion shows every year, these spaghetti strands in spaghtetti straps come prancing down the catwalk, barely visible to the naked eye. It's almost to the point where leaving the clothes on the hanger would give the outfits a better shape.

But why, year after year, do these women who are this close to actually existing at a negative weight, get to sashay down the walk? They can't even run the air conditioning at these shows because the models will blow away now.

Oh and, how many among us didn't secretly chuckle at the video of the poor model who took not 1 but 3 falls on the ramp the other day.

Sorry, I rambled off track there.

Anyway, the way I see the fashion industry operating is not really any different than the way I see any other business. They sell what sells. These designers are making money selling these ridiculous outfits to someone.

Same with the tabloids. They print what sells. Magazines like "Star" fly off the shelf at a pretty good rate, along with other such titles as "Us" and "People", although "People" tries to mix in just a touch of intelligent reading.

Now the ones who have the biggest problems with the whole weight issue are obviously the women who are normal in this country. But here's my problem with the whole situation:

Most guys I know aren't buying "Star" or "Us". Guys do have rags of their own, like "Maxim" and "Stuff" and "FHM", but those magazines don't seem to have the same circulations as the first two. And I can tell you, from what I read, every time one of the tabloids publishes an issue with the Lollypop girls on the cover, they hit pay dirt. But who is buying the magazines?

I'm probably going to get whupped for this, but I think women are their own worst enemy when it comes to this whole mess. As I said, someone is in the stores, buying up the fashion that these dopes are peddling off the barely-there, boney-as-hell backs of the uber-thin Pencil Models. If these folks weren't making a dime with an obviously existing clientele, they would either change their practices, or go out of business.

It works with every business, but none are so fickle as the fashion industry, and the entertainment industry. Look at "Reality Shows: one guy hits the jackpot with a reality show, and suddenly every moron who ever had his 15 minutes of fame, is getting another 15 or 20 to gag us with.

Bottom line, folks, "money talks". If they can sell it, they will, if they can't, they won't. Women keep magazines like "Star" and "Us" in business, just like they keep the fashion designers in great wealth. Protests and outcry don't work. They garner attention to the complainer for a short time, sure, but they often backfire and pile on a whole bunch of negative, but valuable publicity on the target. We're only looking at Paris Hilton because someone figured out that the whole bullshit act is capable of raking in some serious coin. Her naughty video did more for her career than anything else she ever did, because afterward, people couldn't get enough of her. And until they do, we can sit back and watch her rule the world.

But reality sucks. If the images of Nicole Richie or Kiera Knightley sell more blouses than those of Rosie O'Donnell and Queen Latifah, guess whose image is going to be in the catalogue next spring?

If you want to make a difference, just stop buying the stuff. Don't shop at Victoria's Secret if you think they cast an unrealistic image of women. Ignore Nicole Miller the same way that she ignores you. Refuse to buy clothes that it's physically painful for you to wear.

Buy the products of a company like "Dove", who is trying really hard to change our perception of beauty, with it's "Campaign For Real Beauty".

I'm telling you, it's simplistic, but it's the only language they understand. No bucks? Oh you'll have their attention in no time.

The Metro-Sexual look worked for a while, but it was a passing fad. 1. Guys don't want to dress up like that 2. Women got sick of fighting over the mirror with their boys and 3. Queer Eye got sickening after a while. So, POOF. Buh bye Metro...

We guys get a lot of the blame. We do. And maybe we deserve a lot of what we do get. But we don't generally buy your clothes for you, and we generally don't read those magazines. Yeah we are losers, drooling over "hottt" women, but we don't drive the market, because gawking is free.

So why is the waif look still hanging on the shelves?

I don't know, just something I ponder.