France likely to pass bill banning super-skinny models

[Aleide]

I think Elite, IMG, Women and the other agencies might get punished but, will They dare to punish the Fashion houses like Dior, Saint Laurent, Chanel, Valentino, etc ? I really, really doubt it.

 

[Golden ice]

Thank god it didn't pass.

However the other link, the one about being able to imprison people for promoting anorexia online is EXTREMELY concerning. Who's to determine what counts as pro-anorexia and where the line is? Because there are plenty that would call this site pro anorexia, even though it clearly isn't.

Not to get political, but this is what concerns me about regulations like this, and any regulations that outlaw "hate speech" or bullying/hazing or other types of speech. I'm not in favor of using hate speech or anything like that, but it opens the door to further more restrictive laws. Who actually decides and defines what counts? And even if now the parameters regarding that are strict, or are defined in a way you are in favor of, who's to say in 20 years they haven't extended it to include all derogatory speech?

Ironically (because we're talking about France) it was Voltaire that said "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."

 

[FrançoiseEllyn]

Thank god it didn't pass.

However the other link, the one about being able to imprison people for promoting anorexia online is EXTREMELY concerning. Who's to determine what counts as pro-anorexia and where the line is? Because there are plenty that would call this site pro anorexia, even though it clearly isn't.

Not to get political, but this is what concerns me about regulations like this, and any regulations that outlaw "hate speech" or bullying/hazing or other types of speech. I'm not in favor of using hate speech or anything like that, but it opens the door to further more restrictive laws. Who actually decides and defines what counts? And even if now the parameters regarding that are strict, or are defined in a way you are in favor of, who's to say in 20 years they haven't extended it to include all derogatory speech?

Ironically (because we're talking about France) it was Voltaire that said "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."

I couldn't agree more. Governments are able to patrol child pornography and nazi-type websites because the content is so clear. When it comes to health, every person would need to be individually assessed by a doctor, which they will realize is nearly impossible. However, if the word "anorexia" or "ana" is in the title.. I think that may be different story.

 

[MCgirl]

Thank god it didn't pass.

However the other link, the one about being able to imprison people for promoting anorexia online is EXTREMELY concerning. Who's to determine what counts as pro-anorexia and where the line is? Because there are plenty that would call this site pro anorexia, even though it clearly isn't.

Not to get political, but this is what concerns me about regulations like this, and any regulations that outlaw "hate speech" or bullying/hazing or other types of speech. I'm not in favor of using hate speech or anything like that, but it opens the door to further more restrictive laws. Who actually decides and defines what counts? And even if now the parameters regarding that are strict, or are defined in a way you are in favor of, who's to say in 20 years they haven't extended it to include all derogatory speech?

Ironically (because we're talking about France) it was Voltaire that said "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."

Agree. It's all too subjective and open to personal interpretation, and it has a huge potential to be abused. I really dislike the slippery slope arguments, but in this case, it might just open the door to passing more freedom-restricting laws.
It's good that they are concerned about EDs, but making pro-ana sites illegal is not the right way to fix the issue. Providing people with more accessible and affordable mental help would be better. From what I know, in Paris one visit to a psychologist can cost you 50 euros, and that's only if you're a student. You can ban the sites, but most kids don't become bulimic or anorexic because they saw it on the internet and think that self-harm is cool and something to be imitated; there is usually an underlying problem, and you can make promoting EDs illegal all you want, but unless you fix the real issue, it won't change much. Certainly not enough to justify passing such a subjective, open law.
Pro-ED sites are harmful, but they are not the root of the problem, they are the symptom.

 

[FashionThin]

It didn't pass yet, the articles are wrong. It still needs the Senate to approve it and I heard it's just sitting there for months.

 

[Katja Jacqueline]

Does anybody know if agencies are preparing somehow in case it passes? I just can't image what they would do.

It also appears to me that they have left the issue of which BMI must be considered too low fairly open. Some are mentioning that health authorities consider a BMI lower than 18 underweight, but maybe they will settle for a lower BMI? Do you think of this as a possible outcome?

 

[FrançoiseEllyn]

Does anybody know if agencies are preparing somehow in case it passes? I just can't image what they would do.

It also appears to me that they have left the issue of which BMI must be considered too low fairly open. Some are mentioning that health authorities consider a BMI lower than 18 underweight, but maybe they will settle for a lower BMI? Do you think of this as a possible outcome?

There's no way. They've been attempting at doing this for so many years. Thankfully, recent studies are letting people know that BMI is not an accurate test of health. Their studies show the same BMI on people with the same height with a dozen different types of body structures.

 

[Kit]

They're apparently trying to change the law now so that doctors must check off your health for you to work. Kind of interesting and cool idea.

 

[sentier]

http://www.timesrecordnews.com/colu...e5a-47ca-533a-e053-0100007ff0a-363665901.html
Good for France for putting its weight behind skinny model issue

Fashion heavyweight France is putting some serious weight behind stopping the fashion industry from its unhealthy obsession with ultra skinny models.

Good on France.

The country's parliament on Thursday adopted a bill requiring overly thin fashion models to prove they are healthy. The fine is up to about $80,000 per offense to agencies violating the law. They are required to ask models to provide a doctor's note indicating they are of an appropriate body mass index and are healthy enough to work. The move, which adds to an earlier version of a skinny model law passed in April, is a kick in the fashionable pants of an industry that has long catwalked the line of body image abuse and celebrated models so slim some look not only emaciated but do not represent women in any realistic manner.

According to the legislation, models must have a body mass index of 18 or more in a country with an average BMI of 23.2, the lowest in Western Europe, according to a 2008 study by France's National Institute of Democratic Studies.

Size 0s, 1s and 3s are fool-heartedly and inanely far and away from the norm, when in America, the average size is 12 and 14.

To say the least, the fashion industry always has lived in fantasyland wrapped up in dreamland all tied up in a pretty little bow.

All those pretty little bows come at the sacrifice of models who suffer from anorexia and other eating disorders. In France, 30,000 to 40,000 suffer from eating disorders, according to Dr. Olivier Veran, the French lawmaker who proposed the skinny model measure earlier this year.

These weight worries have come about to fit the unrealistic expectations of an industry that seems to care more about how the clothes look than they do about the young women wearing them.

Not only have dangerously underweight models been a problem in the fashion world, but underage models, too, who are sexualized beyond the expectations for their age.

The real skinny on these skinny issues is how those expectations and how these fantasy perceptions denigrate society as a whole. Girls who read fashion magazines and idolize beautiful models expect that these bone-thin figures are what they need to emulate — that being a size 0 is what they need to be, when that's far from the truth.

France, in combating this skinny model issue, also passed the Photoshop law, in which Photoshopped images must be labeled as being altered.

The industry is being asked to be upfront about all this pretty deception so no one, particularly young girls, gets the impression that those images are the norm. Achieving that kind of perfection requires teams of people — makeup artists, lighting artists, wardrobe people and yes, computer people adept at Photoshop — because few people, even models, actually do look perfect without a lot of help.

It's ironic, for sure, that France is fighting against skinny models while we in America seem to be battling the problem from the opposite spectrum.

In New York, an overregulated restaurant industry has implemented a ban on trans fats, while chain eateries are required to post calorie counts on menus. A failed law attempted to limit the sale of jumbo sugary drinks (the state's highest court shot it down, saying the city's board of health exceeded its authority). Now New York chain restaurants are being required to label high sodium menu items.

The difference between such regulations is that in New York, the regular Joe's contention is that he has a right to eat unhealthily if he wants. He is not being compelled by his job to do so. His livelihood isn't necessarily threatened.

For models in France, getting the job, keeping it and competing for jobs means the very real idea of sacrificing your health to do so. Sure, a model has a right to chose a different job, but she shouldn't have to for a reason as petty as making all those silly little bows look good when, underneath all those clothes, she does not.

 

[oferta]

I have read the news about it....and I saw a lot of articles including images of superskinny models dating back from 2010 and older (the infamous Rosa Cha 2007 )... I am not saying there are no superskinny models these days, but I would put it into the 'activism' category of bored, uninspired French parliamentarian. They should invest their time in real problems.
.

 

[sentier]

I have read the news about it....and I saw a lot of articles including images of superskinny models dating back from 2010 and older (the infamous Rosa Cha 2007 )... I am not saying there are no superskinny models these days, but I would put it into the 'activism' category of bored, uninspired French parliamentarian. They should invest their time in real problems.
.

EXACTLY. As if we don't have bigger things to worry about in Paris at the moment.

 

[espressoenthusiast]

I couldn't agree more. Governments are able to patrol child pornography and nazi-type websites because the content is so clear. When it comes to health, every person would need to be individually assessed by a doctor, which they will realize is nearly impossible. However, if the word "anorexia" or "ana" is in the title.. I think that may be different story.

!!!! this is so true-- beyond that, i think there is such a grave difference between regulating content about weight and regulating clearly abusive and disturbing content, where a third party is involved. Even if pro ana websites are dangerous, they are dangerous because of individual influence and ultimately, individual choice/mental health. Child pornography obviously endangers an unwilling third party, and puts other children and people in jeopardy, and hate speech type material threatens third parties without their consent/violates their rights; considerably different, fundamentally.