If you have a customer that’s treating you like shit just tell them “I hope the rest of your day is as pleasant as you are!”. That’s my advice for the day.
Have your co-stars treated you differently since you’ve won an oscar?
May 19, 2013
Mike Jeffries
c/o Abercrombie & Fitch
Abercrombie & Fitch Campus
6301 Fitch Path
New Albany, Ohio 43054Hey Mike,I know you’ve been flooded with mail regarding your comments on sizeism, but I wanted to take a second to write you about a project I’ve been working on.As a preface: Your opinion isn’t shocking; millions share the same sentiment. You’ve used your wealth and public platform to echo what many already say. However, it’s important you know that regardless of the numbers on your tax forms, your comments don’t stop anyone from being who they are; the world is progressing in inclusive ways whether you deem it cool or not. The only thing you’ve done through your comments (about thin being beautiful and only offering XL and XXL in your stores for men) is reinforced the unoriginal concept that fat women are social failures, valueless, and undesirable. Your apology doesn’t change this.But oddly enough, that’s not all you have done. You have also created an incredible opportunity for social change.Never in our culture do we see sexy photo shoots with short, fat, unconventional models paired with not short, not fat, professional models. To put it in your words: “unpopular kids” with “cool kids”. It’s socially acceptable for same to be paired with same, but never are contrasting bodies positively mixed in the world of advertisement. The juxtaposition of uncommonly paired bodies is visually jarring, and, even though I wish it didn’t, it causes viewers to feel uncomfortable. This is largely attributed to companies like yours that perpetuate the thought that fat women are not beautiful. This is inaccurate, but if someone were to look through your infamous catalog, they wouldn’t believe me.I’ve enclosed some images for your consideration. Please let me know what you think.A note: I didn’t take these pictures to show that the male model found me attractive, or the photographer found me photogenic, or to prove that you’re an ostentatious dick. Rather, I was inspired by the opportunity to show that I am secure in my skin and to flaunt this by using the controversial platform that you created. I challenge the separation of attractive and fat, and I assert that they are compatible regardless of what you believe. Not only do I know that I’m sexy, but I also have the confidence to pose nude in ways you don’t dare. You’re are more than welcome to prove me wrong by posing shirtless with a hot fat chick; it would thrill me to see such a shoot.I’m sure you didn’t intend for this to be the outcome, but in many ways you are kind of brilliant. Not only are you a marketing genius (brand exclusivity really is a profitable move) but you also accidentally created an opportunity to challenge our current social construct. My hope is that the combination of these contrasting bodies will someday be as ubiquitous as the socially accepted ideal.Ever so sincerely,
JesP.S. If you would like to offer me a “substantial amount” to stop wearing your brand so my association won’t “cause significant damage to your image”, don’t hesitate to email me. I respect you as a business man, and my agent and I would be happy to contribute in furthering your established success.P.P.S. You should know your Large t-shirt comfortably fits a size 22. You might want to work on that.Jes over at The Militant Baker has done it again
my apartment could use a floppy disk coffee table.
I want this.
Discovery, Animal Planet, and History Channel exposed for killing animals for profit →
These channels are failing the spirit of conservationism and education. They are failing inspiring awe in young people. Failing much needed inspiration in a very confused and conflicted world.
These shows are failing their core values, their main purpose, which is leadership in environmentalism and cultural education. Far worse, they are failing millions of young people - millions - who look up to them.
Please join me in asking Discovery, Animal Planet, and the History Channels to stop, apologize, and correct.
That’s an important read up there, folks. These “reality” shows are feeding an outdated and unscientific view of predator species. These are channels founded on principles of education and conservation (TLC, of course, left the building years ago). Are they willing to sacrifice that for what appears to be gratuitous bloodsport?
Like any media, you can vote with your eyeballs. And if you support any kind of rights for wild animals and natural spaces, you can not support these programs. If the account above is true, shame on these networks.
It speaks to part of a larger issue with nature films. The amazing footage we see in shows like Africa, Planet Earth, and Frozen Planet is rarely the result of serendipity. It involves years of careful research and preparation to maximize the chances of capturing nature’s majesty on camera, and what is captured is highly edited to create story, drama and emotion. These are uniquely human interests, and nature doesn’t include them in her original script.
That’s not to say we are being fleeced all the time. People like Sir David Attenborough take these concerns very seriously, and constantly strive to find the balance between entertainment and true nature in every varying instance. What we watch is real. But is it REAL?
I wonder how many people realize that, for instance, the famous polar bear birth scene from Frozen Planet was filmed in a zoo? Disney’s adorable Chimpanzee movie was not a documentary, but rather spliced together to create an emotional tale of adoption. Jason Goldman put together a great collection of opinions on the matter.
How far can we take allowances to deliver good edutainment before we are delivering bad science? The “reality” shows surely fail the test. But the others? What do you think?
