Is The Homoerotic Pull of The Fashion Industry To Blame For Anorexic Standards?

March 4, 2011  |  

Ever since first lady Michelle Obama launched her anti-obesity initiative, her curves have been the source of increased attention. Apparently, in our bizarro American culture, a woman must already be at an unhealthy weight in order to encourage other women to adopt a healthy lifestyle. And since Michelle Obama was spotted eating short ribs while on vacation –‘eating’ being the operative word – she’s not a good candidate for projecting healthy eating standards.

In America, women who eat one satisfying meal (let alone three), are considered fat, which begs the question; fat compared to what? Or whom? The answer which leaps from the creases of my mind, hand raised and vying for attention is – the fashion industry.

Think about it. Isn’t it is agonizingly obvious from watching a model’s morbidly thin frame strut down the runway that straight men, and gay women, don’t share the same beauty ideals as fashion designers?  Which begs the question: Who are these fashion designers and what images are they envisioning when they design haute couture?

Certainly, they’re not imagining the curves of Marilyn Monroe or the voluptuousness of Dorothy Dandridge. Hell! They’re not even envisaging 90’s model Cindy Crawford in her prime. Though Crawford may not have had curves of many of her predecessors, it did at least appear that she got her three squares a day.  Unlike the fashionistas of today, I didn’t have a nagging compulsion to rush up to her and force feed her a sandwich (with a side of fries and a chocolate sundae).

So what is it about sunken in jaws and waif physiques that fashion designers find absolutely spellbinding? How is it that they’re satisfied using a sketched framework of a woman’s body on the catwalk instead of the real thing? And here’s the 100 million dollar question – why are fashion designers determined to super-impose the image of pre-pubescent boys onto female physiques?

There is no way to honestly approach these questions without addressing the homoerotic pull of the fashion industry.  Same sex loving men have fetishized the image of young boys to the point of erecting a physical shrine of malnourished women to celebrate their most primal, and somewhat pedophilic, desires. We don’t see women who have any of the identifying physical features of women strutting down the catwalk because women aren’t desirous sexual objects for their gay taskmasters.

Far from being the object of sexual desire for gay men, women are often resented and viewed as rivals by more effeminate gay men who obsess over gender parity. Let them tell it, they’re just as much female as you, me, or any other “fish”- a derogatory term used for women in the gay community – walking up or down the runway. Their ultimate goal is to trump naturally born women, i.e. those born with vaginas, by demonstrating that their inner diva can outperform our X chromosomes any day of the week.  Of course, anyone with as much as a cursory understanding of psychology can easily discern that all the twirling and cartoonish gesticulation is the consequence of overcompensation. Still, the marrying of homoerotic sexual desire with an irrational resentment of women makes for an extremely toxic brew.

In answering these claims, many designers feign insult and claim that the job of models is to be a hanger for the clothes. In other words, designers are claiming that they are nullifying the feminine features of their models so that buyers of women’s clothes – mostly women- won’t be distracted by a woman’s body.  Apparently, designers feel that breasts and hips are distractions to be designed around, not incorporated into designs for clothes which will eventually adorn the bodies of women who have, you guessed it, breasts and hips!

I would add that it is absolute madness to take designers at their word and allow ourselves to become convinced that they are sincere when they assert that women are only hangers for their designs. Fashion is art, and art is about desire, sensation, creation, and sensuality. Art is impulse driven.

The problem here is that gay designers are driven by the wrong impulses. Their primary desire is to satiate their own appetite by recreating their sexual desires in the bodies of their female models. Gay designers have transformed the fashion industry into their own little autoerotic and self-sustaining play pen, creating a vampire effect which sucks the self-esteem right out of women.

Michele Obama is not fat, and I am quite sure that President Obama still gets that familiar va-va-va-voom feeling whenever he sees her, as do many red-blooded American men when they see any woman with curves. The fact that gay designers don’t share the desires of heterosexual men in no way grants them permission to ignore the cumulatively vacuous effect that their dysfunction has on women. It’s high time that the narcissistic fashion industry, largely financed by the purchases of real women, learned to cater to real women. It’s not only as a choice; it’s the only socially responsible one as well.

Yvette Carnell is a former Capitol Hill Staffer turned political blogger. She currently publishes two blogs, Spatterblog.com and GoGirlGuide.com.

Trending on MadameNoire

View Comments
Comment Disclaimer: Comments that contain profane or derogatory language, video links or exceed 200 words will require approval by a moderator before appearing in the comment section. XOXO-MN
blog comments powered by Disqus