Why Ralph Lauren Photoshopped That Model So Skinny... It Thought She Was Fat... At 120 lbs

from the how-nice dept

Fri, Oct 16th 2009 10:59am — Mike Masnick

We recently wrote about Ralph Lauren's DMCA notices about bad Photoshopping, making a model impossibly (and sickly) skinny. While the company apologized for the bad photoshopping, it never apologized for the bogus DMCA takedowns. And, now the other shoe has dropped. The model in the picture has spoken up and noted that she lost her job with Ralph Lauren, because they felt she wasn't skinny enough, despite being 5'10" and 120lbs. So, rather than showing her as is, apparently the company decided to digitally alter her and then try to find someone who actually is closer to the impossible image they put in their ad.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: models, skinny
Companies: ralph lauren

81 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 16 Oct 2009 @ 11:04am

Actually, having seen a recent picture of her, I can say that RL may have been right. She is a pretty lean girl, but she seemed to have a pretty evident pot belly. "fat" doesn't mean overweight, it can just mean the weight isn't in the right place.

Someone who is 5 foot 10 and 120 pounds is lean, no double about it.

Perhaps you would want to run a real image of her, as opposed to this horrible photoshop?

http://freenet-homepage.de/bradvei1/scans/scans-2/bradvei-Filippa-Hamilton-MAXIMsept4. jpg
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 16 Oct 2009 @ 11:11am
  
  Re:
  Wow. I'm convinced you could post a story about Hitler Clones in Brazil, and some AC will come and start arguing 'nature vs. nurture.'
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Almost Anonymous (profile), 19 Oct 2009 @ 11:45am
    
    Re: Re:
    Godwin'd in two posts... excellent. Your point is well taken though.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Designerfx (profile), 16 Oct 2009 @ 11:13am
  
  Re:
  that is no pot belly, by far.
  
  However, I wonder if Ralph Lauren's motto is:
  
  "it's impossible to be good enough for us" or so.
  
  5'10 and 120lbs is pretty much as close to the border of anorexic as exists for that height in a woman.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - interval, 16 Oct 2009 @ 12:02pm
    
    Re: Re:
    I agree. I think Ralph Lauren should strive for being so exclusive no one can buy their products. And I mean NO ONE.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Dark Helmet (profile), 16 Oct 2009 @ 11:18am
  
  Re:
  "but she seemed to have a pretty evident pot belly"
  
  .......Bwah?
  
  I went to the link, and I have to ask what in the sweet hell you are talking about. That woman is GORGEOUS and if you think THAT is a pot belly....come to the midwest, where we have plenty of men and women (many of them still attractive people) who have actual pot bellies....
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 16 Oct 2009 @ 2:37pm
    
    Re: Re:
    haha. You guys are pretty stupid. That picture I linked wasn't of her pot belly, but rather a very nice (but NORMAL) image of a very pretty model. As you said yourself, GORGEOUS and certainly not a stick figure.
    
    http://www.radaronline.com/sites/default/files/photos/image_20091014/RalphLaurenPhillipa. jpg
    
    This gives you a better idea, I would say she isn't quite the same shape as she was even a year ago. There is a picture circulating around that shows her in a brown evening gown and a notable curve to the front of it.
    
    Remember, fashion houses like their models to stay in size (whatever their default size is) and straying from that is usually a termination of contract by terms.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Dark Helmet (profile), 16 Oct 2009 @ 2:41pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Uh, you can't see any potbelly in THAT picture either...
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Hec, 16 Oct 2009 @ 11:25am
  
  Re:
  That's not a pot belly, those are her flat, toned, infinitely normal and necessary abodminal muscles.
  
  I really hope you just forgot your sarcasm tags.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ima Fish (profile), 16 Oct 2009 @ 11:33am
  
  Re:
  "She is a pretty lean girl, but she seemed to have a pretty evident pot belly"
  
  If that's some sort of problem, (I'm not saying it is, only "if") then photoshop that and only that out. I see no reason to photoshop everything about her out so that she looks unhealthy and malnourished.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- zaven (profile), 16 Oct 2009 @ 11:45am
  
  Re:
  You say the girl's fat and post that of all pictures? You should just stop talking now. Go crawl back in your hole and stay there troll.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- R. Miles (profile), 16 Oct 2009 @ 11:52am
  
  Re:
  Actually, having seen a recent picture of her, I can say that RL may have been right.
  So says the one who actually 'shoped the image.
  
  You're an idiot if you truly believe your own words.
  
  I have seen other photos of her (untouched) and she's more than suitable for pushing an exaggerated form to young girls who truly do have a pot belly, forcing their self-confidence over their looks even further into darkness.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- sondun2001 (profile), 16 Oct 2009 @ 12:21pm
  
  Re:
  ? Dude, you posted the wrong link to whatever image you saw. Pot belly? GTF out of here....
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 16 Oct 2009 @ 12:50pm
  
  Re: #1 Anonymous Coward
  And you can stop ordering the supersize fries and buying the economy size snicker bar bags. I can't see anything wrong with her.. except she is too skinny. Real men like curves!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 16 Oct 2009 @ 1:16pm
  
  Re:
  The model is super *HOT*.
  
  The PS image is just plain silly looking. Something that someone would do using some web based java "fun photo distorter" as a joke.
  
  I'm hoping they fired their marketing "artist" and everyone on the approval chain. It's poor workmanship that never should have been published.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Shanoboy (profile), 16 Oct 2009 @ 1:20pm
  
  Re:
  I wish my wife had a pot belly like that...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 16 Oct 2009 @ 2:55pm
  
  Re:
  Where the hell is that pot belly?
  
  She is not sickly skinny, like RL obviously want their models, but she is in no way fat either.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Frankie, 16 Oct 2009 @ 3:30pm
  
  Re:
  1. is that a "real" picture of her?
  2. I don't see her "pot belly"
  3. if she has a pot belly at 120 pounds, maybe she'd just drunk a glass of water, I mean think about it, having dropped 15 pounds myself, it's amazing how "fat" I perceive myself when I'm eaten or drunk, as opposed to when I'm very hungry. There's nowhere for that stuff to hide
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Frankie, 16 Oct 2009 @ 3:32pm
  
  Re:
  1. is that a "real" picture of her?
  2. I don't see her "pot belly"
  3. if she has a pot belly at 120 pounds, maybe she'd just drunk a glass of water, I mean think about it, having dropped 15 pounds myself, it's amazing how "fat" I perceive myself when I'm eaten or drunk, as opposed to when I'm very hungry. There's nowhere for that stuff to hide
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Cap'n Jack (profile), 18 Oct 2009 @ 10:54am
  
  Re:
  You must live exclusively in the internet. Her belly is amazing. If she were any skinnier she'd be sick - she'd need hospitalization.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
BullJustin (profile), 16 Oct 2009 @ 11:22am

Why don't they just draw a stick figure and photoshop a head and clothes on it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Free Capitalist (profile), 16 Oct 2009 @ 11:25am

Actually, having seen a recent picture of her, I can say that RL may have been right.

OMG MY EYES!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
joshua, 16 Oct 2009 @ 11:51am

Re:
I agree that there is no pot belly, they're called her internal organs
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Geekish, 16 Oct 2009 @ 12:13pm
  
  Re: Re:
  "I agree that there is no pot belly, they're called her internal organs"
  
  Apparently Ralph Lauren would like those gone as well. No digestive track = no calorie absorption = no more 'too-fat' 120 lb. model! Probably no pulse too, but they'll just Photoshop out the corpse-blue skin color.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rob, 16 Oct 2009 @ 11:52am

"She is a pretty lean girl, but she seemed to have a pretty evident pot belly"

I have one thing to say to that ...cheapeyeglasses.com

Get some and look again
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Oct 2009 @ 11:58am

Post number 7 by Hec is dead on. That is NOT a pot belly. The shirt ends where her waist line is and is already pretty narrow. Everything below the belly button is hips. Maybe the shadows, clothing, and basic lack of understanding of the female form are throwing off the first poster?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 16 Oct 2009 @ 12:03pm
  
  Re:
  Understanding the female form? Not on my internets!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Shuryno, 16 Oct 2009 @ 12:00pm

Oh please! Is there really one person that didn't even think that picture was photoshoped? I mean, really, it looks like a first homework for photoshop student(Not a very good homework).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
hybrid756, 16 Oct 2009 @ 12:00pm

Was she in District 9? I can see a definite bit of skin retouching there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
otb (profile), 16 Oct 2009 @ 12:02pm

Fat?!
Has anyoen who said this girl has a potbelly actually image searched filippa hamilton??

If the answer is 'no,' then you should probably shut up.

If the answer is 'yes,' then you should probably shut up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Oct 2009 @ 12:05pm

"They fired here because they said she was overweight and she couldn't fit in their clothes anymore".... well then I guess 99.9% of the population can also not fit into their cloths - a doomed business model.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Duncan Yoyo (profile), 16 Oct 2009 @ 12:20pm
  
  Re:
  It could be that they don't want models that are normal showing the clothes as opposed to normal people buying those clothes.
  
  I look for something that looks decent on somebody like Drew Carey.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Overcast (profile), 16 Oct 2009 @ 12:25pm

Looks much, much better non-photoshopped, lol
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Oct 2009 @ 12:26pm

Men don't like skin and bones, and women know that for the most part. The clothing industry seems to be sending the wrong message. It seems like they believe the ideal women should look like they are from Somalia and should be lining up for a bag of grain from the UN. But that's not the type of woman that's attractive.

Put women that are normal and look like women we know in the ads. After all, real men don't go to department stores to watch women put on clothes. Hell, most of us have problems deciding between your black or red dress. Yes, Honey, you look great in both.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Nastybutler77 (profile), 16 Oct 2009 @ 12:33pm
  
  Re:
  You seem to think these ads are for men. They aren't.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 16 Oct 2009 @ 12:42pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Your right, but right next to these ads in the magazines they talk about a host of problems like anorexia, bulimia, all kinds of other immune-system related issues. Then on page three, they have an expose on how Jennifer Lopez is somehow real unattractive and overweight.
    
    Yet no one seems to be able to figure out the correlation.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 18 Oct 2009 @ 12:52am
  
  Re:
  Ralph Lauren ads are not targeted at men (who like women with toned bodies), they are targeted at women who believe that with the right close they can look more like the model. The point of the ad is to sell clothes to the vulnerable.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Oct 2009 @ 12:28pm

BMI
BMI Categories:

* Underweight =
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
cc, 16 Oct 2009 @ 12:29pm

Tsk tsk, AC #1. Except for that girl being absolutely stunning with no sign of a "pot belly", the image you posted is probably © by Ralph Lauren! ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nastybutler77 (profile), 16 Oct 2009 @ 12:32pm

Bring on the fatties!
If all the fat women in my city were built like that, I'd be a chubby chaser.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Oct 2009 @ 12:38pm

What are you smoking, Anonymous Coward 1? She is totally hot in that photo you posted -- no potbelly there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Oct 2009 @ 12:43pm

Why dont we go back to corsets and remove ribs too? Women need some fat in there body you know.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Oct 2009 @ 1:14pm
  
  Re:
  >>Women need some fat in there body you know.
  
  That's what men are for...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
angelica, 16 Oct 2009 @ 1:07pm

Really?
Jeez AC#1...
My gfs and I always say that a guy that loves girls with little boy bodies has a tinii penii.
As for real pot bellies (and yes, I have one. I had two children so it's kinda hard to lose that) I was very self-conscious. But my boyfriend loves to play with that particular part of my anatomy. I was the one that had to get over my hang-ups about it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Seth Carroll, 16 Oct 2009 @ 1:08pm

At first I was like
>_> at the fact that she weighed 120 lbs, but then I realized that she's 5'10" and that's about as skinny as you can get at that height without looking like you're dying.

This makes me sick. Real women have curves.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dirk Belligerent (profile), 16 Oct 2009 @ 1:13pm

If you look at the Sports Illustrated Swimbo issue desk calendar, you'll notice that the majority of the 365 photos are outtakes from the shoots that produced the issue. While still good, they have something or another than disqualified them from print - usually incorrect exposures, unflattering shadows, odd poses - and a few of them are clearly because the girls look *fat*. Not the muffin-top spongy look of normal people, but the "more weight than a supermodel should have showing" sort of thing.

Look at Rebecca Romijn on "Eastwick" - she recently had twins and is carrying her post-partum weight and she sure doesn't look like she did as Mystique, though remember the X-Men movies were made 4-10 years ago.

For someone who has 3 kids of her own, I don't get why Angelina Jolie is so skinny now. Both in "Wanted" and set shots from "Salt", she looks too scrawny to kick ass. She needs to get back to her "Tomb Ho" and "Mrs. & Mrs. Smith" weight where she looked luscious and unlikely to snap her arms while beating the crap out of someone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Brendy, 16 Oct 2009 @ 1:17pm

I don't see anything wrong with this...
I count my 117 lb 5'8" gf's calories all the time because even a gain in 5 lb's would cause me to think she's fat. She gets very annoyed when I do so, and she complains about it to other people like my friends and family. I personally hate curves because I know in 5-10 years those curves will turn into cellulite and I won't even be able to look at the girl. Been 6 years, and she's STILL with me, somehow.

RL needs to give off the perception that their clothes will make people look skinny. Makes sense to me. I saw her on the new news, and she wasn't fat but she wasn't skinny either. Just regular.

The mentality here in socal is that women need to be skinny and fashionable. Whenever I visit the midwest or east coast, I am appalled at how ugly people are. The women wear no makeup, are 50 lbs overweight, and have no sense of fashion. Seriously, I'd say that MAYBE 1 in 10,000 are even remotely attractive. You just would have to understand the culture out here in order to judge the rationale behind RL's decision.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PaulT (profile), 16 Oct 2009 @ 1:31pm
  
  Re: I don't see anything wrong with this...
  You appear to have some severely unrealistic ideas about what women should look like (hint: everything that makes them look female rather than like 12 year old boys - boobs, ass, etc - is made of fat). It's a shame you feel you have to push your delusion onto your girlfriend (*you* wouldn't be counting her calories if she was doing it for herself instead of for you), and I feel sorry that your being with her seems to depend on whether her body goes through a natural ageing process or not.
  
  "The mentality here in socal is that women need to be skinny and fashionable."
  
  That doesn't make it right. Besides, "skinny" doesn't have to mean "bag of bones". There's a large gap between a woman with natural curves and one who's overweight by any rational measure.
  
  "You just would have to understand the culture out here in order to judge the rationale behind RL's decision."
  
  We understand it, and understand that it's shallow, pathetic and damaging. But understanding it doesn't mean we have to think it's acceptable.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Dark Helmet (profile), 16 Oct 2009 @ 1:33pm
  
  Re: I don't see anything wrong with this...
  GOD you must be trolling...
  
  "I count my 117 lb 5'8" gf's calories all the time because even a gain in 5 lb's would cause me to think she's fat."
  
  You're the idiot that caused the overreaching and equally idiotic "Women's movement" (quotes? because they don't really represent ALL women's interests, only those that agree with their idiotic point of view).
  
  "I personally hate curves because I [am a closet pedophile]"
  
  FTFY
  
  "The mentality here in socal is that women need to be skinny and fashionable."
  
  Reason number 48,344 that SoCal needs to be nuked off the planet...
  
  "Whenever I visit the midwest or east coast, I am appalled at how ugly people are."
  
  Okay, are you for real? Please walk through downtown Chicago any day of the week (particularly in the summer) and tell me that the women in my fair city aren't GORGEOUS. St. Louis? Same. Twin Cities? Same. Cleveland? Same. All are the same, with the possible exception of Milwaukee, where the average in looks dips a bit :)
  
  "The women wear no makeup"
  
  Not
  
  "are 50 lbs overweight"
  
  Not
  
  "and have no sense of fashion"
  
  Yeah, you're an idiot. Name the single most popular female icon in America when it comes to current fashion trends and then tell me where she's from. The correct answer is Michelle Obama and Chicago, tard.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Brendy, 16 Oct 2009 @ 5:02pm
    
    Re: Re: I don't see anything wrong with this...
    I am not trolling I am being 100% serious.
    
    LOL yea Michelle Obama is the trend setter for young women, riiiigghhtt. You may have a different opinion of beauty and what overweight is. It's fine, you are used to it because that's all you know. Come to Laguna Beach or Newport and tell me your women are hotter. You may think 160 is an average weight for a woman. To me, that is grotesquely overweight. It's all good man, enjoy your extra cushion, but know that Hollywood sets the fashion, not your loser states. I was born in Chicago btw and when I visit my family there and in Wisconsin I'm disgusted by the people I see. So many fat women, God! Oh and St. Louis, the second worst city in the country instead of it's old standing of being the worst! Good job citing that as a place with reputably good looking people. Don't be jealous because all you got are butchy fat women.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Mechwarrior, 16 Oct 2009 @ 5:25pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: I don't see anything wrong with this...
      Maybe you aren't trolling, maybe you're just a giant dick tool.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - nasch (profile), 19 Oct 2009 @ 8:30am
      
      Re: Re: Re: I don't see anything wrong with this...
      I am not trolling I am being 100% serious.
      
      I hope your girlfriend dumps you (as in garbage) immediately. Either way, it sounds like you're going to die alone, because all the women your age will be "disgusting" and the 20 year olds won't give you a second look. Sounds fitting.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Valkor, 19 Oct 2009 @ 2:23pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: I don't see anything wrong with this...
      Dear Brendy, I hope your "girlfriend" kills you with a bag of dicks. Unfortunately, if she's been with you for six years of calorie counting, she's too emotionally damaged to stand up to you at all.
      
      Helmet's response was unfortunately incomplete. Every single sentence in your original post was either factually inaccurate or completely batshit insane. I would really love to think that you're trolling, because your posts are so chauvinistic and show an appreciation of everything superficial about "girl(s)" that I don't want to believe they are spoken by a real person.
      
      Your attitude toward women would have been charmingly obnoxious in the 50's, and you clearly have no idea what BMI is or is even supposed to mean. Your us/them attitudes, be it state to state or gender to gender, are quite disturbing. Have you ever considered professional help? Your posts are too frightening to be real and too consistent to be a troll.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Verve (profile), 22 Oct 2009 @ 6:39am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: I don't see anything wrong with this...
        "Unfortunately, if she's been with you for six years of calorie counting, she's too emotionally damaged to stand up to you at all."
        
        Ding. You hit that nail right on the head.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 25 Mar 2010 @ 2:33pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: I don\'t see anything wrong with this...
      I am actually writing a major paper on the media's affects on young women, and the kind of crap you're spewing is exactly why there are so many anorexic and bulimic women in this world. They just want to be accepted, but jerks like you push them down with your unrealistic ideals. In 1917, a woman who was 5ft 4in and 140lbs was considered beautiful and very desirable. Girls as young as 7 years old are aware of what a diet is nowadays and think they are fat. What you do to your girl friend is wrong. No girl deserves to be treated like that. Real men do like curves. My beautiful curvy sister just got engaged to a great guy. This obviously just shows that you only care about a woman's body, and not her personality. It makes me sick. I hope you come to understand that SoCal's standard shouldn't be the world standard. SoCal's standard is creating both women with eating disorders and obese. Women who aren't successful dieters become compulsive eaters because they are looking for comfort and food does that for them. So in reality SoCal is responsible for both extremes. Thanks for volunteering your home as the place to blame :P I'm a young woman, 5ft 4in, 160 lbs, most of my weight is comprised of muscle. I am curvey, and I am BEAUTIFUL.
      P.S. Words of wisdom for the guys: Pick curvey over scurvy.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 25 Mar 2010 @ 2:35pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: I don\\\'t see anything wrong with this...
        And I'm not an anonymous coward, i just wasn't signed in. My username is thenightdance.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Almost Anonymous (profile), 19 Oct 2009 @ 11:51am
    
    Re: Re: I don't see anything wrong with this...
    Dark Helmet, thanks for answering Brenda's post so well, pretty much put my "STFU" to shame.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- JustMeDebbie, 16 Oct 2009 @ 2:59pm
  
  Re: I don't see anything wrong with this...
  There IS something wrong with your gf. What is wrong is that she is still WITH you at all.
  
  If 5 pounds is going to be the difference between you wanting her or not wanting her, there is also something very wrong with YOU.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Brendy, 16 Oct 2009 @ 5:04pm
    
    Re: Re: I don't see anything wrong with this...
    Well, I didn't say it was selfish of me to think that way or make her watch her weight, but it'd be just as selfish for her to get fatter and have to make me embarrassed in public lol.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Mechwarrior, 16 Oct 2009 @ 5:26pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: I don't see anything wrong with this...
      I can hear conservative America applauding that comment.
      "I dont want her to embarrass me".
      
      Women aren't made of solid gold, they get old and wrinkly like normal humans. Maybe you need to find a Real Doll suitable for your tastes.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Just Me, 16 Oct 2009 @ 5:59pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: I don't see anything wrong with this...
      With a nickname like Bendy, I question your manhood anyway...
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Oct 2009 @ 1:22pm

If someone said "You're fired because you're too fat"...
...makes me wonder if someone at Ralph Lauren was really aiming to show what the clothes would look like on a 90-lb boy. It's a very unattractive photoshop disaster!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
bob, 16 Oct 2009 @ 1:24pm

Shoot the Victim
Filippa Hamilton was thrown under the bus.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
otb (profile), 16 Oct 2009 @ 1:31pm

Socal
Sucks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Oct 2009 @ 2:01pm

I just wanted to say, I just scrapped my plans to order a tube of Polo Sport aftershave balm and bottle of cologne (Ralph Lauren products) and will be using something else in the future. Suggestions?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Dark Helmet (profile), 16 Oct 2009 @ 2:05pm
  
  Re:
  Eau d'Shwartz....
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Nastybutler77 (profile), 16 Oct 2009 @ 2:15pm
    
    Re: Re:
    May the Shwartz be with you.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- azuravian (profile), 16 Oct 2009 @ 2:11pm
  
  Re:
  I recommend Bulgari Black. My wife bought it for me recently, and I've gotten many compliments. John Varvatos colognes are also very nice.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
megatrollificus, 16 Oct 2009 @ 2:14pm

What's sexy about narrow-hipped-tiny-tit-no-butt-flatbellies??
Everything, if you're a fashion designer. Because that describes their actual sexual targets: teenage boys.

Seriously, the people who design these clothes are more attracted to waifish butt boys than real women. Thus are the standards of what a "high-fashion model" should look like derived.

Not that there's anything wrong with THAT*.

*-waste of money and time and the destruction of self-respect for millions of girls and women aside...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Oct 2009 @ 2:22pm

"Overweight"??? WTF. Much more likely, she just refused to get laid by the boss.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
JustMeDebbie, 16 Oct 2009 @ 3:05pm

Pez Dispenser
Ralph Lauren seems to prefer his models to look more like Pez dispensers than to look like women.

Why not just put the clothes on hangers and photograph them? All he wants is a walking hanger anyway. Something that won't mess up the lines of the clothing with annoying things like curves in the body.

Sheesh.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Joe, 16 Oct 2009 @ 6:03pm

Oops, they did it again...
http://rubyroom.aol.co.uk/2009/10/16/ralph-lauren-photoshop-controversy-continues/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cendir, 18 Oct 2009 @ 7:10pm

haha
This is a pretty hilarious picture. I almost vomited. Maybe if she didn't have clothes on, I would.

I don't have kids, and wow, I can't imagine trying to raise them in this twisted, immoral world.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Oct 2009 @ 5:56am

I'm the same height as Philippa, and weigh only a few kilos more. But by BMI-standards, I am underweight. In the 'normal' photos of her, make-up, the right lighting and a little bit of photoshop (it's still there, just less obvious) try to make her look like a healthy woman, but her hip- and wristbones are still sticking out. This means she is skinny to the point that she'll bruise very easily, will feel cold very easily, and can probably draw her own skeleton quite accurately based on feeling her bones.

On the photograph where she wears the black top that would be showing her pot-belly: it's a stupid design. Even 12 year old girls can look a bit pregnant wearing that type of top (although I still can't see the pot-belly there, since there's fabric falling over her belly, so it's virtually impossible to determine its form). And even then, possible reasons for a woman's belly sticking out a bit:

- bad posture
- she drunk a lot of water
- she's having her period
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
popsugar, 23 Oct 2009 @ 7:54am

please men are useless and know nothing about beauty to let alone comment on it. women are all shaps and sizes. having small breast is just as beautiful and femmine as having larger breast because women come in all shaps and sizes. so men quit trying to make your useless opions matter because they don't. being small dos NOT make a woman boyish. it simply just means she's small all men need to die to improve the self esteem of women
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Matt, 23 Nov 2009 @ 5:44pm

Her shoulders are in the wrong place; she doesn't even look like a real skinny person.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
who cares, 16 Dec 2009 @ 7:39am

she still looks kinda fat they should have taken some weight from her head
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Dec 2009 @ 7:40am

hey pop sugar your useless
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
anonyoums, 19 Jan 2010 @ 8:45am

People are retarted! All models dont have to be the size of a toothpick. Its no reason for photoshopping people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Frank, 8 Apr 2011 @ 9:22am

A site named photoshop killer can help you find out Photoshopped images. It uses both the exif info and the content of image to find evidence of digital manipulation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Kelly, 12 Aug 2011 @ 1:06pm

she
Is sooo skinny even in real life who ever said she had a "pot belly" is fuckin crazy...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]