Talk:Feminist Perspectives on Eating Disorders

Someone has to start the argument?

I'll open with the following: Regardless of if the media - any media - has an effect on other women that is negative, or if the media is degrading women by exploiting or otherwise making money from images of their bodies, it strikes me as patently absurd to label wanting to actually do anything about it as "feminist".

• There is a very nearly 1-to-1 relationship in the lists of countries where women are expected to cover themselves up, and countries where women have little or no rights compared to men.
• By the time a movement to censor, ban, or reduce funding for, images of women's bodies gains enough momentum that it may actually make a change in the daily life of the average US citizen, it is almost always in the control of the same group of people - conservative fundamentalists - who loathe other respected women's rights efforts - be it proactive recruitment or reproductive freedom. I'd hardly characterize Edwin Meese, nor his political partners, as great supporters of feminism or women's rights!

It seems clear to me that the proper way to resolve this in terms of promoting equality is to help women achieve the same abundance of eye candy that men currently enjoy. Equality will be reached when just as many women shamelessly look at advertisements, pornography, and other media featuring the opposite or both sexes, with the same amount of enthusiasm, as most men currently do.

If this means men feel compelled to diet a little more, no harm done - last time I checked, the US was experiencing an obesity epidemic and the vast majority of US citizens could actually use a little more pressure to take better care of their bodies.

Oddly, the neutrality tag was already in place - but the talk page was blank. So, here's a starter: Women have the right to do what they want with their bodies, including exposing themselves in media, regardless of the effect on other women who are not forced to look in the first place! Zaphraud (talk) 02:56, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

• Not forced to look? In Western culture there is no escape from media. Within a few years of television premiering in Fiji, eating disorder rates skyrocketed--among a culture where thickness was praised! 24.74.141.22 (talk) 03:50, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

The above comment is incorrect. The Becker article in question, which the above comment is referencing, found inconsistent results at best. It was nonetheless "sold" as if an indictment of Western media. In fact weight among women in Fiji didn't change after the introduction of Western media, nor did evidence of anorexia symptoms. We must be careful to recognize where the rhetoric surrounding some studies does not match the actual data in those studies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.46.56.73 (talk) 02:47, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Misogynist bias! Plus, merge?

This article is blatantly sexist. "women tried to imitate these figures just as children do." Really? The whole thing needs a total rewrite. In fact, I'm not even sure this subject warrants an article. Feminist perspectives on eating disorders... a better, balanced, accurate version could be merged into the article Third-wave feminism. I propose deleting this article. 24.74.141.22 (talk) 03:50, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree. The article is about the book, but is written as if it is about the subject of the book. Delete it or change it completely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.230.232.60 (talk) 10:11, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

New Look

I see in the article that the "Campaign for Real Beauty" is posted. Dove has helped show the views of a "natural" woman, but they aren't alone. Recently, Glamour Magazine's August 2009 issue had photos of Lizzi Miller, a plus-sized model. Just wondering why she wasn't mentioned, or the magazine. It's starting to view "thicker" women as well... Here is the source I used: http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/32538061/ns/today-today_fashion_and_beauty/ Kkscarbro (talk) 19:06, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Feminist Perspectives on Eating Disorders. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/65q5xHqLw?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tamiu.edu%2F%7Ecferguson%2FWho%2520Is%2520the%2520Fairest.pdf to http://www.tamiu.edu/~cferguson/Who%20Is%20the%20Fairest.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:46, 30 December 2016 (UTC)