America Ferrera gets glamourizedRemember when Redbook photoshopped Faith Hill from elbow to earlobe into a physical impossibility? You might have already seen the latest victim of such tinkering, America Ferrera, in images circulating the web. If you haven't, hold onto your eyeballs, because the photo-chopping you're about to see transformed another beautiful body into such an awkwardly proportioned mess that the end result looks like somebody's mischievous five-year-old was swapping heads around on cardboard cutouts. The irony of this situation is screaming from every airbrushed corner of the cover of Glamour's "1st Annual Figure Flattery Issue." Didn't the Ugly Betty pilot offer a little commentary about this very thing? Have you ever even seen the show, Glamour? So here we go. This is America Ferrera at the Teen Choice Awards on Aug. 26, 2007.
And this is America Ferrera as cover girl for Glamour's October issue: Words! I'm still trying to find the words. But the photos really do speak for themselves. Here's a side-by-side view for your comparing pleasure (well, withering scorn):
Besides the abnormally slenderized neck that gives her head the appearance of tottering more precariously than Britney Spears at the VMAs, what shrieks to be noticed is the way they've treated her "curves." Instead of reducing her to Faith Hill-in-Redbook proportions (and I am grateful for small mercies), they offer their own version of a "curvy" woman, paring down arms, shoulders and chest while leaving lumpy vestiges of hips, waist and bust. Just when you thought it couldn't get more ridiculous, here's the title of the Ferrera feature: "Surprise! She's a bombshell (and you can be one too)." (Surprise! That's insulting. But that's not really a surprise.) The opening paragraph — and I couldn't make this up — reads in part, "she's ignoring the unwritten rule that says stars must be blond and Twizzler-thin." You know, except for when a magazine highlights her hair, thins her down, and makes her look oddly like Mandy Moore. Am I the only one who sees it? Fine.
Look, I know that we're talking about Glamour magazine here, whose very name warns us that it's selling a remanufactured vision of beauty, femininity and the female body. But one reason people love Ugly Betty (besides its clever writing, campy fun and Salma Hayek) is that Betty Suarez quite literally embodies the struggle of being female in American society. It's not enough to personally reject the airbrushed version of the female form that Glamour sells, because we still have to live in a culture that daily questions (persecutes) women who don't conform to social expectations. The most repellent thing about Glamour's image manipulation is this: They co-opt the one pop culture image that constantly and humorously confronts the stereotypes of femininity that the magazine itself still perpetuates and try to sell it back to us, but only after making it conform to their standards. I'm not shocked by such shameless hypocrisy any more than I am by the fact that they photoshopped her image; both just make me sad. Even as the interview feebly tries to celebrate Ferrera as an oddity in the world of the blond and the underfed, holding her up as an outsider who can succeed despite the handicap of being, you know, normal, they've given us their real message right on the cover: Normal is still not good enough. Speaking of normal. When asked that question about being the "spokeswoman for curvy figures," Ferrera drops this little fact: "I'm a size 6 or 8, which is totally normal." (Less than normal, actually — normal American size is 12–14.) Guanabee.com's translation of this comment is, I think, the perfect response to Glamour: "Bitch, get some perspective." Here's mine: I prefer all real, all beautiful, all America.
Submitted by on September 14, 2007 - 9:01am. |
Recent blog posts
New forum topicsActive TopicsNew Comments
|





grrr...
Articles and magazine covers like this negate the wonderfully redeeming things about America Ferrera, and the character she plays.
Good work calling Galmour out, Apollo.
Also, the Mandy Moore comparison? Spot on. And kinda creepy.
Fake America?
WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Uh sorry but that picture of her on the left is not a fair picture of the now skinny America Ferrera. The dress makes her look bigger then what she now actually is. The Glamor picture is more true to what she looks like today even if it has been Frankenstein.
Ugly Betty is just a character that takes lots of makeup and padding to pull off. America whom I've met and have gotten her autograph is way more beautiful in person then Betty is on screen.
-Nathiest
Yeah, as much as that
Yeah, as much as that Glamour photo has been Photoshopped (and dear God, has it ever), if America really is a size 6/8, the Glamour photo (as well as the way she looks on Ugly Betty when they actually show her from the side) looks more like her size than the other photo, where she looks more like a 10/12. Maybe it's just the dress?
"Out of the box is where I live." -Starbuck
Ugh, I hate that magazine
Bring Back Sassy!
Photoshop or angles?
Although there are substantial differences between the photographs, I think that the positioning of her hair is more responsible for the oddly attenuated neck than photoshop. The bodice neckline, cinched waist, and flowing skirt of the purple dress also give the illusion of length (It was a deliberate choice, I'm sure, to have straps that create a lengthening V shape). The other dress has a structure that emphasizes her hips, and creates a broader shoulder.
I actually prefer the gray dress- I think that its tailoring is very flattering, and conveys a lot of confidence. If Glamour altered their photos, I can't say that I'm impressed, but I'm not shocked. However, I think that the alterations probably had more to do with skin texture (concealing any blemishes, for example), and slightly changing the arms. Otherwise, I think we're seeing a classic case of camera angles and deliberate apparel choice. I think that photoshop is an aide, not a cause.
Holy crapperdoodle...
that's just sucks. really
Its all about perspective...or is it perception?
Look at this picture with her, Jennifer Hudson, and Anika Noni Rose. If you saw this in a magazine, you might say it was airbrushed because they look proportionally much smaller!
http://www.imdb.com/gallery/granitz/5749/AnikaNoniR_Kambo_12416201_400.j...
But no-no-no, its all about angles and lighting! They all look about the same size as Anika - and she is tiny!
But really, what do you expect from magazines like those?!? They even airbrush size minus-zero models, come-on!
Troubling but...
I still love the magazine. They do have some good articles in it unlike Cosmo.I do miss Jane but that magazine didn't really cover a lot of major issues like Darfur,etc. It was more of a fun read then talking about serious issues.It did need work and I have heard a lot of bad things about it. I don't really think they took off more than an inch or two. That first photo of her seems to make her look bigger than what she probably is.Sometimes I think the public make America seem bigger than what she really is shape wise. It's the same way with Kate Winslet
"Life is either a daring adventure or nothing."-Helen Keller
I'm sorry,
but I was so busy looking at the hotness that is unphotoshopped America Ferrera that I missed the rest of this article.
SWOON.
"There is no formula. You learn to love by loving. "
Aldous Huxley
It's Cartoony
Glamour blows.
I am glad someone else recognized this America Ferrera nonsense in the magazine. I bought it thinking it would be interesting, and all they talked about was being "curvy". It was painful to read. I was hoping they might focus on her work, or her opinions about things other than weight, but alas, no. That line that says "she's ignoring the unwritten rule that says stars must be blond and Twizzler-thin." really rubbed me the wrong way. She's not intentionally ignoring any rule. Just because she's not blond and she eats doesn't make her some kind of anomaly.
Glamour's been making me very angry lately. They also love to fill up the magazine with articles encouraging you to quit smoking, and then throw in Camel advertisements between the articles. I sent them a nasty e-mail about it and they wrote back saying that it's perfectly legal to advertise cigarettes to adults, and if people want to smoke then it's their own choice. Kind of negates all their preaching about the horrors of tobacco.
Glamour is utterly ridiculous.