A commonly and vociferously launched feminist argument is that advertisements create an unrealistic expectation of what a woman’s body should look like. This is often portrayed as an attack on a woman’s psyche, unjustly demanding that they should all look like supermodels.

Ironically, in a world where advertisement manages to sway the masses to just about anything, including deciding who gets elected to public office, this is the one hot button topic where it is absolutely demanded that media control and impact is acknowledged. Feminists and white knights will frequently and enthusiastically proclaim that media influence over a woman’s body is excessive, not rooted in reality, and simply used to mislead and devalue them.

They are missing a key issue within their own claim. This is an issue that not physically or superficially devalues women, but rather exposes blatant frailty within their minds.

To accept and defend this stance, and most agree they do, is to openly say that women are actively and effectively being controlled by media. Furthermore, it states that they are not just controlled, but controlled to such a point that they will subject themselves to drastic measures like bulimia, anorexia, abuse of diet pills, and a number of other unhealthy trimming techniques.

To be clear, those disorders can be triggered in a number of psychological ways, but in this article we are focusing on their manifestation solely based on media assault feminists claim women to be under.

The lady will have the water salad.

The lady will have the water salad.

It goes without saying that a fit look can be achieved by alternative, healthier means, with equal or superior results, but such pesky logic has no place within feminist outrage. The focus is on the woman who is being told, by evil patriarchal media, that she needs to do these things.

This “control” and “forcing” is considered applicable to enough women that it warranted making it a mainstream SJW issue. The focus of the outrage is women who feel they are being manipulated by being subjected to images of women in better shape. The obvious fallacy at hand is the complete dismissal of the existence of women who actually do want to be, and are, healthier.

Perhaps even more perplexing is the dismissal of wanting to pursue a more physically active lifestyle for the sake of simply being healthier for one’s own sake. How many times have you overheard a 200+ lbs woman bashing “toothpick” women who only weigh in the low 100’s? There seems to be a mathematical disconnect in size perception, which has been reflected in choice of news anchors on various TV stations where dolled up “plus sized” personalities are becoming more and more common.

The new normal

Mens sana in corpore…….sano?

The far bigger point to be made lies within the feminist stance on this itself. If we accept their view one hundred percent and get on board defending these “victims” who subject themselves to all sort of physical malady because of very superficial media influence, then what exactly are we saying about these women? We are saying that not only are they controlled by the media, but also that they are controlled to such a severe degree that they will choose to drastically and negatively impact their own bodies and well-being because said media told them to.

This is not a minor point to consider and acknowledge, and can only exist if one of two scenarios is true. First, normal and healthy women are so easily swayed by media that they will ruin their own bodies and health. This suggests that their “normal” state is incredibly frail and subject to change on a whim. Second, they never possessed stable mental health in the first place, which is why when someone told them to ruin their health for the sake of mimicking a runway model, they eagerly obeyed.

“Jen was a perfectly normal, intelligent, sane young woman, until magazines and TV told her she has to resort to anorexic behavior, and she did.”


“Jen never was a free thinker in the first place, so naturally, when she realized runway models are skinnier than she is, she stopped eating for two weeks.”


The face of the oppressed

Those claiming this media oppression upon a woman’s body image need to be very careful when taking such a stance. What else in the media are women this strongly controlled by? How can one relatively minor example of media control be passionately held up for acknowledgement, without the realization that acknowledging this makes those in question absolute media acolytes or minions?

If you are blindly following orders to destroy your body and health, what other orders will you blindly follow and do follow? What does that say about your state of mind and how much of a voice should you be given in an adult conversation?

Can anyone claim that a group subject to body image messaging to the point of ruining their own health, would not be automatically suspect to exhibiting that same frailty of mind in other circumstances, like voting for one candidate over another, choosing how to spend money, or simply sanely interacting with other people?

Read More: #Freethenipple Is Another Example Of Female Narcissism And Armchair Activism

Send this to a friend