But the BASA has decided not to pull the ad. Interesting considering they have pulled a whole series of things over the past year and a half - such as the Ann Summers radio advert for Halloween, Dolce and Gabbana's advert with knives and the Beyonce advert for her perfume. The one where she has an orgasm in the bathroom to the sound of her own voice.
As you do.
It's an interesting debate and one that never dies. The thin girl in fashion. I remember reading a piece in 'Fashion Babylon' about why thin girls are mainly used for fashion shows/adverts. Because fashion is about fantasy. A projection. They present a girl which we yearn to be. Rich, well dressed, well made up, gorgeous - and thin. They argued that no one wants to be a size 16. I'm not saying I agree with it, I mean, Marilyn Monroe was a size 16 and she was gorgeous! There are plenty of women who are plus size and fantastic for it. But I do understand the logic behind it. (again before I get shot, I'm not saying I agree!)
They go on to explain why sample sizes are also small. In that it costs a designer twice as much to make a garment in a size 16 as it does a size 8. They cannot pass this cost onto the customer. (think of the outrage if that happened) so if there is a chance that the garment may not be picked up by a buyer/stylist and therefore popped into a store/photoshoot - they make it in a small size to keep costs down.
ANYWAY! Gonna wrap up the size debate because it's not something I want to get into. It will rock on for quite sometime. The long and short of it as far as I'm concerned is this - your fantastic no matter what size you are. So work it!
This is what the BASA had to say on the matter at hand : (The Miu Miu campaign - not my views)
The ASA noted that the model in the ad was slim, and that the lighting effects, make-up and low-cut dress emphasised her body shape. However, we considered that the ad was typical of those used for fashion products and that the model did not look significantly underweight. We therefore concluded that the ad was not irresponsible.’