The first article is named "FAT". It relates the use of photoshopping, see photos in article, that change the way people look at what is supposed to be beautiful. A model was fired for being too fat, and one of her last photos was photoshopped to the point she looked alien.
At that point, I suspect, we can at least agree it is not art.
Yes, those would be the Ralph Lauren models dianavilliers
referred to in her post.
(I wondered what your point was because posting a link to a blog is always risky -- blogger might have updated between the time you post and the time your intended audience reads. Always better to link to the post.)
I'm still trying to figure out a lot of the tech stuff. I'm a writer, not a computer geek. But dianavilliers has a very valid point that ought not need to be made. we ought to realize real women do not look like models, and models are not real women. They're painted, photographed, and perhaps there is some artistic value in what is being done, but there is no way your average everyday teenager girl is going to look like that except on a computer, no matter whose clothes she's wearing. I think it's a terrible thing that's being done, but as long as there's money in it...
Hey, I'm an electrical worker and recovering computer geek. ;)
And I agree that in an ideal world we wouldn't need to make the point that these images are warped beyond reality, but while the point does need to be made, I think we should keep making it.
In other words, I think we're in violent agreement. :)
I'm working the graveyard shift these days. I'm not quite certain if the things I'm writing make sense to other people. I'm fairly certain I'm still entertaining. If in no other sense, teh same way a slow train wreck is.