I was watching a news segment on M&J this morning that was about Kim Kardashian and her retouched photos for Complex magazine. The website that once featured an untouched photo, has replaced it with a photo with lightened,smooth thighs,slimmer arm,and lightened face. On her blog she claims that she is proud of her body and embraces her curves. Why retouch what you already feel is beautiful already? Why airbrush-away a body that has made countless lists for best/hottest body?
Photoshopping is the norm for celebrities featured through-out any magazine these days.It seems as though natural,human beauty. . .flaws and all are no longer deemed acceptable. Some may argue that photo retouching gives photos a finished look.It has been in existence since the creation of photography itself. I find that retouching. . . photo manipulation assist in the deterioration of self-esteems(especially in females) across America. When we have figures,like Kim that are never shown in their human state,we perpetuate standards for beauty that are impossible to attain. Magazines need to feature more realistic images of beauty. I wonder if models and celebrities had a choice to retouch their photos or not,what would they choose. I know that looking up at that picture of Kim, I see a beautiful woman in both pictures. . .and I'm pretty sure there are many that agree. Perhaps we all need to take a step in pursuit of the mass publication of beauty in its natural state.
That is a good point but if I had photos of me on a magazine, espicially being a celeberty where my image was the sole income of my money. I would photoshop and airbrush my photos. However if I was known for writing or a talent that was beyond my image I would promote the fact that my pictures were not airbrushed.
ReplyDelete