Thursday, April 26, 2012

Kate Winslett's Legs


Kate Winslett doesn’t look like this
 GQ's Kate Winslet photoshoot
and she’s not afraid to say so:

“I do not look like that and more importantly I don't desire to look like that. 
I am proud, you know.” 


The editorial staff of the British edition of GQ back in 2003 decided that she didn’t look quite right enough for their cover so they took to  Photoshop and got to work.  By the time that they were finished, Ms. Winslettt was considerably thinner…..smaller….less womanly.  It’s a beautiful picture, it’s just not Kate Winslettt.

Titanic’s been re-released, and that must be why this story about her body gracing GQ’s cover has been all over Facebook of late.  I remember watching the movie with Little Cuter and her girlfriends, over and over and over again.  Kate gets naked and Leo draws her and her curves are lying there on the couch, Rubenesque in their fleshy wonderfulness.  For the first time in a long time, I didn’t need to interrupt their viewing with a muttered screed on how unhealthy, how very very thin and very very unreal the leading actress looked.  Kate Winslettt was a real person in the real world and she embraced it, proudly and loudly, both then and now.

She’s not overweight.  She’s not obese.  She’s normal.  Her legs have been holding her up for all of her 30-some years; if they are larger than the gams which graced the dreams of the editorial staff of Britain’s GQ that’s their problem, not hers.

I love it when a star steps to the stage and takes on her own image.  Carefully cultivated and curated, images often bear no resemblance at all to the actual human they (theoretically) represent.  Those horrible star on the way to the grocery store sans make-up photos prove it.  They are news the way the fact that I went to the store with my shirt on inside out last week is news. Honestly, who cares?

The brouhaha over Hilary Clinton’s hair and pantsuits made me nutty.  Did anyone consider that John McCain’s collars were unflattering to his facial structure?  Who cuts Mitt Romney’s hair, and how does it stay in place so well?  Is any of it important?

Not to me.


3 comments:

  1. Being that I use Photoshop every day, I find it quite annoying when people go overboard on changing someone's appearance. It's supposed to be flattering, not make the person look like a freak of nature. I was on the Victoria Secret's web site the other day and I was just gobsmacked with how much they had retouched the models. Some of their arms look really disgusting--they have made them so thin that they literally look like twigs on women with big boobs.

    I've always loved how Kate Winslet looks. She is absolutely gorgeous and a good role model for young women. She's confident and beautiful.

    Shame on GQ for changing her so much. I'm glad some of these women are speaking out about how they are being over-photoshopped. It gives young women the wrong impression on how people should look.

    And don't get me started on the double-standard for men...


    Megan xxx

    ReplyDelete
  2. The Photoshop response was awesome... it's a tool and don't blame us if editors get carried away.

    Skinny arms and legs... how can we raise fit girls if this is what they see all over....
    a/b

    ReplyDelete
  3. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete

Talk back to me! Word Verification is gone!

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails
 
Five Star Friday