Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

Banning Underweight Models -- a jumping off point for a broader discussion

124»

Replies

  • BinaryPulsar
    BinaryPulsar Posts: 8,927 Member
    aylajane wrote: »
    Also just to add. Anorexia means under weight. If a person has a BMI of 17.5 they are diagnosed with Anorexia. That doesn't mean they have the eating disorder Anorexia Nervosa. There could be other reasons or other medical issues causing it. 17.5 is just the diagnostic criteria for when a person is actually considered to be at the upper end of underweight. Not 18, 17.9, or 18.5 (those numbers are based on population averages). But, being underweight varies per person.

    No, anorexia does not mean underweight. You can be anorexic and be obese. The definition is "an emotional disorder characterized by an obsessive desire to lose weight by refusing to eat". A 300 pound person can become anorexic and lose 100 pounds in 3 months but is still obese. Eventually, over time, continuing anorexia can lead to being underweight, but it is not equivalent.

    I think it's technically called ednos (eating disorder not otherwise specified) until you reach 17.5 or at least it was when I was diagnosed.

    Yeah. Also sorry for the confusion.

    Anorexia is the medical term for underweight.

    Anorexia Nervosa is the eating disorder.

    But, we all just call the eating disorder Anorexia. Which is fine. But, I was saying that the term Anorexia can be applied in a medical context even when a person doesn't have an eating disorder. That's why side effects sometimes list Anorexia. They mean excessive weight loss, not that it causes the person to have an eating disorder. Sometimes Anorexia also applies to loss of appetite. It doesn't matter. I was just saying that Anorexia can mean different things in different contexts.

    Definitely people can have an eating disorder at any weight. That wasn't what I was saying. Just wanted to clarify. Sorry for the confusion.
  • chocolate_owl
    chocolate_owl Posts: 1,695 Member
    aylajane wrote: »
    Also just to add. Anorexia means under weight. If a person has a BMI of 17.5 they are diagnosed with Anorexia. That doesn't mean they have the eating disorder Anorexia Nervosa. There could be other reasons or other medical issues causing it. 17.5 is just the diagnostic criteria for when a person is actually considered to be at the upper end of underweight. Not 18, 17.9, or 18.5 (those numbers are based on population averages). But, being underweight varies per person.

    No, anorexia does not mean underweight. You can be anorexic and be obese. The definition is "an emotional disorder characterized by an obsessive desire to lose weight by refusing to eat". A 300 pound person can become anorexic and lose 100 pounds in 3 months but is still obese. Eventually, over time, continuing anorexia can lead to being underweight, but it is not equivalent.

    I think it's technically called ednos (eating disorder not otherwise specified) until you reach 17.5 or at least it was when I was diagnosed.

    To clear all this up: anorexia nervosa is the eating disorder. There used to be weight requirements (BMI under 17.5 or body weight of less than 85% of expected healthy weight) for diagnosis under the ICD-10 and DSM-IV, but I believe the DSM-V focuses on significantly low body weight in the context of the person's condition prior to disordered eating.

    Anorexia (not anorexia nervosa) means a prolonged loss of appetite, and it is linked to other medical conditions like anorexia nervosa, anxiety, cancer, etc. It is considered a symptom of another illness and has nothing to do with BMI.
  • singingflutelady
    singingflutelady Posts: 8,736 Member
    aylajane wrote: »
    Also just to add. Anorexia means under weight. If a person has a BMI of 17.5 they are diagnosed with Anorexia. That doesn't mean they have the eating disorder Anorexia Nervosa. There could be other reasons or other medical issues causing it. 17.5 is just the diagnostic criteria for when a person is actually considered to be at the upper end of underweight. Not 18, 17.9, or 18.5 (those numbers are based on population averages). But, being underweight varies per person.

    No, anorexia does not mean underweight. You can be anorexic and be obese. The definition is "an emotional disorder characterized by an obsessive desire to lose weight by refusing to eat". A 300 pound person can become anorexic and lose 100 pounds in 3 months but is still obese. Eventually, over time, continuing anorexia can lead to being underweight, but it is not equivalent.

    I think it's technically called ednos (eating disorder not otherwise specified) until you reach 17.5 or at least it was when I was diagnosed.

    To clear all this up: anorexia nervosa is the eating disorder. There used to be weight requirements (BMI under 17.5 or body weight of less than 85% of expected healthy weight) for diagnosis under the ICD-10 and DSM-IV, but I believe the DSM-V focuses on significantly low body weight in the context of the person's condition prior to disordered eating.

    Anorexia (not anorexia nervosa) means a prolonged loss of appetite, and it is linked to other medical conditions like anorexia nervosa, anxiety, cancer, etc. It is considered a symptom of another illness and has nothing to do with BMI.

    I do know this, just was referring to the person saying you can be obese with the disorder anorexic when technically it would be called ednos not anorexia.

    I have had both anorexia nervosa and anorexia (not at the same time). I sometimes have anorexia from my crohn's.
  • robininfl wrote: »
    Lucy221 wrote: »
    Been given a business card by a model talent spotter in Leeds yesterday and asked if I had considered plus size modelling.....

    As a UK12 dress size (sometimes a 14 for fitted items - damned boobs!) would you take it as an insult or compliment??

    I think the problem with models and all 'body types' is the labelling we give people.

    I'd take it as a sales pitch, frankly. Mostly when those guys give you cards they are trying to get $ from you, not for you. Tread carefully, check the agency online. If they ask you for hundreds for a portfolio, or want you to pay for training, that's a scam.
    robininfl wrote: »
    Lucy221 wrote: »
    Been given a business card by a model talent spotter in Leeds yesterday and asked if I had considered plus size modelling.....

    As a UK12 dress size (sometimes a 14 for fitted items - damned boobs!) would you take it as an insult or compliment??

    I think the problem with models and all 'body types' is the labelling we give people.

    I'd take it as a sales pitch, frankly. Mostly when those guys give you cards they are trying to get $ from you, not for you. Tread carefully, check the agency online. If they ask you for hundreds for a portfolio, or want you to pay for training, that's a scam.

    To be fair, all big agencies do use model scouts to look for teenage girls who fit the ideal so it very well could be legit. When I was 16 I got scouted by one of the big ones but in the end they decided I wasn't 'small' enough (Kate Moss had just got famous and I didn't look waifish enough because boobs etc.) To be honest I think I dodged a bullet - the experience of being scrutinized from every angle and having every part of me measured (even my ankles) was not enjoyable.
  • BoxerBrawler
    BoxerBrawler Posts: 2,032 Member
    If underweight models are banned, than overweight models should be banned as well.

    Actually I think the whole thing is ridiculous for a few reasons.

    One, each individual person is responsible for his or herself. If I want to be an underweight model, or an overweight model, that's my business and no one else is responsible for my health or my well being. Sure... people can suggest professional help but you can only lead a horse to water.

    Second, the whole plus size model thing and the marketing of "It's okay to be obese as long as you love yourself". Okay, yeah... love the skin you're in but let's not say it's OK to be unhealthy and yeah, I've heard the argument that just because someone is overweight doesn't mean they are unhealthy... well, yes it does. Sorry, if someone is obese than all of their organs are straining under the extra weight and so on... Same as if someone is underweight, the body and organs are struggling to keep whatever little nutrition or energy it has.

    Third, After struggling for several years, after working my ever-loving *kitten* off, after training so hard that I've thrown up, after fighting so hard that I've passed out, after going through all of the emotions, struggles and hard ships of not only losing weight but building muscle and then maintaining it through strict nutrition and many sacrifices... I feel completely disrespected at the suggestion of banning someone because they are underweight.

    I am not pro-anorexia so please don't assume my words above imply that. But I've worked too hard to have things swing in the other direction now! If it were really OK to be plus sized, obese, over-weight, just plain fat, than this application wouldn't have millions of users struggling to lose weight and get healthy.

    That's my rant. Feel free to rip it apart.
  • 4legsRbetterthan2
    4legsRbetterthan2 Posts: 19,590 MFP Moderator
    This is an interesting topic.

    My first question: Who is the doctor who determines this? Will he be paid off by the modeling agencies. Do the models have to provide their own doctors note. Will he be hired by the government to oversee this?

    another thought: In non modeling careers it is supposedly illegal to discriminate based on weight. How does that apply to modeling? Discrimination based on appearance is intrinsic to the job, you are hired based on how you look. But saying you have to be at whatever weight for a "good reason" basically furthers it. How is supporting regulation of models weight any different than regulating weight in any other job? Because they are seen more?
  • kaylinhnguyen
    kaylinhnguyen Posts: 9 Member
    Personally, I have always been under weight, and still very healthy. My weight is only low, because of my family's genetics, and would be pretty pissed if I was fired because of my weight.
  • kaylinhnguyen
    kaylinhnguyen Posts: 9 Member
    But there is a fine line between my condition and unhealthily skinny
  • jak2772
    jak2772 Posts: 5 Member
    Isnt this weight discrimination? can't ban underweight models and allow overweight models... (just because fatties gonna fat)