pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Getty images notice on retouching commercial images of models' body shapes  (Read 24599 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #75 on: September 28, 2017, 12:34 »
+2
Not retouching already thin women to look skeletal is a stranglehold on people's rights in a nanny state dictatorship which will inevitably lead to a communist dystopia...the mental gymnastics in this thread are hilarious.

Why do you make it only about women and thinning?

Justin Bieber wants his penis and hands enlarged, not thinned!
Same goes for women wanting their breasts enhanced. Again, it is much better to use Photoshop, than a scalpel to achieve such wishes.

The law is applicable to all, not only to what fits your ideological agenda.
Let people do it, even if you arrogantly think you know better what is good for them!

And instead of being obsessed with women having huge breasts, by either photoshop or surgery, why has it not occurred to you that perhaps society should accept that women have different breast sizes?

Yeah, maybe society should accept women with different breast sizes. And stars, like Justin Bieber, should also accept that men have different penis and hand sizes.

I'm all for it! I can even support a movement aiming to promote this ideal!
What I don't want is a government coercing beauty standards on its subjects.

Let people worship the god they like or the bodies they like!
« Last Edit: September 28, 2017, 12:40 by Zero Talent »


Shelma1

« Reply #76 on: September 28, 2017, 12:47 »
0
How do you know Justin Bieber wanted his body parts enlarged?

« Reply #77 on: September 28, 2017, 12:51 »
+1
How do you know Justin Bieber wanted his body parts enlarged?
Some hilarious stuff on this if you google how much is true I can't be bothered to try and find out

« Reply #78 on: September 28, 2017, 13:09 »
+2
...
« Last Edit: September 28, 2017, 13:14 by Zero Talent »

Shelma1

« Reply #79 on: September 28, 2017, 13:19 »
0
Oh....you mean there was negative publicity about it? Something Getty would rather avoid?

Brasilnut

  • Author Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock & Blog

« Reply #80 on: September 28, 2017, 13:35 »
+2
Must be a mutant protein shake he's taking to get those triceps.

« Reply #81 on: September 28, 2017, 13:38 »
+2
Oh....you mean there was negative publicity about it? Something Getty would rather avoid?

Negative publicity is a great tool to change opinions, behavior, preferences. It has been like this since dark ages. Our society has been shaped by the fear of negative publicity and by what others think of us.

See? There is no need for stupid laws and government involvement in such cases!

« Reply #82 on: September 28, 2017, 15:12 »
+4
I dont understand why all agencies dont add a simple sentence below ALL creative content that this file might be altered with photoshop. I mean the whole point of creative content is to be creative...if you want the real world, that is what editorial is for.

One country will let you increase boobs, muscles, eyes, lips and...hands...but you cant change the waisteline and the cheeks need to be realigned with lighting and make up, although it is easier to adjust in Photoshop.

Maybe another country will ban enhancing breasts, but doesnt acre about the waist. Another will not allow a change in haircolour...I mean where does it end. There are artist that photoshop lizard skin and fake tattos on a model. or remove tattos and piercings.

And the next stage will certainly be mixies of 3D render and photographs, the way it is being done in other themes (home interiors and jewelry)

Creative content is not only for fashion, it is used in all kinds of industries.

Seems a lot easier to just make it clear that all of it is creative and if a company needs something  unedited, well, go and book a custom shoot.

Limiting creativity doesnt solve the problem.

I am all for helping young girls develop a healthy view of their bodies, but like others have pointed out, obesity is the much bigger problem and affects everyone, not just girls.

I dont think you can solve the anorexia problem by banning photoshop.

Certainly well intentioned, but I dont see how you can change a cultural attitude this way.

The question is: why are customers preferring to buy products if they feature physically unhealthy or very, very extreme people? Where is the attraction of the body of a 10 year old with fake boobs?

Because if the customers wouldnt prefer to buy products if they are presented this way, the problem would solve itself.

StockPhotosArt.com

« Reply #83 on: September 28, 2017, 16:01 »
+1

I dont think you can solve the anorexia problem by banning photoshop.

Certainly well intentioned, but I dont see how you can change a cultural attitude this way.

Now I see why some people are having a hard time understanding the relevance of this decision... You think that the solution for the eating disorders is a one step process and not a strategy involving multiple decisions, actions and steps, of which this is only one of the measures!

You think that people behind this decision came up with an instantaneous and miraculous solution for this problem. Like, they were sitting around a table brainstorming and suddenly one snapped his fingers and proclaimed:

"I know how to eradicated eating disorders from allover the world for all eternity instantly! Ban photoshop manipulation of the bodies!"

And the crowd went nuts with this divine solution and immediately cancelled all education programs, banned Body Mass Indexes from all medical books, closed clinics and in an unexpected twist hunger on planet Earth was also cured!

Actually... I'm pretty sure things didn't happened that way... This measure is only one among hundreds of others with the same objective.

What is different is that since this decision affects some of the people here they are not happy.

Just like website owners of sites that teach people how to starve to death also get bummed when their sites are closed. I can even envision the main anorexia forum with webmasters complaining that anorexia won't disappear by closing their sites and that people starve because of a cultural attitude...

Shelma1

« Reply #84 on: September 28, 2017, 16:08 »
+2
"The customers" are influenced by their culture, and if fashion designers demand dangerously thin women so their clothes will hang better, and those images are everywhere, "the customers" will get used to seeing that and absorb it as being the normal standard of "beauty."

That leads to all sorts of women, not just models, struggling to reach an impossibe standard. Photoshopping extremely thin women to make them look even more thinbasically, physically impossible womensets impressionable young girls and women up to try to starve themselves in order to look like the images they see.

If you think fashion designers have no influence on culture, just remember the huge shoulder pads and sweat bands of the 80's. Or the ankle-spraining platform shoes and psychedelic tie-dye of the 70's. Or the fact that businesswomen today teeter on stiletto heels that used to be sold only to "dancers" in Frederick's of Hollywood catalogs, but have somehow (hmmm, I wonder how) become de riguer accessories for women who are old enough to know better...but are still caught up in the influence of their culture.


« Reply #85 on: September 28, 2017, 21:02 »
+3
You are all saying people are totally stupid idiots and cannot make decisions and need a nanny to look after them.

I would be genuinely interested why so many customers prefer to buy clothes if they are presented on childrens bodies. Why is that so attractive and makes them spend more money?

Get to the bottom of the problem.

There must be a reason why it works so well.

Nobody would advertise with bodies that stop customers from buying their products.

And I am not convinced customers are braindead lemmings.

It certainly isnt stopping the obesity epidemic and that affects millions of people in France. It is a genuine killer disease, destroys families, careers and costs billions in health care.

It is their country, but to ban photoshop and stop creative content from being creative content just doesnt make sense, especially because how on earth are you going to police this?

Creative content is not the real world. People also understand movies are not the real world. Nor are computer games the real world. Watching a horror movie doesnt turn people into mass killer machines when they leave the cinema, computer games dont make us evil in real life. All through the eighties this myth was drummed into us, but computer games are still here in all their violent gory.

This is the same thing, people believing that the real world is run by a fantasy. It just doesnt work that way.

People with anorexia have a very, very serious illness, they look at themselves and their brain makes them feel they are fat. They have their own online forums and groups where they compete with each other and just show horrifying images of themselves, but their peers keep telling them how fat they are.

I had a friend with the problem, so I followed the subject a bit. I really didnt have the impression that reading magazines made any difference. At some point it started, she connected online with others. She finally got out of it, with family therapy (her family was quite supportive), personal therapy and some medication.


If the fashion houses all start advertising with Beth Ditto, do you seriously believe anorexia will disappear from this world?


So for me there is anorexia the disease, which is a mix of very, very personal problems and certainly a biological component.


And there is the question why all kinds of normal people, including obese people, apparently prefer to buy clothes if they are presented on a childs body.




And finally: why is the fashion world not having any effect on the obesity epidemic?




« Last Edit: September 28, 2017, 21:05 by cobalt »

« Reply #86 on: September 28, 2017, 21:40 »
+1
Well said, Cobalt.

You are all saying people are totally stupid idiots and cannot make decisions and need a nanny to look after them.

One more thing, they are not only assuming that "the public" is made out of a bunch of morons, they also imply that they are superior.
They know better.
And those ignorant "lemmings" must be coerced to obey for their own good and they must be educated to like only what the officials want them to like.

Nice! Heard that before. I take a knee.
« Last Edit: September 28, 2017, 22:08 by Zero Talent »

« Reply #87 on: September 28, 2017, 22:22 »
+1
"One more thing, they are not only assuming that "the public" is made out of a bunch of morons, they also imply that they are superior.
They know better."

Very good point. Yes, indeed, they are superior and can see the truth but those poor helpless dumblings are blind followers of whatever fashion houses tell them.

So both need to be controlled, the fashion houses, the photographers, the models and the poor dumb lemmings.

Anorexia is a very serious illness that needs a lot of research by professionals.

Overall awareness how girls are systematically discouraged from developing their self esteem, why they dumb down to not stand out...all of that absolutely needs very critical attention.

But photoshop use on stock sites will not change how parents raise their daughters. And that is where you need to start.

« Last Edit: September 28, 2017, 22:27 by cobalt »

StockPhotosArt.com

« Reply #88 on: September 29, 2017, 01:00 »
+2
You are all saying people are totally stupid idiots and cannot make decisions and need a nanny to look after them.

Yes!!! The people this law intends to protect are totally "idiots"! Yes, they cannot make decisions! Yes, they need a nanny! They are called CHILDREN, TEENAGERS AND YOUNG ADULTS!!!


Is this that f*unking hard to get into your thick skulls?!

And sorry by the terms, but are you people so stupid and dumb that are completely clueless about the power of images?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Really, in this forum people are so outrageously ignorant that haven't realized that images affect and even help change society?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Really?!

Haven't you noticed how children books, and teenagers magazines and covered with images? Isn't that a sign of the power of visual communication? People, images are one of the most powerful tools of propaganda and World Wars were brewed using them!

It's because clueless (or selfish and greedy for a buck) people like you that these laws are created. People without the slightest common sense that force the state to be a nanny. You don't like nanny states? Then grown a conscience and an ethic so others won't have laws imposed about everything.

You people are the reason nanny states grow in power.  Stop playing the naive and caring role, because the last things that's in your minds is the welfare of others. You are simply bothered because someone messed with your photoshop workflow. Cry me a river...

And again, in case you have trouble processing this mind blowing idea:

Yes!!! The people this law intends to protect are totally "idiots"! Yes, they cannot make decisions! Yes, they need a nanny! They are called CHILDREN, TEENAGERS AND YOUNG ADULTS!!!
« Last Edit: September 29, 2017, 01:40 by StockPhotosArt »

Yuri_Arcurs

  • One Crazy PhotoManic MadPerson
« Reply #89 on: September 29, 2017, 02:42 »
+2
You are all saying people are totally stupid idiots and cannot make decisions and need a nanny to look after them.

Yes!!! The people this law intends to protect are totally "idiots"! Yes, they cannot make decisions! Yes, they need a nanny! They are called CHILDREN, TEENAGERS AND YOUNG ADULTS!!!


Is this that f*unking hard to get into your thick skulls?!

And sorry by the terms, but are you people so stupid and dumb that are completely clueless about the power of images?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Really, in this forum people are so outrageously ignorant that haven't realized that images affect and even help change society?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Really?!

Haven't you noticed how children books, and teenagers magazines and covered with images? Isn't that a sign of the power of visual communication? People, images are one of the most powerful tools of propaganda and World Wars were brewed using them!

It's because clueless (or selfish and greedy for a buck) people like you that these laws are created. People without the slightest common sense that force the state to be a nanny. You don't like nanny states? Then grown a conscience and an ethic so others won't have laws imposed about everything.

You people are the reason nanny states grow in power.  Stop playing the naive and caring role, because the last things that's in your minds is the welfare of others. You are simply bothered because someone messed with your photoshop workflow. Cry me a river...

And again, in case you have trouble processing this mind blowing idea:

Yes!!! The people this law intends to protect are totally "idiots"! Yes, they cannot make decisions! Yes, they need a nanny! They are called CHILDREN, TEENAGERS AND YOUNG ADULTS!!!

StockPhotosArt. Your intentions are obviously novel. You want to protect the impressionable youngsters of our communities from the unnecessary harm of having to live up to ever increasing standards of beauty and thin-ness.

I disagree strongly with the way you are writing your reply. Your all caps, red bold text, suggests that you claim some kind of moral high ground compared to the rest of this thread. Discussion is healthy StockPhotosArt! Even if you disagree. In fact the way you write strongly resembles the kind of hate speech that the European Union will now demand that social media sites police and ban. So ironically, you seem to have fallen victim to the no-goes of the very same political correctness movement you seem to support so dearly.

The newly elected French government has another 3.5 years or so to find out that banning liquifying will not make the children, teenagers and young adults feel better about themselves. In fact. I am pretty sure the opposite will be the case. Before this ban on liquifying, the children, teenagers and young adults all knew that what they saw on posters and billboards, was most likely retouched. Now however, they have a legal guarantee that the beautiful and thin models actually look like that. This ban on liquifying wont make big commercials suddenly change the kind of models they use, so they look more real. It will have the opposite effect. They will start booking models that look good enough, so that no liquifying is needed and thus avoid the label this image has been retouched. Like if a tobacco company could spend a little extra, and avoid the this product causes cancer label. Do you not think they would do so?

This ban, will make the very people we are trying to protect feel even worse about themselves, and it will make an already unhealthy model industry even more unhealthy. The intentions are good, and despite the differences in opinion in this thread, I think we all agree that it is a good thing to cause as little harm to our children, teenagers and young adults as we can. It is the solution that is the problem.

StockPhotosArt.com

« Reply #90 on: September 29, 2017, 02:44 »
0
they also imply that they are superior.
They know better.

I'm not implying being superior or to know better.

What I am certain is that unlike some people in this discussion, who try to manipulate and dismiss FACTS to fit their egotistic agenda, I try to take into consideration actual facts that any person with half-brain knows to be a FACT.

Things like:
- the incredible power that images have in our society,
- how easily young people are influenced and how easily they take life threatening risks just to conform to what is presented to them as cool.

So, it's not me who's implying to be superior, It's you who's playing dumb, narrow minded and totally clueless.

Well, from your point of view, I guess that someone stating OBVIOUS facts that even the most illiterate person recognize as an evidence, may sound to you as arrogant...

Plus some argue with the obesity problem (which I completely agree). Do you actually believe that presenting impossible bodies, who will make anyone trying to accomplish that look fail, a good strategy to fight obesity? Is presenting impossible objectives a good way to motivate anyone?

What is more motivating for people to lose weight? A healthy natural slim girl with a 1.65m height and 50/53kg, or a photoshoped female skeleton with 1.65m tall and looking 40/43kg?

Obesity is another discussion, and in absolutely no way starting to promote natural slim bodies without photoshop manipulation will be looked as an excuse for obesity. Only in your distorted minds that happens.

« Last Edit: September 29, 2017, 02:54 by StockPhotosArt »

StockPhotosArt.com

« Reply #91 on: September 29, 2017, 02:51 »
0

StockPhotosArt. Your intentions are obviously novel. You want to protect the impressionable youngsters of our communities from the unnecessary harm of having to live up to ever increasing standards of beauty and thin-ness.

I disagree strongly with the way you are writing your reply. Your all caps, red bold text, suggests that you claim some kind of moral high ground compared to the rest of this thread. Discussion is healthy StockPhotosArt! Even if you disagree. In fact the way you write strongly resembles the kind of hate speech that the European Union will now demand that social media sites police and ban. So ironically, you seem to have fallen victim to the no-goes of the very same political correctness movement you seem to support so dearly.

Well sue me for being angry with all the BS and nonsense being written in this discussion, and feel the need to express it.

Or will the anti-nanny state people feel offended that others express emotions with their opinions and try to pass a law to ban that? LOL

And I'm not supporting political correctness views. I'm expressing evidences that even illiterate people know as a reality of life.

EDIT: As for the rest. I totally disagree. This measure about photoshop is only a part of a more complex solution. But somehow, people here seem to think that the manipulation ban is looked as the miraculous and sole strategy to solve the problem. It's not. It's only a small part. The only reason people are upset it's because it affects them.
« Last Edit: September 29, 2017, 03:03 by StockPhotosArt »


« Reply #92 on: September 29, 2017, 03:45 »
0
I grew up in a communist country. This whole thing straightforward reminds me of what the commies did to art and portrayal of people in art and commerce. It was the proletariat, the "workers paradise" so on almost all depiction, especially public statues and painting, they hand to be these chunky, robust characters with cubic heads and large thick hands, women having the same large thick hands as men. Sad to see the total cluelessness to the point of mental degeneration in western ppl, probably coming from near zero history education, not noticing what their culture is sliding into ever more rapidly. It will be sad, bleak and painful, believe me.

Despite this incredible lack of education & knowledge about humanity's history, I still don't see why it is so hard recognize the severe threat when you such ideologies rapidly invading every field of life, flooding everything with dictates. When you see that either push back as hard as you can, or if you can't.... run!

I'll have what you're smoking!

12yaerold's copy paste answer.  "Am I cool yet? Am I cool yet?" This isn't youtube.

I'll have you know, I typed that all out myself; thank you very much. I'm just curious how Getty Images no longer accepting retouched body shapes, and people's comments on the situation... is down to 'total cluelessness to the point of mental degeneration', 'near zero history education' and an 'incredible lack of education & knowledge about humanity's history'? That's maybe a little bit extreme!

No it's not, your are clueless. Take your time to listen to this, not that long:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xss0vC3mRfE

If you don't see the connection with the discussion here (which is trivial to be honest), than obviously we have nothing to talk about.

« Reply #93 on: September 29, 2017, 03:51 »
+1
Not retouching already thin women to look skeletal is a stranglehold on people's rights in a nanny state dictatorship which will inevitably lead to a communist dystopia...the mental gymnastics in this thread are hilarious.

Nobody is retouching thin women to skeletal, this only exists in your mind. If you go around to look for icons of sexyness making living almost exclusively from their bodyshape, +being superstars known the world over, the prime example would be Victoria Secret girls. They all look like pictures of health, like moderately-highly trained athletes, they are basically fitness models. If that's not good enough for you, the problem is with you.

« Reply #94 on: September 29, 2017, 04:33 »
+2
And instead of being obsessed with women having huge breasts, by either photoshop or surgery, why has it not occurred to you that perhaps society should accept that women have different breast sizes?


since when society does not accept and adore women with all kind of breasts? One of the dumbest prole myths ever. Why do people like you come full out lying full throttle about things you can check on the net / IRL? Once again a thing that only exists in your skewed mind. Men's taste are so varied that you can literally build a business on running porn/sex sites that caters specifically to admirers of very thin girls, one that caters specifically to admirers of voluptuous girls, one that caters specifically to admirers of fat girls. They are all out there, so quit your nonsense. There is no point lying about stuff that the world contradicts in 0.0001 sec if you check. 

On IRL stuff, I have 3 best selling models. One is an italian looking, tiny (about 150 cm), voluptuous-type girl, she is slender but has a really big butt, strong cleavage (not huge breasts at all, just nice), and amazing sweet face with a million dollar smile. Second one is the exact model type, tall, very long legged, not flat chested but has smallish breasts, looks athletic, if she lost a bit more weight she would look "shredded". Third is also small like the first one, but she is also athletic, tiny breasts on tiny body. The only reason she doesn't look really fragile is because she works out and she has muscles. Do you know what they have in common? Men of all shapes and sizes and status adore them. They literally have 100+ of men to choose from that would drop everything and run to date them at a moments notice, they are often telling me some of the stories. One of them got hit on by yoshi form japanx. Other one has been courted for months now by the son of a billionaire winemaker, the guy looks and lives like james bond... just to know, we are not talking about your usual desperate men who would fk anything that moves. How does that fit into your tiny world of supposed huge-breast obsession?

The women you talk about get the huge breasts for other women, not for men, to make them envious. That's how they compete with each other because they are the type of women who have nothing else to compete with. As for the section of men who do like those huge breasts: it's not even about sex, they have mommy complexes. They want to suckle and feel secure :D

StockPhotosArt.com

« Reply #95 on: September 29, 2017, 04:35 »
0
Not retouching already thin women to look skeletal is a stranglehold on people's rights in a nanny state dictatorship which will inevitably lead to a communist dystopia...the mental gymnastics in this thread are hilarious.

Nobody is retouching thin women to skeletal, this only exists in your mind. If you go around to look for icons of sexyness making living almost exclusively from their bodyshape, +being superstars known the world over, the prime example would be Victoria Secret girls. They all look like pictures of health, like moderately-highly trained athletes, they are basically fitness models. If that's not good enough for you, the problem is with you.

If you look at the standard runway shows, Victoria Secret models would be considered overweight! They do not represent the beauty standard of the industry. And that's why they are so popular among men. Because the fashion industry does not look for Victoria Secret girl types, but for the unhealthy type.

Lingerie models are a group apart from the standard fashion models, because there's a preference for girls with boobs, hips, legs and booty to show when they are barely covered.

My friend who was a model in one of the most famous agencies in the world (operating in my country) had a Victoria Secret type of body and she was asked to drop a huge amount of weight (to near 40kg) because they did not think she was thin enough! She would become a corpse.

And she was already making commercials centered around her on a very big brand in prime-time tv commercials.

Despite she had 17/18 years old at the time she was structured enough to say no and abandon her career and continue with her university studies. But how many have the courage to do it especially if there's no plan B?

The only reason laws are created it's because some people think we live in the Far-West where anyone can do what pleases him without explanation. When the lines start to get crossed, then it's the duty of the state to intervene. Especially when we talk about younger people.
« Last Edit: September 29, 2017, 04:47 by StockPhotosArt »

StockPhotosArt.com

« Reply #96 on: September 29, 2017, 04:45 »
0
And instead of being obsessed with women having huge breasts, by either photoshop or surgery, why has it not occurred to you that perhaps society should accept that women have different breast sizes?


since when society does not accept and adore women with all kind of breasts? One of the dumbest prole myths ever. Why do people like you come full out lying full throttle about things you can check on the net / IRL? Once again a thing that only exists in your skewed mind. Men's taste are so varied that you can literally build a business on running porn/sex sites that caters specifically to admirers of very thin girls, one that caters specifically to admirers of voluptuous girls, one that caters specifically to admirers of fat girls. They are all out there, so quit your nonsense. There is no point lying about stuff that the world contradicts in 0.0001 sec if you check. 

On IRL stuff, I have 3 best selling models. One is an italian looking, tiny (about 150 cm), voluptuous-type girl, she is slender but has a really big butt, strong cleavage (not huge breasts at all, just nice), and amazing sweet face with a million dollar smile. Second one is the exact model type, tall, very long legged, not flat chested but has smallish breasts, looks athletic, if she lost a bit more weight she would look "shredded". Third is also small like the first one, but she is also athletic, tiny breasts on tiny body. The only reason she doesn't look really fragile is because she works out and she has muscles. Do you know what they have in common? Men of all shapes and sizes and status adore them. They literally have 100+ of men to choose from that would drop everything and run to date them at a moments notice, they are often telling me some of the stories. One of them got hit on by yoshi form japanx. Other one has been courted for months now by the son of a billionaire winemaker, the guy looks and lives like james bond... just to know, we are not talking about your usual desperate men who would fk anything that moves. How does that fit into your tiny world of supposed huge-breast obsession?

The women you talk about get the huge breasts for other women, not for men, to make them envious. That's how they compete with each other because they are the type of women who have nothing else to compete with. As for the section of men who do like those huge breasts: it's not even about sex, they have mommy complexes. They want to suckle and feel secure :D

This, I agree completely.

« Reply #97 on: September 29, 2017, 04:55 »
+1
You are all saying people are totally stupid idiots and cannot make decisions and need a nanny to look after them.

Yes!!! The people this law intends to protect are totally "idiots"! Yes, they cannot make decisions! Yes, they need a nanny! They are called CHILDREN, TEENAGERS AND YOUNG ADULTS!!!


Is this that f*unking hard to get into your thick skulls?!

And sorry by the terms, but are you people so stupid and dumb that are completely clueless about the power of images?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Really, in this forum people are so outrageously ignorant that haven't realized that images affect and even help change society?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Really?!

Haven't you noticed how children books, and teenagers magazines and covered with images? Isn't that a sign of the power of visual communication? People, images are one of the most powerful tools of propaganda and World Wars were brewed using them!

It's because clueless (or selfish and greedy for a buck) people like you that these laws are created. People without the slightest common sense that force the state to be a nanny. You don't like nanny states? Then grown a conscience and an ethic so others won't have laws imposed about everything.

You people are the reason nanny states grow in power.  Stop playing the naive and caring role, because the last things that's in your minds is the welfare of others. You are simply bothered because someone messed with your photoshop workflow. Cry me a river...

And again, in case you have trouble processing this mind blowing idea:

Yes!!! The people this law intends to protect are totally "idiots"! Yes, they cannot make decisions! Yes, they need a nanny! They are called CHILDREN, TEENAGERS AND YOUNG ADULTS!!!

Ohh, man, you look through history and you see those 100s of millons of peple killed by children's book and teen magazine publishers, cosmetics companies... ohh wait, that was people getting slaughtered by their own governments when those turned to oppression. Dude, you level of education about pretty basic facts of the world is... I don't even know. It's low. LOW. :)

« Reply #98 on: September 29, 2017, 05:07 »
+1
The newly elected French government has another 3.5 years or so to find out that banning liquifying will not make the children, teenagers and young adults feel better about themselves. In fact. I am pretty sure the opposite will be the case.

This basically already happened. The war on 'model industry thin-nes' is something like a decade old scam now. When it got some traction, the 'thin-thing' got promtply replaced by the truly surreal and naturally completely unachievable nicky minaj-type blow-up doll look, and you have poor ghetto girls dead from cheap toxic butt implants.

The urge to compete is the most basic instinct of all. If you ban competing on slenderness, they compete on ridiculous implants, if you ban that too, they will compete on something even more surreal. Finally if you ban competing on almost everything, kids will compete on doing self harm and start cutting themselves. Hence the world record number of teen suicides in commie countries.

Shelma1

« Reply #99 on: September 29, 2017, 05:16 »
+1
It's funny how you all decry the obesity epidemic but feel people should have the personal fortitude to not be influenced by images of unnaturally thin women.

Both problems stem from societal pressure. If you honestly think impressionable children and young girls should have the sense not to try to starve themselves, then surely all full grown adults should have the common sense to adopt a vegan diet.

After all, studies have shown vegans have the healthiest body weight, fewer diet-related illnesses like heart disease, cancer and diabetes, and we all know meat production adds just as much to climate change as the transportation industry. Everyone knows we'd meet our climate change goals if we simply stopped eating meat.

Since you're all sensible adults, I'm sure each of you has been vegan for quite a while now. None of you falls for marketing from meat and dairy producers. You're not tempted by fatty, salty foods. You've never eaten in a fast food restaurant. Sure, you're inundated with advertising for all that stuff, but you're smart enough to ignore it.

You all maintain a healthy diet and a healthy weight, get regular exercise, own the most sensible electric cars (no flashy gas guzzling sports cars for you..too smart to fall for that!).

Advertising definitely doesn't work, and it has no influence on people. Which is why I made a quite nice living working in the advertising industry. It was fun, going to focus groups and seeing how none of our messages made any impact! Ha ha !

And images don't influence people, and societal pressure doesn't affect the images you shoot, which is why you're furious that you can't photoshop skinny women into being even skinnier.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
7 Replies
4126 Views
Last post April 20, 2007, 15:32
by a.k.a.-tom
5 Replies
4624 Views
Last post November 06, 2009, 04:23
by FD
52 Replies
10483 Views
Last post July 01, 2012, 18:40
by OM
2 Replies
1873 Views
Last post February 02, 2013, 22:22
by disorderly
989 Replies
92434 Views
Last post March 18, 2014, 08:32
by KimsCreativeHub

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results