Exhibit A: Jonathan Coulton’s cover of “Baby Got Back,” released 8/14/2005.
Exhibit B: Glee’s cover of “Baby Got Back,” due to air on 1/24/2013
There’s (understandably) a lot of anger on the internet about this. My friend Kris Straub wrote, “We…
Calm yo tits, water bottle.
Have some friends who would totally buy into this crap
I had just sent a company my invoice for designing their new logo, and the guy I was working with texted me the very next day.
Client: Hey there. I just wanted to let you know, my boss loves the new logo, and we got your invoice and everything… But my boss wants you to make some changes on the…
This is why I don’t feel like tipping service industry people most of the time.
Here is a video of a man playing a ragtime version of the Ghosts ‘n Goblins theme on the piano. It’s pretty great.
The intersection of the two greatest forms of music ever produced. <3 infinity
Legend of Zelda Cookies!
A custom order I took this week. 8 bit Hearts, Link’s shield, the Tri-force symbol and of course an 8 bit Link!
Anything 8 bit makes me happy.
Man, I really gotta get rocking the fondant.
When my daughter first showed signs of hating herself, I got out photoshop. We went and found an image of her choosing, of a woman. I spent the next two hours showing her just how easy it was to alter this woman. I changed her hair, whitened her teeth, made her thinner. I erased her blemishes and even made her taller while my daughter sat there aghast. At the end of it she loudly said - ” THAT’S NOT FAIR!”
I told her that damn near every image she saw of people in magazines, on television, etc, was altered like this, and that she should never compare herself to that, because even supermodels don’t look like supermodels.
I wish I could do that for every child. I wish it was a mandatory class in school.
Here is the problem that I have with this ad: It makes people think that every model in a makeup, fashion or fragrance ad has had this much photoshopping done on her. The makeup/ hair/ lighting process is accurate but probably longer than it usually would take, but the amount and the type of painstaking photo-editing that is going on in this is far from realistic. Hell, the entire thing is unrealistic- you think a photographer would choose a model that needed that much post work to achieve the result he wanted? Hell no. This is why they have 10-hour days of model castings, so they can find the girl with the foundation face and body they want to sell their product on. From the distance of their eyes to the width of their jaw. To correct these things would take hours in post-production and that means thousands more dollars they have to spend. No beauty company would pick an advertising model that needed this much photo-altering, especially not one which you would see on a huge billboard or in a Conde Nast magazine. This is more or less an ad that shows what Photoshop can do to manipulate a photo.
I’ve worked with many models, mostly in castings and at fashion shows. The girls that get billboard or magazine print campaigns? They are gorgeous, many have wonderful bone structure, body proportions, clear skin and have posing down to an art- meaning they know how to make their eyes look bigger, their necks longer, their jaw more defined through muscle control and movement. This is why they are models: they are making a profit from what they can do well, which is have a look that aligns to what society at a given time finds aspirational and above-average and be able to understand the look & effect a designer and photographer are going for and know how to achieve it. All post-work is done to enhance, not illustrate and completely distort, and if/when it is you can bet that it is noticed and pulled (hello Ralph Lauren stupidity). Granted that when the models are working they do have professional hair, makeup and lighting and of course there is almost always going to be photo-editing to some extent, but a beauty ad is rarely the result of changing a person’s anatomy to be a living illustration like is shown here.
Why I’m sharing this is because I think that this gives a false sense of comfort, which is a feeble one. It basically says “Don’t feel bad about yourself when you look at the models in beauty and hair ads- they only look that way because of hours of professional hair and makeup and incredibly intense photoshopping. They’re basically robots.” And I think this logic actually strengthens the animosity that occurs between model-type women (who look a lot like they do in the ads when they put a little makeup on) and other women. I see it all the time. Women who are beautiful and sexy in their own ways that immediately feel threatened when they see a modelesque woman who is beautiful and sexy in HER own way, and so they deflect their needless intimidation by talking shit, by picking out flaws, by making assumptions about her character or intelligence, and it is un-fucking-necessary and gross as all hell. I’ve seen some of the top lingerie and fashion models of today in person, and they are jaw-dropping. Because they are rare, it is rare for someone to have such a symmetrical face, such proportional features, such clear skin, such a statuesque yet feminine body. But I don’t wish I looked like her and I don’t wish I had her life. She is prettier than me in my opinion and has more money than me, but I am happy with myself because I believe in myself and am loved by people that I love too. Interacting with a woman like that is only intimidating to the point of discomfort if you do not value yourself and what you are for who you are. I used to want to crawl under a rock when I saw women who actually looked like the models in magazines in person- the women who I had tried to delude myself in to believing didn’t actually exist on Earth. And you know what? That response to a female who looks like what society proclaims is an ideal beauty is s fucking weird, it’s unhealthy, and it’s not because of photoshop.
Look, whether or not the women on TV or in magazines are fake, women who are beautiful in that way and on that level exist. But they are not better than you, and you are not better than them. No “type” of woman is more capable of being loved, is more interesting, more alluring, more intelligent, more virtuous, more fun, or is more valuable than another woman based on her looks alone. These things lie completely in your mind and soul, and you will not be able to truly enjoy the incredible joys of these things in other people or in yourself until you realize that the only people who want you looking like something you don’t look like is the CEOs of the corporations. And even that is just their day job, it’s nothing personal if you’re smart enough to see it. Let’s not forget that models have their own set of insecurities, mistreatment, and social unfairness to deal with. We are all the fucking same, with the same amount of bullshit to keep us from nirvana, just dispersed in different ways in different facets of our lives. The point is not to just accept that all images being fed to you are completely fake, because it doesn’t prepare you for realistically and humanistically viewing the many people in the world who are more closely aligned to “ideal societal physical beauty” than you. This ad only heightens our paranoia of the damage low self-esteem can do to a woman’s psyche. It makes us think that every beauty ad we see is this epic puzzle of deceit and that makeup companies are horrible enemies and you should fight the battle by focusing on just keeping your hair and body pretty and clean with DOVE PRODUCTS.
Do you see that it is all a fucking game?