after seeing the newsreaders dancing on CIN, am wondering if you need to be a size 10 to read the news

[ssd]

they all looked great, but jesus talk about skinny

dont they eat?

and they all have a bunch of kids too

jesus

Sian is definitely lollipop head. I can't watch her so we watch Daybreak.

Women come in all shapes and sizes don't they. And all ages. Just that the full range is not represented when it comes to female TV presenters/newsreaders.

Worraliberty
I can assure you that Sian is NOT a size 10, more like a size 6.

I couldn't care less what size Sian is

That's my point. Her weight is her own personal thing and if she's healthy and happy then all power to her.

It just annoys me when people assume that if you're over a certain age or you have a few kids, you're 'abnormal' in some way if you're slim.

If that's the case and it's not down to over eating and lack of exercise, then we wouldn't have a 'rise' in obesity because women would have been obese since time began.

Worraliberty
I was only replying to your post which mentioned size 10.

Oh sorry, I was assuming she's a size 10 cos of the thread title

think Sardine says it right, women do come in all shapes and sizes but the female newsreaders were not representative at all in CIN yesterday.

Being bitchy about women being slim is just as bad as being bitchy about women being fat.

My adult daughter is a healthy size 8 and 5'9", despite having had two children, and is just naturally very slim. She gets really pissed off with comments about how thin she is, no one feels nearly as comfortable telling a fat woman how fat she is yet fat women actually have to do something to get fat.

Can we women not just appreciate each other fat or thin?

I know, but Sian does look dangerously thin to me. I have to confess a girl crush on Susannah Reid..

Nobody is bitching about women being fat or thin. Of course some people are naturally thin.

It's a slightly odd requirement for a Job as a journalist, though!

I think people need to think about what 'dangerously thin' means - you mean the person's health is being affected. Women who demonstrably have energy, whose fertility is not impaired, whose hair and face etc look healthy cannot be 'dangerously thin'. We all have different body types. I am overweight for my height. Were I the ideal weight for my height I would still have a biggish backside because that's the shape my body is programmed to be. I have two friends (sisters) who some of you would describe as 'dangerously' thin - you actually can put your hands round their waists. Except - that is their natural body size, they eat sensibly, have carried pregnancies, have normal amounts of energy. I agree that judging women for being 'too' thin is as bad as judging them for being 'too' fat. I have friends who sometimes struggle to keep weight on, being told they are 'too' thin is as hurtful to them as if they were overweight and were being told they were fat. It's unnecessary and intrusive comment. If you must obsess about body size kindly keep it to yourselves. I don't want my daughters growing up in a society so narrowly focused.

"Nobody is bitching about women being fat or thin."

Lollipop head? For starters.

No, honestly, I do think she looks a bit scary. Don't forget that TV adds about a stone, so in real life I think Sian would lookeven weirder.. And Lollipop head is a description of women who have become so emaciated their heads look oddly big, which Sian's does. Maybe she isn't anorexic, but she does look anorexic.
My best friend is very thin, naturally, but she doesn't look like that and her head is in proportion.

And once again we move away from what society does to women, and how our daughters are being programmed to think about themselves.

Fact. Women in the media have to fit into a narrow perception of physical attractiveness to be taken even remotely seriously.

Fact. Men don't.

Northernwreck - who says TV adds a stone? Where is that proven? Nowhere! The TV adds a stone is yet another way of feeding our obsession with body size. 'Lollipop head' is a derogative and misogynistic (never heard it applied to a man) way of describing a woman's appearence. It offends me. As does your assertion that Sian looks 'anorexic' because she looks different to your friend. That would be because they have different body types. Can you try and grasp that fact - we all have a number of factors infuencing our body shape. What we eat is only one of those.

I thought TV added 10lbs.

They all looked lovely.

Maybe it's because they know that other women are so judgemental and bitchy that they try to keep themselves in the best shape that they can. Or maybe they are all naturally slim without having to work at it. Either way, they are normal people and they can do whatever the hell they like with their own bodies and they shouldn't be criticised for it.

I hate this attitude that just because a woman is slim after having children and being middle aged that she is somehow abnormal or is obsessed with looks. It's an attitude that usually comes from other women, especially those that have let themselves go.

Northern Lurker
TV does add weight especially wide screen TV. I have seen Sian in real life and she is a lot thinner than she looks on TV.

Seeker puts it well, women have to fit into a look but men don't. It's wrong. Why do female journalist have to be slim and attractive and males don't?

And why do we judge what women are wearing, and not men? I am guilty of always casting a very critical eye over Kirsty Wark's clothes.

Is there some sort of relationship between journalistic ability and being very slim and attractive? Or is it just a coincidence that these are the women we see on our screens - presumably the plumper/older/plainer ones simply weren't up to the job.

Listen to Radio 4 - there's a much wider cross-section of reporters and presenters there including Jenni Murray, Martha Kearney, Harriet Cass, Jenny Cuffe, Sheila Dillon and Jane Garvey.

If we are talking about newsreaders, then I think that yes, the women always do look very groomed and are quite attractive. But then, so are the men really! I mean think about Huw Edwards or George Alagiah, I think they are kind of sexy in an older man sort of way (particualrly love Huw Edwards!). And you dont really get overweight male newsreaders and they always have to look groomed and wear a suit etc.

If you are talking about reporters, then not being horrible (well I am really) but I always thought that Orla Guerin was no oil painting!

"I hate this attitude that just because a woman is slim after having children and being middle aged that she is somehow abnormal or is obsessed with looks. It's an attitude that usually comes from other women, especially those that have let themselves go."

How you can draw that from this thread defeats me! The point is that women the media are expected to look a particular way- and those that don't haven't got a hope.

Yes, seeker, but so are men. Name me one ugly male newsreader who doesn't look in shape and wear a suit? And I don't mean the ones who specialize, like whatshisface who used to do the financials on BBC Morning, he was heavy, but he had a skill they needed. I mean the guys who are in the lead position.

samstown "kind of sexy in an older man sort of way " grasping at straws a bit!

As opposed to actually sexy in a younger woman sort of way for the women!

I can't think of a hot male newsreader.

Krishnan gurumurthy used to be quite nice but that was about 15 years ago...