Super skinny models for M&S?

[CheeseDreamz]

I am really struggling to shop online at the moment as it feels like many retailers are using super slinky and very tall models to show clothes that are usually aimed at a more average demographic and body type. M&S being the worst right now.

Before people accuse me of body shaming I am observing the predominant use of what is actually quite a rare human shape - not about whether it is attractive, or healthy or possible to achieve. 5ft 10+ and size zero with very long legs is not that common, especially over 25. I have my thoughts on this, but my question is more around the widom of doing this and the difficulty of shopping.

It's making it impossible to tell what a piece of clothing might look like if you have boobs or bum, even at a size 12. And in many cases the clothes don't even look that great. Also has the model wears size x information now gone on many sites?

Looking over a few sites it seems to be increasing in mens clothing too.

I know that representation of a variety of body types has been adopted (for years by some retailers) but it feel as if that is really waning now - weirdly it seems to be better in brands I would consider for younger people. There is some discussion in the media about "the return of hyper skinny" (though a quick google reveals there are articles on this going back to 2022), so it's a perennial thing. But really, who the hell do M&S think shops with them? It's so off-putting - all I see is that these clothes are not for me.

Don't worry, soon they'll have bespoke AI models instead

In the grand scheme of things, having an extra model present at the same photoshoots, where they’re paying lighting, make-up, hair, photographer etc to be there, it seems like a fairly small investment to make the shopping experience more appropriate for all customers and would save them a fortune on returns!

The women on the site don't look underweight at all; they look healthy.

Joanie often employs a model who is 5'6 and a size 10. Almost exactly the same size as me....it's brilliant to actually see how short dresses are or wether i' ll be tripping over trousers!😁

@Mannersmattertoo Im not saying there are unhealthy, just said my BMI was underweight. Is that really a surprising thing to say about the modelling industry?! Plus photos are different, there's a reason many are surprised when they see how small a celeb is in real life

The thread is about the M&S website.

@Mannersmattertoo It's about how the models for M&S look, what's confused you?

Exactly, it is subjective. Notice on this thread, there are so many digs towards slim women, but none towards overweight/obese. It is somehow okay to insult anybody under a size 12 as "skinny/scrawny/no bust", and the list goes on. Maybe we should have a website of larger ladies so you can criticise those too. Leave women's bodies alone.

To have a cup size irrespective of back measurement that's nearer the middle of the alphabet than the beginning (depending upon whether the particular manufacturer of said bra uses D, DD, E, EE, EEE, F and so on) makes them impressive in my opinion. I suppose I could have used a word such as massive, huge, comparatively enormous or very large, but I think those would be taken as insulting by both the smaller back size posters and the larger. However, I've got smaller back size women being snotty about me saying what was intended as a compliment to anybody with proportionally more breast tissue+body fat than I have in that area irrespective of starting rib cage circumference.

If I want to buy a dress, I don't want to have huge expanses of nothingness where other women with similar waist or hip measurements as me also have perfectly normal but significantly larger breasts, as that means it wouldn't fit. Being able to see if a dress is designed to hang right/fit properly on the basis of having a larger volume of bust - something that increases in likelihood with larger sizes with the variances in where women store fat combined with their genetic complement of mammary tissue - isn't glorifying anything other than the ability to see whether it's the right dress or not for somebody who, comparatively speaking, has fuck all in the way of tits.

Exactly

@boxyboxs You being underweight and modelling isn't reflective of the m&s website, where they aren't underweight.

Me, too (only a size 8 was a 12 back then!)
I measured 36-24-36 inches.
5'8", 7½ stone, BMI is 16.
Note: this is not my current size/shape, and I had anorexia.

Edit for @Mannersmattertoo: I've just looked at the model details for a stack of M&S dresses and tops. They are mostly 5'8" and size 8. Same as the PP and me when modelling - and underweight.

The women on the website look normal to me and not unusual. Most young women in their late teens and early 20s that I know are around a size 8. Whatever size they show it will alienate some women. Size 8 is probably the ideal for health and aesthetics. That's why they show size 8. Above a size 12 most women have rolls of fat which wouldn't show the clothes to their best advantage.

@Garlicworth I didn't know it was a controversial thing to acknowledge! 😆

You've mentioned the fact you used to model over and over again, it's irrelevant to the models on the M and S website.

Nope I didn't say it over & over again! Some of those models will have underweight BMI, it's just logic..

Ideal for health?

"A BMI of 18.4 or below is classed as underweight. This suggests you could benefit from gaining weight.
Working towards a healthier weight range could strengthen your immune system and help prevent bone fractures."

Most young women in their late teens and early 20s that I know are around a size 8.

But are they tall, that tends to be the difference with a model...

Look at the John Lewis’s landing page has models with arms like Ive not seen since the heroin chic 90s. I’m sorry its puts me off and no I am not overweight.

The Op is describing herself. She wants to know if the outfit will gape.

My problem with having very tall, willowy, gorgeous women modelling clothes is that they look fabulous in them - of course they do - but they would look fabulous in a sack. I want to see a very ordinary looking woman looking fabulous in an outfit. Because then I will know that the outfit is fabulous not the model.

Average height in the UK is 5’3” -5’4”

Why is that vile?

I have fuck all in the way of cheek bones and bum

Why would it be vile to say this?

Oh, do get over yourself. I'm talking about me. Where it seems that almost every poster on the subject of bra size has a G or above, I clearly have not been produced from the same mould. The largest cup size I ever nearly filled was a C five days after my eldest was born. They are just small in relation to the rest of me my arse.

I just want to able to work out if my comparative lack of breast tissue is going to cause a problem in terms of a dress that fits the rest of me needing a bloody vest underneath or not. And if the only image is of somebody with a 28A for example - or a 32AA or whatever is the standard bra size for a model, I cannot see if the scaled up size is intended for somebody who has a 40A measurement or is designed to only fit properly at 40F+.