Banning models based on BMI?

[MaeFlowers]

France has passed a new law which bans models based on the BMI. http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/03/us-france-anorexia-idUSKBN0MU0JK20150403

 

Personally, I am struggling with this. I am curious to hear what others think.

[BlsdMama]

Knee jerk reaction? I'm glad. Anorexia can be deadly. These girls, intentionally or no, are often role models for young girls. To ensure they are healthy role models there are infringements and limitations.

 

Is it so different than requiring wrestlers to make weight? Or any different than requiring a clean drug test for athletes? I don't think so.

[Liz CA]

It's interesting that the govt is getting in the mix of this. However, if it can help with young girls seeing healthy models versus being led to think thinner is better to the point of being severely undernourished, it may do some good. Imposing a fine should be sufficient IMHO - any monies accumulated that way could be donated to some facility that counsels girls with Anorexia. Jail sentence? Seems a bit exaggerated.

[Epicurean]

Knee jerk reaction? I'm glad. Anorexia can be deadly. These girls, intentionally or no, are often role models for young girls. To ensure they are healthy role models there are infringements and limitations.

 

Is it so different than requiring wrestlers to make weight? Or any different than requiring a clean drug test for athletes? I don't think so.

 

The government doesn't require wrestlers to be a certain weight. The government does not require sports teams to test for steroids. Not even in France, to my knowledge. That's the difference, and it's a big one. If modelling agencies adopted these rules as part of self-regulation, that would be just fine.

 

Government is a powerful tool that at its core, uses the threat of violence to enforce its laws. Since modern republics were invented to protect the citizenship from oppressive governments, I think it follows we should err on the side of not giving power to the state to enforce moral principles like this one.

 

I'd like to quote a Frenchman, Frederic Bastiat, on the purpose of government.

 

"I do not dispute their right to invent social combinations, to advertise them, to advocate them, and to try them upon themselves, at their own expense and risk. But I do dispute their right to impose these plans upon us by law, by force..."

 

"For ourselves, we consider that Government is and ought to be nothing whatever but the united power of the people, organized, not to be an instrument of oppression and mutual plunder among citizens; but, on the the contrary, to secure to every one his own, and to cause justice and security to reign."

[Tsuga]

Considering the mortality rate below the required BMI, the age of the models, and the fact that they are public figures, I think it's appropriate regulation. In France that means a law. Wouldn't fly here as law but I would strongly support industry regulation.

 

But then, I'm pro-regulation for minors especially.

[Suzanne in ABQ]

But, isn't France a Socialist country?  

[Tsuga]

France is a democracy which usually votes more or less social democratic on the whole. The economy is not socialized but there is significant gov. Intervention.

[Laura Corin]

But, isn't France a Socialist country?  

 

What do you mean by socialist?  I've lived both in France and in a socialist country (China).

 

France is a democratic country whose people vote for parties that introduce laws that may differ from those of the US.  However, there are private companies, private (religious) schools, freedom of worship, freedom of movement.....   According to The Economist (old article) France has a large public sector, but 75% of employed people work outside of it.  And, as the article makes clear, that structure is what the people choose by elections.  Does that make it socialist?  

 

China is a one-party state, ruled by a communist party, the stated aim of which (when I lived there first) was to move through socialism towards communism.  In the 1980s, there was communal ownership of the means of production, and citizens were denied freedom of expression, movement, religion, reproduction and choice of employment.

[Melissa in Australia]

It's interesting that the govt is getting in the mix of this. However, if it can help with young girls seeing healthy models versus being led to think thinner is better to the point of being severely undernourished, it may do some good. Imposing a fine should be sufficient IMHO - any monies accumulated that way could be donated to some facility that counsels girls with Anorexia. Jail sentence? Seems a bit exaggerated.

It isn't the starving girls that are going to be fined, but rather the companies that are forcing them to starve to keep their job. Jail sentence seems appropriate - a fine would not be anything to those companies, they would just look at it as one of the expenses of being in business.

[Melissa in Australia]

But, isn't France a Socialist country?  

Not sure if you are making a joke, or serious. Do you know what a socialist country is?

[Plink]

Most images are photoshopped anyway, so I don't know that this will solve the problem, but I have to say that I appreciate someone putting some thought into it. 

[Danestress]

Most images are photoshopped anyway, so I don't know that this will solve the problem, but I have to say that I appreciate someone putting some thought into it.

The law will require that any photo shopped images carry a statement to that effect.

[MotherGoose]

The freedom-loving American in me says it's not the government's business to pass a law about this. Self-regulation by the industry, sure, but not a law. Slippery slope.

[Lolly]

If BMI were actually an accurate indicator of health, I might be more inclined to agree with this. Since it is not, I have some serious issues with it. There is a difference in having anorexia and having a low BMI. Is it different from having weight classes in wrestling? Immensely. Aren't there weight classes for most people to fit in in wrestling? In fact, don't most wrestlers aim to go for the lowest weight class available? Sometimes don't they diet in order to make the lower weight cut? (I don't know a whole lot about wrestling, obviously.) Plus, as another poster pointed out, this is not a law; it is sports policy. Is it the same as taking steroids? More similar, but steroids is something that can actually be tested for. Steroid rules do not eliminate people who are naturally muscular or athletic. More similar would be a law banning anyone with an arm circumferance of X cm or faster than X sec. in a run. Because obviously you can't be that large, or fast, or strong without using drugs. There are many, many women who are naturally thin and below an 18 BMI. Perhaps it would make more sense to require a doctor's statement of health instead of relying on a test that is known to be an inaccurate predictor/test of health.

[Laura Corin]

The freedom-loving American in me says it's not the government's business to pass a law about this. Self-regulation by the industry, sure, but not a law. Slippery slope.

 

I don't know how I feel about this particular law.

 

However, the US does not have a monopoly on the concept of freedom.  Some other countries strike a different balance between 'freedom to' and 'freedom from'.

 

L

[Mergath]

The freedom-loving American in me says it's not the government's business to pass a law about this. Self-regulation by the industry, sure, but not a law. Slippery slope.

 

A slippery slope to what?  

[Word Nerd]

I think it's too focused on BMI as a gauge of health. Underweight does not equal anorexic.

 

ETA: There are many jobs that are much more potentially harmful to people's health than modeling, yet the government doesn't usually decide certain people aren't healthy enough for that work and ban them as job candidates. Is that really a precedent you want to set? I'm not sure what safety regulations and guidelines are already in place in the modeling industry, but I'd rather see an overhaul of those and more individual support for the models--regardless of BMI--than a ban.

[Pawz4me]

I think I'd support the law, except that BMI is an extremely poor means of measuring healthy weight.

[justasque]

In my state, minors have to have working papers, which includes getting a physical.  It seems reasonable to include a screening for ill health due to being underweight as part of the protection of working children.  Framed that way, I don't have a problem with it, assuming the physician does not rely solely on BMI for their decision.

[MotherGoose]

A slippery slope to what?

To more laws that reduce freedom further. To me, freedom means you have the ability to make poor decisions.

[forty-two]

I think I'd support the law, except that BMI is an extremely poor means of measuring healthy weight.

I actually misread the title - thought the post was about banning models-of-determining-healthy-weight that were based on BMI. I was several posts in before I figured out what the title was *supposed* to mean :lol:.

[Scarlett]

5'7 121 pounds is a good weight I think. I am 5'6 and pretty happy at 125 ( which I will likely never see again) but at 112 I was waaaaaay too thin.

[Greta]

However, the US does not have a monopoly on the concept of freedom. Some other countries strike a different balance between 'freedom to' and 'freedom from'.

 

L

I thought that was very well put, Laura. My daughter and I have had some interesting conversations about this, but I never thought to express it quite as succinctly as you did here. I like that.

[Catwoman]

I think a BMI of 18 will exclude many perfectly healthy, naturally small-boned and slim models. When I modeled, my BMI was under 18 and I never dieted and I ate a lot of calories every day. I was just a slender person. I could eat all day and not gain an ounce. I was also in the best physical shape of my life.

 

I don't think BMI is a reliable indicator of health.

[MaeFlowers]

The BMI used as a gauge of health was my main concern. It seems to throw the baby out with the bath water, as they say. I've known a few models and none of them would have made the cut-off. They were perfectly healthy. Maybe they are choosing to take drastic measures because they feel the problem is so rampant?

 

I was also concerned about the slippery slope. Where do you draw the line? This wasn't simply about making models healthier, it was about the image they project. Will they ban entertainers as well?

 

 

 

Edited to fix typos.

[Reefgazer]

Typical government over-reach. If someone doesn't like the working conditions, they are free to find a job elsewhere, and if someone doesn't like the message the company sends, don't buy their product. But government should butt out of micromanaging business.

[In The Great White North]

 

Considering the mortality rate below the required BMI, the age of the models, and the fact that they are public figures, I think it's appropriate regulation. In France that means a law. Wouldn't fly here as law but I would strongly support industry regulation.

 

What is the mortality rate at BMI 18?

 

Do you have a link?

[Bluegoat]

I think there can come a point where an industry like this needs someone to step in.  The industry makes it clear that it can't or won't do something itself, and the public either doesn't have the power to affect their activities, or is affected in such a way by the industry that they won't.  If the activity is enough of a problem, then someone has to step in.

 

I think it is really a little innocent to think that the way modern capitalism works really allows industries to self regulate in all cases.  That could potentially be changed, but I think it would require far more radical structural changes than passing a few regulations, and people who see that as an imposition on "freedom" would be even more horrified.

 

I would also say that groups that tend to regulate themselves fairly well are often ones that have a strong sense of purpose apart from profit.  Some doctors might be greddy for money, but overall you will find few who  think their job is fundamentally about earning money rather than increasing health.  I think having that clear non-commercial motive really allows groups to put their activities into a kind of ethical focus.  i am not sure the fashion industry really has that.

 

It can also be very difficult for a single business to take action alone in many cases, when others won't - for example a competitor to Walmart who wants to pay living wages to employees is in for trouble competing.  The idea that it is up to consumers to stop buying from those who pay unfair wages is pretty silly - of course they should, but the fact that they don't does not mean the behavior of the business toward the employess becomes right.  It is just that now they are getting screwed over by a whole chain of people - I am sure that does not make them feel better or pay the bills.

 

In this case, I think the fundamental problem is that people have become unable to really see the human body clearly, they are influenced by all the images and it has become normalized.  THe industry is unwilling to self-regulate, who knows why, maybe for a lot of different reasons.

 

I am not sure hwever that this is actually a very easy problem to solve just by creating BMI indicators.  In fact I am not sure that I can see any really simple way to do it.  Something that might help might just be to put an age limit on who can model for adult clothes, so you don't have young teens, who naturally tend to be very thin and in a very particular way, standing in for grown women.

[CindyH in NC]

There are many, many women who are naturally thin and below an 18 BMI. Perhaps it would make more sense to require a doctor's statement of health instead of relying on a test that is known to be an inaccurate predictor/test of health.

 

Didn't read past this reply yet.  I agree with Lolly completely.  I have 2 teenage dds.  The 17 year old has a BMI of 15 currently.  She is 5'5 and looks very thin, but she is healthy and eats what she wants.  No eating disorders or anything like that.  She loses weight quickly when she is sick, but truly struggles to gain weight at any time.  Her father and I were both built like this as teens (no longer a problem for either of us, unfortunately;-), and constantly being asked by nurses and doctors (who of course are just doing there jobs) as well as relatives and friends if she eats or has an eating disorder is really discouraging to her.  She struggles especially because her younger sister has the perfect size 2 figure while she struggle to find clothes that are teenage friendly and flattering. 

 

I just think that laws or guidelines need to take into account all sizes of healthy and attractive whether the models are thinner or heavier.  All of our teens need to see themselves represented as models.  Talking about this is good though.  Hopefully in time there will be a more accurate way to measure health. 

Cindy

[Epicurean]

Maria Sharapova has a BMI of 17, according to what I've read online. She wears a size 4. Here's a picture of her. If world class athletes have BMIs of 18 or lower, then we know for a fact that it's not an accurate metric of health.

 

Gwen Stefani and Miley Cyprus have BMIs of 18. Gwyneth Paltrow has a BMI of 17.

 

Surely there are plenty of examples of women with low BMIs who do not have anorexia. I don't doubt that models, actresses and athletes work hard to stay slim, but should we say they're truly unhealthy or imply that that they have eating disorders? Can we say unequivocally that there is no way to attain their level of body fat without harming one's health? Are we so confident in that assertion that we want to imprison anyone who publishes pictures of them?

 

I've heard that juries wrestle with the decision to send murderers to prison even if they're certain of guilt, because it's such a heavy thing to take away someone's personal liberty. So why is it we're so quick to make laws that would imprison people for victimless crimes?

[Lisbeth]

Hmmm, as a person who throughout my teens, 20s and 30s had a natural propensity to be very thin, with a very high metabolism, I would say it is government overreach in a big way to prohibit people like me from being employed somewhere based on weight.

[lailasmum]

I think the regulation is a good idea but it might be better based on say yearly doctor's assessment that could deal with the bigger picture of a model's health and well being. They can work some ridiculous hours under a lot of pressure if successful so I think dealing with stress would form part of that bigger picture as well as weight. 

[LostSurprise]

This legislation has been proposed several times in an effort to convince the modeling industry to create some kind of self-regulation. Unfortunately there was little interest in creating a more diverse group of models or confronting agencies and fashion houses which pressure mostly very young girls to be thinner so they make better 'clothes hangars.' (I'm not even going to get into how public these choices are and how western societies are concerned about the cultural obsession for a body type that the majority of individuals can not reach.)

 

I think the industry had the time to make necessary changes. Legislation that most people honestly did not want to see went through because the industry is divided between people who want it to stay the same and people who want change but can't find an alternative which everyone can agree on. 

 

BMI is an easy but ethically problematic alternative. I think what's hoped is that it will change the culture of modeling. If the culture is changed, then modeling will be safer for all BMIs. Because, while there is a minority population of people who have healthy BMIs below 18, not every model is one of them. Natural thinness is only one component of modeling, and most models are chosen for their face or body symmetry...not their natural BMI. So most models have to make their weight fit within whatever standard the industry holds.

 

I'm not necessarily for it, but I'm hoping it will lead to some positive change in the industry. It's a rough wake-up call. 

[LizzyBee]

If BMI were actually an accurate indicator of health, I might be more inclined to agree with this. Since it is not, I have some serious issues with it. There is a difference in having anorexia and having a low BMI. 

 

This. My girls inherited their father's body type and all have or had low BMI. They are not anorexic; in fact, they eat a lot, but they metabolize it so fast that they don't gain weight. 

[Mergath]

It's a nice idea, that runway models are all actually very healthy and just naturally underweight, but the testimonies of people who have left the modelling industry claim exactly the opposite.  The long list of models who died from either anorexia, suicide, or drug overdoses in the last fifteen years is heartbreaking.  If the legislation prevents another young woman from ending up like Isabelle Caro, I'd call that a win.  And honestly, if it means there are a handful of naturally underweight women who can't start modelling because of it, that's fine with me.  The modelling industry isn't a healthy environment for anyone.