It's great to see pregnant women in the public eye but must they all be so gorgeous? | Coco Khan
Briefly

It's great to see pregnant women in the public eye  but must they all be so gorgeous? | Coco Khan
"Determined to find new ways to stay in the headlines, the underwear brand Victoria's Secret recently had the model Jasmine Tookes one of its most longstanding angels open its runway show nine months pregnant. As a postpartum woman myself, my first thought, of course, was: Finally! A pregnant woman I can relate to. Only joking: it was a deep concern for her ankles,"
"Perhaps seeing more pregnant and postpartum bodies in the media could be a net gain for womankind. I'd have hoped, though, that by now we would have learned that we need more than just images of hot mums glamorous, rich, thin women whose pregnancies appear to be just convenient little bumps, rather than metamorphoses that seem to affect every single organ and limb."
"Hasn't this been done to death? I'm just saying: Demi Moore did a nude pregnant photoshoot in 1991, OK? Still, I am the fool if I am expecting Victoria's Secret, or any union-busting clothing brand, to be right on. When it comes to brands trying to promote themselves with images of empowerment, perhaps we should remember the words of Homer Simpson: Hey! Just because I don't care, doesn't mean I don't understand."
Victoria's Secret had model Jasmine Tookes open its runway show nine months pregnant. The image prompted practical concerns and questions about exploitation. Pregnancy and postpartum experiences remain poorly understood despite affecting everyone. Many women feel pride after childbirth yet struggle with physical changes to their bodies. Increased visibility of pregnant and postpartum bodies in media could benefit women. Current media often showcases glamorous, thin, wealthy "hot mums" rather than realistic transformations that affect organs and limbs. Brand-led empowerment imagery can be performative and may ignore structural labor and recruitment issues in the industry.
Read at www.theguardian.com
Unable to calculate read time
[
|
]