FRIENDSHIP

 We go through life 

thinking we are the only one 

who feels a certain way about things, 

and then suddenly someone comes along 

who feels exactly the same way.   

It's the start of a beautiful friendship.

....© David Baird  "a Thousand Paths to friendship"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My friends:   You may wonder at the length of time between posts, and this is quite simple. I've been working on a few other projects, and time simply passed me by.   And of course I've become "older" just as RoseMary's NoteBook© has done  - well, she IS 33 years old this year! And "she" (RoseMary's NoteBook© that is) has decided to reinvent herself once again. 

There's no doubt that the world is undergoing a lot of change:  from past experience, as individals, we are expected to change as well.   

Is there a place for RoseMary's Notebook© in 2024?  I'm an optimist and I believe that women - whatever age, size or shape© - often need the encouragement of other women who understand the issues of discrimination (yes, even today), bullying (our young women can verify this problem); domestic abuse (which still reigns supreme in many homes around the world) and loneliness (especially in older years). 

Motivation and encouragement are essential for a healthy attitude.   It's not that we are expected to be "jolly" all the time; smiling and laghing all the time;  optimistic all the time.  

So this little blog will continue to highlight encouraging and supportive ideas combined with fun/serious issues; adding to the enjoyment of a woman's life.   Based, I might say, on simple, effective, no-nonsense opinions/suggestions some of which may be considered old-fashioned but have been successful in the past.  

So I'll put my 'thinking cap' on, and will ponder just exactly what the next "post" will be about.  Keep safe and well.

'til then ...

GETTING REAL!

Someone sent me this fun cartoon.   It certainly made me smile, but it also reminded me that we are living in a society where "perfection" as it applies to the female form, has taken a turning where normal or typical is no longer seen as being totally acceptable.

Today to be "seen" as acceptable a woman has to be:  young - slim (if not skinny); svelte (with no bumps or curves); sexy (what exactly is sexy?) and most importantly young.

How has this come about?   What has changed from the 1950s ,,,,,,?  

A lot happened.  Firstly the 1960s brought about a swing in attitudes - of life as well as behaviours.   The fact that Jean Shrimpton wore a knee length shift (dress) at the Melbourne Cup, WITHOUT a hat or gloves (oh, dear! what was the world coming to?) caused loud headlines in the press.  But that's too easy to say that her decision to wear an outrageous dress - for the era that is - caused the change in attitudes to women's shapes and sizes.  But it certainly was one of the factors that started the ball rolling.

We all shortened our hemlines.  We lowered our necklines.   Everything was free and easy.   But for the plump and curvaceous woman, that was also the start of an inherent and growing animosity towards the way SHE looked.   Size discrimination rose to greater heights and it became apparent in film, television, the media per se.  Women's magazines took on the role of telling their readers to diet, to undergo cosmetic surgery, to attend the latest and very expensive gyms in order to attain the lean, sleak bodies of more naturally slim women.  They didn't tell their readers that it was OK to be a different size or shape and that all sizes could be considered normal or typical.   Manufacturers began to treat the curvaceous woman with scorn and retailers hid clothes for her size in a tiny section at the back of the department store.   It took many years for "plus-size" suppliers to come out of the woodwork.

So that's where the whole thing went haywire.   For all women are NOT fundamentally the same shape or are meant to be the same size.   Women were told they HAD to diet;  they did and many did far more damage to their bodies and minds through yo-yo dieting over decades than they could have imagined.   Somebody forgot to tell them that genes play a bit part in their body makeup (in fact it was only recently that the medical people have acknowledged this to be true - it was argued about heatedly in previous decades.)

What happened next?  Suddenly eating disorders became prominent.   A whole new industry was born whereby people were counselled about disorders in their eating behaviours.  The human body, and mind,  suffered serious consequences.  Not only women but men and children are affected.   In all age groups.

What am I trying to say?   I'm saying it's about time we realised that the world is made up of people who look different, who have differnent shapes and sizes, and we should recognise and respect each other unconditionally.

(I'm not talking here of those who are addicted to non-stop eating, or eating inappropriate foods until they really do become medically and dangerously obese.   Nor am I talking about those people whose bodies react violently to the medications they may be taking.)

Let's join in the protest (albeit quietly but determinedly) 

that ALL women's bodies and shapes should be 

celebrated, no matter what age, size or shape ©.  

It's about time!

Sketch © RoseMary's NoteBook 1991-2014

This is a small post on the subject of "discrimination".    It is imperative that the media (especially women's magazines be it hard-copy or online) come to grips with the fact that their readership is not made up entirely of  20 year olds with slim figures.  Women of all sizes and ages read their publications and it's about time that more portrayals of older people dressing as "they" see and feel like it, are included in each and every edition.

When these magazines, which they claim for all women, deign to present special little supplements for the older or the plus size woman, they treat it as though they're doing us a service and we should be eternally grateful for it.  Unfortunately they're carrying on the form of disctrimination that defies reason.

When will the media see women in all their differing shapes, sizes and ages as women per se.   There's no need to imply that anything other than a young, extremely thin woman is not acceptable as being typical and representative of women you see in any home or shopping mall.

Let's get real.   As an advocate for size acceptance for more than 40 years, I can't believe it's taking so long for "society" to demand total acceptance of all our differences, which after all, make us the same.

We need to celebrate womanhood for what it is and what it stands for.   As far as the media is concerned we've made no real inroads for decades.   Celebrate our natural shapes and sizes, and that includes thin and curvaceous.

"STAGGERING LEVELS"

Headlines blazed across the television screen this morning, NUMBER OF "OBESE" AUSTRALIANS REACHES 'STAGGERING LEVELS'

For a woman who wears size 20 clothes (and sometimes I have to buy sizes 24 and 26 even though I don't change shape or weight in order to get something to fit), I have come to the stage where I am no longer willing to be categorized as a burden to Australian society because of my size.

In reading a lot of material about plus-size (much of it from the archives of plus-related books and articles as well as contemporary writings), I've come to realise that in the past as well as the present, we have been given the most humiliating descriptions possible and we've been expected to accept that discrimination without a murmur.

Personally I've been told that:

• if I want to be accepted as an equal in the work-scene I have to lose weight;  
• if I want my views and balanced opinions to be listened to seriously about all manner of issues, then I should lose weight; 
• if I want to be accepted as an intelligent woman ( a lot of plus size women are considered to be dull and not having much sense), then I would have to lose weight;
• if I want to be accepted as a patient in many small as well as major hospitals then I would have to lose weight;
• if I want to be treated respectfully at many restaurants around the country and to be seated comfortably at one of their tables, then there was an inference that I should lose some weight - ("we can't provide chairs for people who aren't standard size" I've been told more than once).  Just exactly what do they mean by "standard size"? - should everyone be identical in height, width, shape, size and looks, so that we are "standard'?)
• if I want a reasonable range of clothing to choose from then it would be preferable to be a few sizes less

and the list goes on.

It's when the health industry publicly gets vocal in their non-acceptance of us that things start to turn nasty. For the media is always eager to sensationalise reality and they grab hold of what the health industry state, and we become the agents for not only discrimination but ridicule.   The health industry has the ability and the opportunity to improve our lives by seeing us as we are, and then working with us to assist us to become more healthy.  Working with us means NOT to insist that we lose weight by outrageous diets or disfiguring and dangerous surgery.  Too many studies have been carried out that now claim it is not necessary to be thin to be healthy.  We get blamed for being who we are when if the health and fitness industry looked deeper into the question, they have it within their means to enhance our lives as they are right now.

So the health industry reminds us that we are fat and overweight and then the media takes up the message and emblazons the television screens, the national magazines and even the newspapers with reports and photographs that do nothing to assist in our self-esteem.

Because that's where the whole subject loses its way.  If society and this includes the media and the health industry, were to readily accept the plus-size woman and encourage her to make the very best of what she has, then she would become healthier and happier.  And with that her self-esteem would rise.

It's self-esteem that we have to aim for, first and foremost.   

©  Rose Davida

INTERNATIONAL and NATIONAL WOMEN'S MAGAZINES

LATEST FASHION TRENDS on SKINNY GIRLS

One question remains unanswered as far as I’m concerned.  Why do women’s national and international magazines insist on showing us half-grown petulant, skinny girls (I'm not talking about naturally thin models!) to show off the latest “garment” thrown together by a well-known designer.  If you’re observant and look around you, you’ll readily see that those models DON'T represent the girls at the major store counter or the girls sitting near you at the mall coffee shop or the women in your family and groups of friends.  Those garments are, we’re told, all made in a size 0 or less - how can you get anything less than zero?  

Do you know why?  

Manufacturers tell me that it’s because the garment hangs better on a body without flesh or curves!   Aaah, am I missing something here?  Because you can't tell me that the above model is either happy or healthy and that the garment hangs better on her than on a girl with a little more flash.   There’s a contradiction here - even a size 16 girl will look different to the size 10 or less model wearing the same garment!   Is it strange then that a plus-size woman feels frustrated?  The only reason I can see why they insist on making sample garments in such a small size and using models so thin they look as though they’ll break, is because .......... it takes less fabric!    But that doesn't quite answer the question does it?  If a garment is for a size 16 girl, then surely it should be modelled on a size 16.  Yes?

If there’s another answer to this question, then I’d like to hear it.

HOW MANY PLUS SIZE WOMEN ACTUALLY BUY THESE MAGAZINES TODAY?

These magazines are still selling - and if the comments of most of the women I know is true, then these magazines are being produced in spite of the fact that not many plus size women are buying them.  What a contradiction.  Women’s magazines are supposed to be for ALL women of all ages, sizes and shapes - yet do we see ourselves represented fairly within their pages?   I only read magazines at the hairdressers, in the doctors rooms and the like these days, but not in my kitchen or lounge room (that is unless I sneak one from my hairdressers!).  

ONCE AGAIN THE INAPPROPRIATE "POSES" OF OUR MODELS and "CELEBRITIES"

Another point about these half starved waifs that I can’t understand - and I’m not alone in this, is the way they stand or pose.   Honestly most of them look as though thy need to find the “ladies” quickly or else they’ll have an embarrassing moment.   What is this all about?

Put a mini dress on a model and she crosses her ankles - put her into a pair of jeans and she sits with her legs open wide.  Am I really that old-fashioned to be offended?

LAST BUT CERTAINLY NOT LEAST

The debate about the size of models has been going on for far too long, without any resolution that satisfies the majority of women.  Even young women.  I see a number of blogs these days written by young, intelligent, articulate women - teenagers through to 30-40 year olds - all declaiming the use of digital enhancements and photoshopping of models and even photographs of everyday things - landscapes and the like.   Even some of our better known and top models say they don’t even recognise themselves after being photo-shopped!    What does that say?  It says that we’re being conned, and that reality is no longer real. 

Don't you think it's about time we saw "real" women - flesh and curves; wrinkles and grey hair; faces and bodies that are their own and original (without the help of a scalpel) in our magazines - or isn't the 21st century world ready for this yet?  When will someone in the media have the courage to make decisions to show us as we are, not as "they" want us to be?

DO YOU EVER WONDER?

Have today's women become TOO obsessed with thin-ness and sexuality, losing out on femininity and sensuality?   Have we lost the ability to tell the difference?

What's your Opinion?

I heard on the television morning news a few days ago, that there's a suggestion from Professor David Penington for teachers to add the weight of a child to their report cards in an effort to combat obesity.  Parents, psychologists, and a whole spate of other interested parties are jumping up and down in anger at possible consequences.

Read the link hereunder and see what you think.   Is "naming and shaming" a child going to successfully combat obesity?   Will it even, in the worse scenerio, pit parent against child, each blaming the other because of the child's size?  Will it set in place a dislike even hatred against teachers and education per se?   Will it put teachers at a disadvantage whereby as many have already said "we're there to teach the children, not to put them down because of their weight"?  Will it set in place more opportunities for bullying?  There are countless ramifications when you think about it.

In fact, let us know here at RoseMary's NoteBook© what you think, because this whole subject of categorising children into "fat" or "thin" is bound to reflect on any child's self-esteem and feelings of worth.   Believe me, I'm one of those people who as a child was subjected to this kind of pressure and I know the personal effect on me.  I'm fortunate in that I've been able to work my way through those feelings of inadequacy and worthlessness based on what I was told regarding my size.  Many people can't handle the humiliation and never get over it.   And speaking with hundreds of women over the years, I can speak knowingly of tragic circumstances resulting from inappropriate behaviours, attitudes, comments and actions by those who supposedly were out there to "help the child lose weight" which then became "we'll help you lose weight" (as an adult),  but who did nothing more than erode that person's perception of self.

As many parents have said, bring back sports and physical education into the curriculum;  encourage children of all sizes to be treated with respect and tolerance by each other and to each other; and encourage kids to get outside and play games - preferably with the parents participation.   We all know that parents have time constraints, but having and bringing up kids is an all-round responsibility - we've been there and done that and at times it was difficult, but the effort was worthwhile.  What we've got to do is the right thing by our kids (and grandkids) while at the same time expecting "society" (the media, the health industry, educators etc) to do likewise.

I look forward to your feed-back.

http://theconversation.edu.au/adding-kids-weight-to-report-cards-will-do-more-harm-than-good-for-preventing-obesity-11211

Surprised? Yes. Disappointed? Yes. Hopeful that things will change? Yes.

It takes something really out of the ordinary to make me sit up and want to yell from the rooftops that "this isn't fair".

Mind you, I've been up there (on the rooftop) many times over the years, in an endeavour to get women to recognise inappropriate attitudes (as far as body size and looks are concerned) and to put in place practical and workable solutions that will benefit their own lives, and those of other women in society.  Then something comes along when I listen in astonishment and say how can this be so?

On this morning's news on ABC 24, there was an interview of two  young women - Louise Adams a Body Image Consultant and Kristan Dooley of the Women's Forum Australia.   They spoke about body image in the present day, and more importantly the impact that negative body image is having on our children.

Firstly Kristan Dooley, the MD of Women's Forum Australia, was interviewed about the Lottie doll that is making inroads into the doll market for little girls.  The Lottie doll is a doll that represents a small child, and she even "stands on her own two feet".  She is totally unlike Barbie in her shape and figure and sales of this doll are surprising both retailers and the supplier.  A very positive interview from Kristan and there's no doubt that many parents will be looking for Lottie dolls to give as Christmas presents this year.


"There's a new kid on the block and she's all kinds of cute. Meet Lottie, the wholesome girl-next-door doll, here to destroy the joint with a healthy dose of body image realism.

She doesn't wear make-up, has a waist that won't fit through the eye of a needle, and sports sensible shoes built for jumping in puddles. She even manages to stand on her own two feet.

Barring an exceptionally large head - presumably to house her enormous brain - and Manga-sized eyes, her dimensions are modelled on the average nine-year-old girl's body shape.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/national/a-whole-lottie-to-love-about-this-girlnextdoor-doll-20121201-2ao4o.html#ixzz2E3VmbeNt"

Louise Adams then spoke about body image today being a fundamental dislike of body size and shape which is resulting in many eating disorders with countless women and young girls not liking themselves. She then mentioned that although many magazines are no longer photo-shopping the photos of models and women shown within their pages, there is still a lot to be done via the media, magazines and television to promote a healthy and happy philosophy of acceptable. She also mentioned that many women see themselves as objects and they then tend to look at other women as objects - never seeing their own worth nor the worth of other women, regardless of their ages, shape or size.

But this is where it gets scary, and down right frightening.   Children at pre-school at the ages of 3 and 4 are "dieting", or refusing to eat certain foods because they'll get or BE fat.   Where does this body dislike start?  Obviously in the home and through film, television and magazines.

What is happening in a society where little 3 and 4 year olds see that unless they diet, they'll become unacceptable?  

Have we turned away from the need to reinforce feelings of worth into our children and grand-children?  Can we blame current society or is some of the blame our own?   Where have we gone wrong?   What can we do about changing this situation?   Can we do anything?

We've got to talk about this subject.  With each other and to each other.

Are we supposed to accept; to ignore; or to ask why? During this past week, the title of yet another article that  appeared in the Melbourne Sun-Herald, loudly proclaimed: Bigger keeps getting better and better.   My eyes were drawn to the article, because the very first words following the title were these:  BUMPER-size Victorians are ruling the retail roost, with some outlets reporting a 70 per cent increase in their plus size fashion business since 2010.   Now the content of the article sounds rather good to me - it means to my way of thinking that retailers are increasing not only their choices but also their sizes for the plus-size woman.   Read a little further and there appears to be still along way to go, because Target plans to expand its core range from size 18 to size 20.  Hurrah for the size 20s of this world.   It does mean however that the size 22 upwards woman is STILL ignored, to a large extent, by these retailers.    Thank goodness for those independent providers of plus-size fashion who understand our needs, and have responded with size ranges that meet those needs.  But I've digressed somewhat.  I'm beginning to believe that maybe I AM somewhat "thin-skinned" when it comes to being expected to accept certain inappropriate words to describe me and countless thousands of plus-size women.  I do not like the words "BUMPER-size".   And please note that the word BUMPER is highlighted in the article in BOLD as well as in capital letters.  I refuse to accept such words.    Look, I'm thrilled that the retailers such as K Mart, Target, and Big W are at long last recognising the marketplace potential of sizes in the 18 -20 range.  Of course I'd love to see their ranges going far beyond that size.   It's what is "inferred" in articles such as this that I object to.   Why should the reporter Andy Burns, start off by using the words "BUMPER-size"?  I ask respectfully, because if this article had commenced with the words, "Skeletal sized Victorians" or "Anorexic Victorians" I would imagine there to be a huge hue and cry (with every good reason) - about the words being judgemental; intolerant; unaccepting; discriminatory (there's that word again); lacking decent good manners, and totally inappropriate in a society where such inferences are politically incorrect.  But it seems, time and time again, that the plus-size is "fair game"!   Why does the media permit such unbalance in their reporting?  I guess it comes down to selling their papers and/or magazines.   Would love to hear your views.

Those dratted scales!

No I'm not talking about music scales,

but the dratted weighing machines

If you're anything like me, you've probably thrown out your bathroom scales years ago - they're certainly not our friends and will take great delight in belittling us and our "feelings".

But I'm talking about when you do to the Doctors, or even more importantly, if you have need to go to hospital for any reason. That might be from getting an eyelash taken from the corner of your eye, to major surgery. They will at some time during the admission process, weigh you.

Now, don't get me wrong. I realise they need to know your weight, if only for the reason of how much anaesthetic to give you, should you need surgery. But I don't like the way many nurses seem to find enjoyment in loudly repeating your weight as they take notes. It's not as though everyone in the hospital is deaf, surely.

I'm sure you can tell many stories about inconsiderate hospital staff. I've had nurses very quietly look at the scales and make a note, and I've had strident nurses bellow once if not twice my weight as they write it down. Do I sense a fiendish satisfaction in their faces as they do their best to embarrass me?

I've been caught up with the obnoxious BMI debate and I'll not go into that at the moment, but the way in which plus size women are treated by a lot of hospital and clinic staff is no longer tolerable, in my opinion. It's time for us to stand up for who and what we believe in - ourselves, and actually say what we think - without being militant or nasty, that is.

So I've composed a short letter - constructive criticism I call it - that I attach to my medical details whenever I have to change clinics, or attend hospitals for checkups and so forth. I set out the fact that I am an adult woman, larger than some and smaller than others, and that my weight is very personal. I point out that I have learned to live with my weight, and that should it be necessary for staff to check/recheck my weight, then could they please give me the courtesy of doing it quietly. That would prevent me becoming embarrassed, not by my weight but by their rudeness, and it would allow them to do their job competently and efficiently. They'd have the numbers or figures they need, and there'd be two happy people. Me and them (the nurse and the hospital).

Fat Jibes!

I read with interest an article dealing with "fat jibes", by authors Rebecca Puhl and Kelly Brownell, both from Yale.

It seems research has found that making people feel bad about their size and/or weight is not the way to go. It's counter-productive. There is a wide-spread belief that making people feel bad about themselves (i.e. attaching your fat photograph on the frig) is an acceptable and effective form of motivation. It isn't.

Victimisation (for that's what it is) amongst youngsters creates a no-win situation for them. This type of stigma doesn't work, and most of us know some of the consequences of being treated this way.

I bet most of us can confirm derogatory comments whether in the family, amongst our (so-called) friends and at work. Think of job discrimination. Do we get the promotion without having to undergo rigorous processes when many younger and slimmer people get into the short-list quickly and easily and it's NOT always that they're better at the job. Oh no! Even physical aggression. now, this is one of those "hidden" things that go on, but most of us again, will confirm that we've been subjected to this sort of treatment. We know all this because most of us have gone through this sort of unreasonable behaviour by others.

But the article quoted: "the personal stories we've collected in our studies are heartbreaking; a mother joking in a crowded room that she takes her child to a tentmaker to buy back-to-school clothes; a doctor telling a patient that she is too fat to interest her husband sexually; a teacher announcing to a classroom that an absent child 'probably stayed home to eat'".

These stories reflect a viciousness long ago shunned in matters of race or gender. Here, though, is a perverse twist. People inflicting the stigma are often convinced they are actually helping the victim.

The authors say, "We all need to change and the first step is simple. We must recognise that weight stigma is harmful, that it may well be contributing to obesity, and that it is not legitimate."

Health care professionals including doctors and nurses, dietitians and nutritionists and others within the health arena are very often the perpetrators of this stigma.

What I found of particular interest in this article was the statement, If even the health care system is unwelcoming, where can the obese turn for help?"

Where? Well a lot of us find help and encouragement (in verbal terms) from other people who are in the same predicament as us. It's by joining forces that we can find companionship and understanding.

LOVE without ATTACHMENT!

A lot of my friends (and even casual acquaintances) tell me that even though they surround themselves with lots of "positive" messages about self-acceptance, and plenty of healthy self-talk, there are times when they feel "out of place" and not quite sure of themselves, especially when it concerns relationships.

This is a favourite piece I have repeated and reproduced over many years through my newsletters and small booklets. I hope you will find it encouraging in your personal life.

LOVE without ATTACHMENT!

After a while you learn the subtle difference
between holding a hand and chaining a soul

And you learn that love does not mean leaning,
and company does not mean security

And you begin to learn that kisses are not contracts
and presents are not promises

And you begin to accept rejection
with your head up and your eyes clear
with the grace of an adult,
not the heartache of a child

And you learn to build you life on NOW
because tomorrow is too uncertain

After a while you learn that even sunshine burns if you get too much

Plant your own garden and decorate your soul
instead of waiting for someone to bring you flowers

After a while you learn that you really have infinite worth.

...... Author unknown

The "nonsense" that's going on about plus-size fashion!

Plus-size is a word that has lost its effect.  It is, in fact, becoming a misnomer, because people are taking it to extremes.   When I see fashion, and models on the runway, in size 14, and it's being touted as "plus-size", then I become justifiably angry.   And I'm not alone.

We've been fighting discrimination for decades now - far too long.  Yet, we still come back to the media and fashion industry calling us names that don't really depict or define us.  When will they come to accept the immutable fact that we are:

(1)  Women

(2)  Intelligent

(3) Sexual beings 

(4)  Honest and fully aware of our height, width, weight, shape and size

and
(5) We don't need to be constantly reminded all the time that we don't fit the "mould"!

This is becoming a nightmare.   Those of us who have been advocating a change in attitude for decades (by society at large as well as by ourselves to ourselves and others around us), see small inroads into the clothing market for women of size in todays marketplace.  But it's far too small - the inroads I mean.   

No wonder young girls and women of size 14 and 16 are tearing their hearts out trying to lose weight to meet the so-called "ideal" of LESS than size 14, so that they're no longer seen to be "plus-size".  It has become a derogatory word, not an inspiring one.

Plus-size used to describe women of size 22 and above.   Now for some unexplained reason, and there are some interesting arguments going the rounds which I reckon I've heard all of them over the past fifty years, plus size is now around 14!   Just what is going on here?

Women are women - no matter what weight, size or shape they are.   Yet as soon as a fashion show comes along or a new collection is released, we're supposed to be so grateful to see that "plus-size" is included - yep, up to size 14.

How does the woman who is larger than size 14 feel - say 20 through 30 - when she sees all this nonsense in the press and the current affairs programmes on TV? She feels slighted, she feels rejected, and she feels (again) relegated to the "not acceptable" heap.  And if she's like me, she starts to feel angry.

I read just this morning that Peter Morrissey has said that women of many sizes should be seen on the catwalk.  I can well remember Peter saying in a press interview some years back, that he would never deign to design a dress for anyone larger than size 14.  I made a pact with myself all those years ago that I would never promote any of Morrissey's fashion, and I haven't. Has he changed his mind?  Had he changed his attitude?  I'm not sure, but I hope it isn't because he has suddenly seen the big $ profit-line by designing garments slightly larger than his original limit.  Because that would be hypocrisy and we don't need any more of this, thank you very much.

On the other hand, maybe Morrissey has realised that his attitude of years ago was wrong!   I'd like to think that even the most adamant person who decries curves as being unacceptable, can change his/her mind, and to see the value of curves.

It will be interesting to see how this whole question evolve - because there is a lot of discussion going on, and it would be so nice if it continued in an upward and positive swing.

Do I often get up on my soapbox and shout?  No, but this nonsense of plus-sizes needs some trimming.

In fact I want someone to come up with some better descriptions than "plus-size" or "petite" or ......

I've worn out so many dictionaries trying to come up with some "positive" words, and I send out a challenge to readers of this blog.   Send in your suggestions for descriptive words that will highlight women who are larger than size 14, in an uplifting way.   Have your say on this very important subject.

(This photo has been found on the internet).

There's a lot of discussion .....

I read about an interesting exercise the other day,  that was conducted by a researcher into women's shapes and sizes.  Four women, chosen because they are all size 14, were asked to pose for a photographer.

When the photograph was published, women everywhere wrote in and complained that the women were NOT size 14, but were all different sizes.  This set about a heated discussion.

It transpired that all the women ARE size 14.  Because of their height, their width, the different proportions of their bodies, and the bone structure, they all look different.

And this brings us to the subject of our perceptions of size, when we read and look at photographs of women in magazines.   We look at the person without having the advantage of seeing other women all the same size in the same photograph.   We attempt to base our perception on what we think we see, rather than what we are actually seeing.  

This is why we advocate clothing for curvaceous women should be modelled by curvaceous women!   Not to have a bigger or taller woman on the catwalk (runway) with models who are size 0 up to 6.   The reason for our argument is this.   Regular fashion shows have models of a similar size - therefore the eye goes to appreciate the garment.  If you place one curvaceous woman on that runway at the same time, the eye naturally goes to her curves, and then the garment, rather than the garment immediately.  The woman with curves is immediately "seen" as being plus-size.   Yet putting models of size 18, 20 and 22 on the same runway, and the audience can appreciate that the garments are for the bigger sizes.

As for dressing models smaller than size 14 in garments that are manufactured for women in the size 14 to 30, and then pinning and adapting that garment to the small size of the model, gives no indication of what the garment will look like on the woman who it has been created for.   This puts the purchaser at a disadvantage for so many times the garment will never look the same on her as it does on the small model that she has seen in the catalogue or the website.

That brings to mind the fact that looking at a women and "assuming" that she is very plus-size or very skinny is dependent upon many things.  This is why we should never "assume" that someone is so different as to become unacceptable.  Being acceptable to ourselves and to each other, HAS to be a fundamental right and privilege.

Young women today versus young women of yesterday

Most teenagers/young women of today appear to have an over abundance of confidence. They will take up all sorts of pursuits and set what seem to a lot of us impossible goals, (particularly those of us who are "growing older").   In fact sometimes it seems as though younger women race towards their goals without much thought as to what they will do should they fall flat on their faces. It's not unusual to hear young women say that they never give failure a thought. Their attitude at times seems to be over-confident. The majority of us however encourage them.

That's not to say that women at all times have not set themselves goals that are achievable as well as those which required their persistence and dedication in achieving, even when it meant sacrificing a lot of things. For instance, many women have forsaken marriage and/or starting a family for years, in order to attain a "career". That career may bring with it great rewards - financial and psychological. 

Women have made incredible strides in becoming more independent over the past thirty years,  or more.  Of course there have always been women who have been pioneers and liberated and have overcome great obstacles to be educated and acknowledged as top of their profession - i.e. doctors, bankers, scientists, lawyers, corporate managers, politicians. But too often reaching these heights has "cost" them in more ways than one.

In the pursuit of "equality" in the workplace, women have had to prove themselves not only as good as but better than,  in too many ways. Unfortunately when this has occurred the weight of public opinion has been against them for wanting to prove their superiority! Too often from other women.


To be continued ......

A paragon of pleasing plumpness!

My friend Maureen in Western Australia said this about me a few years ago.  I thought it was delightful.   Maureen, being a curvaceous woman herself, was always looking for words that described herself and her friends in a happy and complimentary way.

That got me thinking about brides.  Not that I intend getting married (not at the moment anyway), but when I leaf through bridal magazines - it doesn't matter whether they're Australian or from overseas, you never see a model who is larger than a size 6 or 8.   Why?

Girls of all ages and all sizes get married and want to look their loveliest.  And why shouldn't they?   But when it comes to someone who is size 18 (US size 14) or 20 or more, they're not supposed to feel they deserve beautiful bridal wear.  Who says so?   Well the media for sure, and the fashion industry as well.  When we have dress designers who are "feted" here and internationally because of their "incredible talents", and who won't even deign to design everyday/evening wear let alone bridal wear for anyone bigger than size 14, then something's wrong.

I don't know how tall Queen Victoria was, but she surely was a buxom, plump little thing.   Dressmakers in the Victorian and Edwardian eras made incredible garments and they made them for slim, svelte and plump and curvaceous women.  Why can't our modern day dressmakers do the same?

Their argument?  We've heard it all before - it takes more fabric to make a garment for a larger person.   La de dah.   We know that.   But it takes more than fabric to design and make a beautiful garment.  It takes talent on the part of the dress maker.   This is where we're let down so often - a dressmaker is not necessarily a good seamstress/dressmaker.  For there has to be "engineering" knowhow;  there has to be imagination;  there has to be experience and there has to be an ability to see the whole picture.

Why does time fly, even when you're NOT having fun?

From Morgana de Courcy


It comes as some surprise to realise it's so long between posts. Have I been busy? Well some say yes, and I say "sort of". But a lot has happened recently and I would suspect most readers would nod their heads and agree that time certainly flies.

Since writing my previous post, I've spent some time with small groups of women who are trying to get over illness; getting over family breakdowns; and trying to survive in a harsh embittered environment. The first two categories can affect all of us at any time- it doesn't only affect women who are aging or who are plus-size. But the third category falls into an area of its own. The ladies who I was privileged to meet and talk with, were all women who had struggled to overcome size discrimination. And would you believe that a couple of these women were tiny - naturally tiny women. But their stories bore out what we all know - that discrimination runs rife out there in the world and within families. They were told over and over again, that they should be ashamed of themselves for being anorexic - these women are healthy (bodysize based on their frames and heredity characteristics) who have lost a lot of their self confidence too. It was eye-opening for each of us as we discussed many instances of rudeness and insensitivity by other people based on our sizes - those who were considered "plus-size" and those who were considered to be "anorexic".

Surely we have to come to a situation of expecting acceptance from everyone around us, whatever our shape and size are? What do you think? 

What is self-esteem? That will be the subject of our next posting. But in the meantime we'd like you to think about your dreams and ambitions. Do you "dream" about doing something out of the ordinary, like starting up your own small business, or going to China to teach English as a language? Do you believe you can achieve those dreams and ambitions, or are you often filled with doubt and guilt, based on what someone says or does to you? 

We all aspire to doing something "better" in and with our lives. Even if we're hindered by circumstances and by the actions and behaviour of others, we CAN still make our lives more fulfilling and satisfying. All it takes is a whole lot of belief in our ability to know what is best for us. 

And deep down, we DO know what's best for us. Some people call it intuition or basic instincts or even "gut feelings". But in order to be seen as typical and normal in today's society, too often we shelve our own personal dreams and ambitions. What others say, and these may be family and friends, and even strangers, becomes the "norm", and we lose our sense of self in the process.

"S" Plates

What is this nonsense?

In the press recently, an article raised the suggestion that older drivers should be issued with an "S" plate that should be affixed to their car windscreens. This "S" plate would then alert other drivers that the driver of the car in question is a "senior" citizen.

Whoa a bit. We've got "P" plates for those who have just been issued a license, and then there's a Disability Permit for those who are less mobile but who are still proficient drivers (of ANY age!).

But why single out the seniors? Why not an "R" plate for Road-ragers; a "D" plate for disqualified drivers (and this is not a contradiction because far too many disqualified drivers get back into the drivers seat and commit all sorts of road breaches of law); a "B" plate for bad-tempered males (no, I'm not gender biased!); a "Sm" for smokers; a "MP" for mobile phone users (which is illegal but an awful lot of people especially young women do it); and one that my girlfriend suggested "DM" for distracted Mums.

Why are seniors considered to be a nuisance - and as a lot of the media has been pressing in recent times, a "burden" on society? It seems someone has to take the blame for what is going on in society, so let's throw it at the seniors!

This is not good enough!

A Woman in a Corporate World!

Why are there so few women in top corporate jobs? And those who are, are they seen to be representative of intelligent well-educated women fully able to manage and be decision makers, or do they quickly become a slightly softened version of the tough and over-riding personality of big-time male corporate heads? I am not being biased, I'm simply asking a question. Because from where I stand, those women who have taken up top jobs seem to lose a lot of their femininity - and I'm not talking about the way they dress - and become something else.

Occasionally it's good to look at this question from another angle. Read and enjoy and if you feel like laughing out loud, then do so, it will do you the world of good!

"Why Woman are not appointed to Company Boards"

1. There are no suitable women. We've looked and can't find any
2. This is a highly specialised field
3. Women are specialists. We need generalists
4. We already have one woman on the board
5. If gender becomes the prime selection criterion, we'll dilute the value of the other criteria and will get inferior directors
6. It's insulting to appoint a woman to the board because of her gender
7. We had a woman once but she was hopeless so we can't risk another one
8. It's bad for women to appoint inadequate women as directors
9. We don't believe in quotas
10. Women mostly get appointed through patronage or seduction
11. A woman would be disastrous on this board
12. Being from Queensland (or other constituency) is more important than being female
13. It's not fair to aspiring male directors to have women push in ahead of them
14. Who'll look after the interests of men if the board is dominated by women?
15. Women talk too much, go off on tangents, are emotional, moody etc
16. Women are distracted by family interests and you can't be sure of their priorities
17. You can't have more than one woman on a board because they fight
18. The other directors are not used to working with high-powered women. 75 per cent of them have stay-at-home wives and all the other women in their lives have been in subservient roles
19. Women executives in the company (Queen Bees) don't like having other women on the board
20. The other directors' wives are threatened by women board members working closely with their high-powered husbands (partners)
21. It is uncomfortable taking women on board retreats
22. Women don't play golf.

So now you've had a good laugh, OK? But I'd like you to stand back and re-read many of these points, because whether you believe it or not, the comments mentioned have been used for decades, and continue to be, in determining that women are not satisfactory material for sitting on corporate boards. In fact many of these comments have been used against employing women in middle to top management of companies, let alone becoming a member of a board.

And again I'm not being biased, but I've noticed something insidious within corporations. When a woman becomes the spokesperson for that company, be she the CEO or board member, it is she who has to bear the brunt of anger should that company be forced to admit losses in profits, or even worse, to under go liquidation with massive losses of employees jobs. It's almost as though the rest of the entire board become invisible and innocent.

Corporate decisions are not made by one person but it's sometimes easier to blame a woman, (if there is one on the board or in top management). Perhaps I AM biased? But I don't think so. I've seen too much of how corporations work. 

.....© Leonie Stevens, Australia

Chronicles of a 21st century Woman

Introduction

As a motivational speaker and "encourager", I'm always on the look-out for like-minded women, who see the need to surround other women who have low (or no) self-esteem, with lots of positiveness and optimism. That's not to say everyone should go around with a big happy smile on their face, even when their lives are breaking apart, pretending that everything's OK. We have to be sensible and realise that it's a part of life having to go through experiences that will uplift us, and others that will drag us down to depths of despair. But it's what we "do" with the highs and lows that is important. Not only to us but to those around us.

In today's society there is a lot of controversy, hypocrisy and discrimination as it relates to looks, age, size and shape. That discrimination then translates into non-acceptance of a person's race, their education, and their beliefs.

This is when basic common sense and good manners get lost in the overflow of antagonism and hostility, from one person to another. In other words things get out of control. The person on the receiving end finds there's no let-up in the stings and barbs, and the perpetrator becomes immune to any understanding of how the other person feels.

Things become more and more confused and complicated. And there's no real reason why life should be this way.

It's usually women, and quite often family members and friends, who belittle other women because they "look" different, by way of looks, shapes and sizes. Why is it so? Why can't we all get on with one another; sharing accomplishments and hurdles with smiles, added offers of encouragement and just "being there" for each other?

Why do we feel threatened by other women? Either by personal achievement; more beautiful looks and figures; or just an inability to "see" another woman as being a friend rather than a foe?

And what is the answer?   There are a few ways of dealing with this.   If we do feel "threatened" by the success or otherwise of other women, we should ask ourselves why we feel this way.   Then think about our own attributes or successes and learn to see ourselves as accomplishers in our own right. 

If you feel that other women discriminate against you personally, then there are two options available to you.  One is to go along and accept this sort of treatment (which won't do you much good in the long run) or two to take the situation in hand, explain that you'd rather be in harmony with others rather than at war, then leave it to them to take the course of action they prefer.  If they walk away and you lose out on their "friendship",  then you must ask yourself, "were they actually my friend in the first place?"   

We can all do with analysing our behaviour and tolerance and acceptance of others - it's called "growing up", and we can learn a lot from tackling challenges of this sort. 

..... © Zuzu

Waiting until ........

You've probably heard someone say they'll wait until ....... before they'll do this, that or the other.  In fact if we're honest most of us have said the same thing.  I know I did, especially as it relates to losing weight.   And over the years I've heard thousands of women say the same thing.

"I'll wait until I lose wait .... before I travel overseas",   "..... before I do that course at University",  "..... before I'll buy that gorgeous red taffeta dress"; "....... before I'll start going out";  "...... before I'll find a man who is attracted to me"........ before I'll buy a swimsuit";  "...... before I'll join some friends for coffee"; "before I'll have a baby".     And so it goes.

Look at it this way.   Why do we wait?   Why should we wait?   Because if we look at the situation fairly and squarely, we'll see that we're setting ourselves up for a "what if we don't lose the weight" scenerio, and what happens then?  We become embittered and despair of ever being happy.

We go without the things that we would dearly love to achieve in the meantime, and who's to say that the opportunity to do what we wish for will still be there should we happen to lose that weight?   We may be successful in losing the weight and then find to our dismay that we don't or can't do what we dearly wanted.

On the other hand, I say (and OK this has been learned over many decades and through many episodes of self-doubt) go ahead and do these things NOW.   Putting things off never achieved anything really substantial in the long run.   Travel overseas - do that course - buy that dress and swimsuit - go out and meet up with friends - and if you and your partner are determined try for a baby.  And there's no reason why you shouldn't find a man who finds you attractive - it happens all the time - you just don't hear about all the success stories!  

Don't put things off.   Too many stories are told of people who missed out on so much just because they put things off "until they lost weight ......".

Losing weight is not the answer to any of our self-doubts;  confidence has to be fought and won by our own determination and strength (with a little help from our friends of course).   Confidence in our self,  our abilities and our potential is not dependent upon our weight (or our losing weight). 

We're intelligent, articulate women.  yet sometimes we fall into the trap of telling ourselves (over and over again) that it is the weight that holds us back from fulfilling our dreams.  Not so.   It is allowing the negative thoughts to take control and to manipulate our thoughts and emotions that are the trouble - dispense with the negative thoughts and replace them with "I can".   Try it out.  And have fun doing it, without waiting "........... until!"

(And if you can't find a red taffeta dress or swimsuit that suits you, then find yourself a dressmaker who will take on the job of making you look stunning.  It will be well worth it.  As far as a flattering swimsuit is concerned, have a look at Monif C's website in the US - her suits are absolutely incredible!)

© R P-B, 2010