Mirror mirror on the wall who is more real than me?

Madrid’s move to ban overly-skinny models from its catwalks received world-wide applause last September, inspiring Italy to follow suit, with Paris and London fashion bigwigs at least discussing the issue. Australia, never far behind, is now attempting to introduce a national fashion industry code of conduct. The proposed code forces magazines to feature normal-sized models and confess when photographs have been airbrushed.

Youth Minister (yes a Youth Minister) Kate Ellis plans to attack the portrayal of stick-thin women by glamorous, fashion, media and advertising industries which she says is “contributing to a generation of children suffering from eating disorders”. Ms Ellis wants a transparent system where people realise models in those pictures don't look like themselves. Well Duh!

Magazines, just as they are placed on racks, can be categorically organised. Woman’s Day and New Idea type magazines are entirely founded on “real people”. Sports mags feature the athletic, toned, sculpted bodies of those who excel in their field. Teen magazines like Girlfriend and Dolly showcase young, bubbly, flirtatious personalities housed in energetic bodies. In recent year’s teen mags have done well introducing healthy bodies to its glossy pages. Yes, Mary-Kate Olsen, Lindsay Lohan and Nicole Richie make several appearances but not without the Magazine’s own criticism of their less than “appetising” behaviour. Australians are seeing more of themselves on the pages of glamour magazines and naturally that’s a good thing.

Australia's number one women’s lifestyle magazine Cosmopolitan Magazine feature fuller figured women frequently. They endorse the hightly popular Dove campaign promoting healthy sexy bodies in all sizes. Australians and Australian publications are clueing on to the real-size phenomenon, so why force feed an unnecessary regulation?

The problem seems to be the waive-thin models in high end, designer-orientated, fashion forward magazines. It’s unrealistic to suggest these publications need to surrender to the proposed code. We shouldn’t glorify eating disorders or parade them about as images of beauty; say no to dehydrated-near-collapsing models. Ban and refuse to use the current breed of size-double zero, unhealthily thin models but don’t strike down the image of thin models all together- they serve a purpose.

Needless to say, it would be nice to see Janie, who lives next door, on the shiny pages of a fashion magazine, or alternatively Janie’s mum with all her beautiful imperfections and human like qualities- but who wants to see real people in Vogue?

In a nation of women averagely size 14-16 it certainly is difficult to justify the difference between a healthy size 8 and anorexic size 8. It does exist. Skinny and unhealthy, though hard to believe, are severable.

Editor for Vogue Kirstie Clements told the Courier Mail this week she believes beautiful young people belong on the escapist pages of a fashion magazine, not real women of different sizes. "It's about beautiful young girls creating beautiful fantasies; it always has been it always will be.” Flipping through Vogue takes you to another world, the same world where you believe Aladdin will whisk you away on his magic carpet. A size 16 woman in a four hundred thousand dollar Karl Largerfeld for Chanel, haute couture, diamond encrusted gown, defeats the mesmerising fanciful vision altogether. Aside from that, what real person can afford the clothes? Not only is the model’s form unrealistic but so is the affordability of almost all garments and novel play things featured in high end fashion magazines. Logically what’s next then, real healthy price tags?

Regulating the size of models in fashion magazine is only a band-aid, feel-good, superficial approach to addressing more a serious public health issues. Understandably any little step helps but attacking magazines that rest on the unrealistic appearance of women is not a certain fix.

Society isn’t imperceptive it deserves more credit, people know waive airbrushed bodies are unattainable for a reason; they’re not real they’re edited. If the Government wants to test Australia’s intelligence and assent to the code of conduct go right ahead. The identity of high end fashion magazines will revolutionise into a picture of “me in an outfit I can’t afford, with a haircut I could never maintain, in a house I could only dream of”- an emulation of real people in unreal situations. Mission accomplished.

Nashneen Mohammed.