British Censors Mind the Thigh Gap


"The UK Just Took a Bold Stand Against Unfair Beauty Standards the US Never Would," reports millennial news site Mic. As you might imagine, Mic author Maureen Shaw and I disagree on whether the latter is a good or bad thing. The "bold stand" taken by British officials was ordering retailer Urban Outfitters to remove a photo from its website because of too much space between the model's thighs. 

Colloquially, this is known as "thigh gap", something (or its absence, really) that has been the envy of Tumblr anorexics, scourge of body-image crusaders, and subject of ample beauty-blogger think pieces over the past few years. The British Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) apparently felt this Urban Outfitter model's thigh gap was too large. 

In a December 31 ruling, the agency decreed that "the ad must not appear again in its current form" and Urban Outfitters must "ensure that the images in their ads were responsibly prepared." The agency was responding to a complainant "who believed that the model in the picture was unhealthily thin" and the ad "irresponsible and harmful." In upholding this complaint,

The ASA considered that the model was very thin, and noted, in particular, that there was a significant gap between the model's thighs, and that her thighs and knees were a similar width. We considered that the model looked underweight in the picture. We understood that Urban Outfitters' target market was young people and considered that using a noticeably underweight model was likely to impress upon that audience that the image was representative of the people who might wear Urban Outfitters' clothing, and as being something to aspire to. We therefore concluded that the ad was irresponsible. The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rule 1.3 (Responsible advertising).

In a response, Urban Outfitters suggested that the model was "naturally tall and slim", not unhealthy, noting that she had appeared in many other ads and had a 23.5-inch waist. Mic's Shaw—who applauds the ASA's decision and writes that "the U.S. needs to follow the U.K.'s lead"—scoffs that "Urban Outfitters may consider a 23.5-inch waist normal," but "the U.K.'s National Health Service cites a healthy waistline as one up to 31.5 inches."

While that may be true, it's also perfectly possible to be healthy with a 23-inch waist; and while weight and waistline are obviously related, waist size is also partially a product of body shape and bone structure. The same is true for thigh gap. Some girls and women are built in such a way that even when very thin, they won't have much thigh gap; others would have to put on an unhealthy amount of weight not to have one.

Thus shows the inanity of trying to regulate such a thing as thigh gap. In general, trying to manipulate beauty standards through censorship seems like a waste of government time and an infringement on free expression and commercial enterprise. But even if we would grant that policing underwear-model body types was somehow defensible, this instance illustrates how it would fail as a practical matter. Enforcing "healthy" body type depiction will necessarily be random, subjective, and dependent on current cultural whims. 

Recently thigh gap and its detractors have been having a moment—and hence models with thigh gap draw the ASA's ire. But significant thigh gap is no more or less suggestive of an unhealthy body weight, or promoting of "unreal" beauty standards, than things like prominent hipbones, breast implants, or good lighting.

And for people whose goal is ostensibly making women feel okay about being individuals with all sorts of body types, it seems rather counterintuitive and insulting to say that women naturally prone to thigh gap are freaks who must be banned from our view, no? Like the "real women have curves" campaign, what purports to be a pro-woman message only continues to emphasize which body attributes are more socially acceptable than others. 

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

259 responses to “British Censors Mind the Thigh Gap

  1. “Unfair beauty standards” = “Men generally don’t find fatties attractive.” The bastards.

    1. Shit, I don’t think she’s attractive, and my tastes are nowhere near John’s.

      1. I’m speaking in general terms.

      2. Actually your tastes are probably pretty close to mine. I don’t like fat women either. Sarcasmic just claims I do as a way of distracting people from the fact that he only likes women whose figures resemble the bodies adolescent boys.

        1. Yeah, I know, but it amuses me to no end to pretend otherwise.

          1. It shouldn’t annoy me and mostly of the time it doesn’t. But once in a while….

            If I were smart I would embrace it. Hell, if I were still single, I would wish it were true. I knew a couple of guys back in the day who would go for anything. They were great guys to take out picking up women because they would immediately go for the fat chick leaving her cute and now aggrieved and attention starved friends to you. And they generally seemed a lot happier than the rest of us.

            1. There’s one universal truth among humans: they love food. So, fat people are happy because they don’t give a fuck about image/whatever, AND get to eat a lot. Eating makes people happy.

              I’m convinced that next to free trade, Food could be the only other thing in the world to bring world peace.

              1. Dumping loads of it into pointless ethanol production certainly seems to cause some distemper among people who can no longer eat.

                1. You must’ve forgotten the First Law of Politics.

                2. All I saw was a discussion of fat chicks followed by “Dumping loads…”

        2. Fatties need loving too, John. So you are providing a community service. You’re a better man than I for dishing out the BBW love. I just couldn’t bring myself to do it. Besides, I don’t have that much flour.

        3. Sarcasmic just claims I do as a way of distracting people from the fact that he only likes women whose figures resemble the bodies adolescent boys.


      3. Actually, I find that quite nice looking, but maybe I’m the odd one. I find the bodies of gymnasts, ballerinas, ice skaters etc quite enticing. My favorite ex had gone to college on a ballet scholarship, and ended up as a minor tv celeb.

        One thing I do notice all the time, though, despite the recent media celebration of huge rear ends — most successful, good personality, handsome guys I’ve met still seem to be with the women with the tight, small asses rather than the buxom ones. And how many white guys go for Asian girlfriends and brides, and most of those ladies have quite small behinds.

        1. What I’m hearing here, is that you fuck young boys.

        2. “most successful, good personality, handsome guys”

          My ears are burning

          1. Hmmmm….

            If I were you, I’d have your gal checked out (and maybe get some penicillin) before you go down on her again.

            It is a bad case of the clap if your ears are burning.

            1. Jeez. I can’t build myself up without somebody tearing me down. But I never thought it would be you, Jimbo.

              1. I should be ashamed to be a hater, but I just got done looking through the pics that LynchPin linked to below and now I hate anyone who isn’t married even more.

                How come these selfies weren’t around 20+ years ago when I was single. Life isn’t fair.

                Playa, the fact that you are out there partaking of the bounty makes me have to pull you down to my level.

                I wish I was a better person, but I’m not.

                1. I’m married. I only partake in the bounty of one woman.

                  Hate away.

                  1. Sorry Playa, I thought you were one of the single gay rakes commenting here all the time.

                    22 years for my wife and I. If she ever gets Lasik, the streak might be over but until then I’m doing well.

                  2. Good stuff Playa. congrats

                  3. Crazy eyes…

        3. I’ve truly never understood the attraction to fat asses. But then again, I’m a promoter of the ever-so-evil “European standards of beauty” which makes me just the worst kind of person and/or Hitler.

          1. “”European standards of beauty”

            Hairy pits?

          2. Rotten teeth?

            1. We’re talking about mainland Europe, not a certain island off its coast that could use a few thousand extra dentists.

              1. Not even. We’re talking about the European ethnicity. Which as far as phenotypes go, tends to produce my favorite hotties.

                1. I like Indian chicks too.

                  1. Like that fiery madras taste, eh?

                2. Sounds like you need some Latina loving in your life, brah

                  1. I’m cool with that. Latina and European ethnicity are not mutually exclusive categories. In fact one might reasonably claim that one is a category of the other.

            2. Rotten teeth?

              Not so much rotten, as multi-directional.

    2. It is interesting how much of standards of beauty is cultural, though. In the past the standard was often much more full figured. And in some cultures it still is.

      1. Perhaps it has something to do with wealth. In wealthy countries poor people are fat. In poor countries rich people are fat. Thus in a poor country a full figure is an indication of wealth, while not so much in a wealthy country. And maybe that extends across subsets of society as well. Just a thought.

        1. I think that probably has a lot to do with it.

          1. That and the fact that wealthy modern societies are into physical fitness, so a slim firm body is more of an indicator of health than a more full figured or plump one.

            1. That and the fact that wealthy modern societies are into physical fitness, so a slim firm body is more of an indicator of health than a more full figured or plump one.

              Wealthy people can afford to devote more time to exercise than poor people.

              1. Never been to prison, eh?

          2. I remember watching some movie a while ago, and in one scene a soldier brings his new Japanese gf/wife back to the States. She embarrasses him at a party by saying to some fat guy in a suit “You are very fat. You must be quite wealthy.”

            1. I’m good with all body types. One drawback that a number of physically fit women have is slim hips. The Y-shaped body doesn’t appeal to me.

              1. *most body types

            2. That was Quantum Leap. “The Americanization of Machiko” 2×03.

  2. Airstrip One leads the way, lads!

  3. Of course it was one single person.

  4. Thank you, UK, for being a constant reminder of why America is still a great place to live in spite of our problems.

  5. They really got their knickers in a bunch.

  6. Well admittedly they do have a bit of a gap problem over there already.

  7. Iss that picture really from the catalog? Because it looks to me like thhe pictures that came out of Dachau. I really don’t find skeletons very attractive. Give me ssome curves, please. (But not too much up top, a C cup is plenty.)

    1. Shit’s shopped regardless of whether it’s the actual image or not.

    2. She’s got obvious curves.

      1. Dem hip bones.

    3. I prefer girls to be a little more buxom but I have no problem with skinny. Some chicks do have that crypt keeper skull face (think Maria Shriver) that’s too creepy for me though. Yeah, and the fat butts do nothing for me.

      1.…..edia/funny stuff/motivator9666189.jpg.html

          1. Holy Hell

  8. I want to know when the UK government is going to take a stand against the unfair/unrealistic standards of Japanese anime characters and their tremendously large heads and eyes.

    1. Not to mention tentacle penis:vagina ratio

    2. “I hope senpai notices my thigh gap”

    3. I wonder if any of the government censors have ever seen Queen’s Blade.

      1. By “Queen’s Blade,” do you mean your dick?

        1. He knights people with his schlong?!

          1. You wouldn’t!?

            1. I dub thee… Head of State?

  9. ” too much space between the model’s thighs”

    When i was in high school, my girlfriend complained of this “unfair image”

    (*she was drop dead gorgeous, far above my pay grade – but nuttier than a Payday candy bar. Eventually emigrated to France and dumped her US citizenship. True story!)

    I was like, ‘WTF, thigh gap? what’s that’? She explains that the Male Gaze demands a standard of beauty that is biologically unreasonable blah blah blah….

    I go, “No shit!? Where’d you learn that?” = Cosmopolitan.

    To her credit, she actually understood that the whole thing was cooked up by women against women for woman to talk to other women about. But it still bugged her. I meanwhile quite liked her thighs.

    1. It’s not so much the thighs I care about as much as what’s between them.

        1. All women are tainted.

        2. Further down….to brown town.

      1. +1 fuzzy clam

        1. Minus the fuzz, please.

          1. I appreciate a good full bush, as long as it’s not the type that looks like a bunch of daddy long legs trying to escape the girl’s underwear.

            1. I’ve never gotten to the point where her pants are off and said “Nah, nevermind” because of the quantity (or lackthereof) of bush.

              1. Yeah, this is true.

              2. Point taken, I just prefer to not be distracted by it when giving a woman head.

        2. I figured you more of a cloaca man….I mean Lizard guy..thing…whatever.

      2. When it really counts, all women have a gap there.

    2. To her credit, she actually understood that the whole thing was cooked up by women against women for woman to talk to other women about.

      Seriously. I don’t think most men are super focused on “thigh gap” as the supreme indicator of attractiveness. Men are pretty base animals, and are sexually attracted to women in general. Personally, I’m attracted to big girls, skinny girls, college girls, MILFs, GILFs, black, white, Asian, redheads, blondes, brunettes, tiny tits, big titties, smart girls, dummies, whatever. I’m just attracted to women. The only women I am not attracted to are women who actually have body image issues.

      1. I think you’re right. If feminists want to say that men and/or our ‘society’ put an undue focus on the physical attractiveness of a woman, then OK, that strikes me as probably true. But to claim that men are generally stuck on something specific like thigh gaps is contrary to my experience.

        1. It’s mostly women who worry about crap like that.

        2. The most ridiculous claim is that men somehow owe fatties their attention. No one has a right to be found attractive by anyone else. Thus any policies pursuant to those ends, are as unjust as they are arbitrary.

        3. If feminists want to say that men and/or our ‘society’ put an undue focus on the physical attractiveness of a woman, then OK, that strikes me as probably true.

          Only if, by “our ‘society'”, you mean other women. And in that case, you can probably omit the “men and/or” part.

      2. I don’t know any male who cares. If you’re fine, you’re fine, with or without some arbitrary space between your thighs.

        1. That’s very true. It’s not any specific feature that makes a woman desirable or not, but the sum of those features.

          1. Preach. I prefer women with dark features but a hot blonde/red head/whatever is still hot.

        2. I think men care about the thigh gap very much – as in, will she spread her legs to create a gap for me to climb in between. That’s the thigh gap that men care about.

        3. There might be men for who this would be a ‘plus factor,’ but it would not be in itself determinative for any man I know.

      3. As far as that goes – its not so much what they’re attracted to as what they’ll use as ammunition against someone.

        Guys’ll fuck anything – including women that they’ll turn around and make cruel remarks to their buddies (even after screwing her just the night before).

      4. I’m with you EDG. I love all women. As long as they’re not gross or scarey looking I’m prolly not turning it down.

      5. Despite my oft cited preferences, only about a third of the women I’ve slept with were redheads. I don’t regret any of the other ones.

    3. …the whole thing was cooked up by women against women for woman to talk to other women about.

      And really, I’d say about 90% of all this nonsense comes down to just that. We guys really aren’t that picky. As long as she’s not genuinely fat, isn’t butt-ugly, and carries herself reasonably well, we’re usually good to go. Women spend a shitload more time passing judgements on this stuff as a means of social competition than we even have the inclination to consider.

  10. It is amazing how sexist this policy is. It rests on the assumption that women are such delicate irrational creatures that they are unable to understand that photos do not always reflect reality and that ordinary people generally don’t look the same or are expected to look the same as professional models who earn their living entirely based upon their looks and figure. How very Edwardian of them. I really think that the UK government should be looking at taking back the franchise from women. If women can’t be trusted to judge a fashion advert, how in the world could they be expected to judge a political advertisement?

    1. A lot of the origin of this stuff is the website Tumblr, which also has a large population of people who dig out the hidden messages of Adventure Time episodes and hold them up as life-truisms.

      I think there’s some kind of connection between people who take their own media a tad bit too seriously, the people who complain loudest about stuff like this (keep in mind a single complaint led the government to take this action), and government utilizing this as an excuse to censor.

      (not meant as a knock on the fine show Adventure Time)

    2. the sexism of low expectations…

    3. Re: John,

      It rests on the assumption that women are such delicate irrational creatures that they are unable to understand that photos do not always reflect reality

      What? You mean, they AREN’T?

      1. I think that’s a fair assumption, on some days. Others she’s not being a crazy bitch.

      2. Women aren’t all that delicate.

    4. John, this kind of thing is an affront to basic liberties and serves to remind us how much better we in the US have it than the Brits do (+1 written Constitution), but is the claim so much that women see these images and, not understanding that most people know these are unrealistic models not to be emulated, break down into mental illness or something, or is the claim usually that 1. young girls are more likely to do this and/or 2. this type of thing pushes the more general societal standards of beauty, and it’s being compared to that that grown women find negative?

      1. The answer to that is that women are full human beings and capable of rejecting such things. Indeed, the women who want these ads banned have managed to reject the standards haven’t they? If not, how do they know they are bad?

        The whole thing is just nonsense. The people who want this banned on the one hand claim to be above the effect of the ads to the extent necessary to know they are bad and want them banned, yet also claim that the ads somehow have such an effect that women can’t help but be affected by them. What are they, super beings?

        1. “The answer to that is that women are full human beings and capable of rejecting such things. ”

          Sure, but kids maybe not as much. Of course that’s where a parent says ‘these photos are airbrushed and not something you should try to achieve’ rather than some bureaucrat using force to squelch an advertisement.

          1. Who gives a fuck what kids think?

            Seriously, I’m going to tell my kid to shut the fuck up and eat. Until you pay your own bills, your ass is mine.

            1. “Who gives a fuck what kids think?”

              Well, people who care about kids I guess.

              1. If you did, you wouldn’t treat every incomplete thought uttered from their feeble minds as deserving of attention.

            2. Seriously, I’m going to tell my kid to shut the fuck up and eat.

              Yep. I’m eating the same damn thing, so you’re eating it too. Or you get nothing.

              I’m glad my kid has an open mind with regards to food. It’s nice to have someone I can enjoy a can of sardines with, or a mess of chicken livers.

              1. Chicken livers are fish bait, not food.


                1. Cooked up with bacon and onions, a sprinkle of fresh ground pepper, finished with red wine… yum!

                  Or like this weekend when I roasted a chicken with a herbed butter containing fresh thyme and lemon zest, then I took the livers from the bag and sauteed them in some of that butter… yum!

                2. Chicken livers are great. Weirdo.

                  Actually, I think that liver is one of those things where some people taste the flavor much more strongly, so it makes sense that it is a love or hate sort of thing.

                  1. Livers of anything are awful, foul, and disgusting bloated organs fully unsuitable for any purpose.

                    At least that’s how the doctor describes mine everytime I get the MRI.

          2. Then why not ban everything that might cause a child to do something harmful or feel bad about themselves. If we are banning thin models because girls might feel bad about themselves, then we sure as hell should be banning gangster movies because kids might think being a criminal is a good life, movies that show promiscuous sex because kids might think having unprotected sex is a good idea and so forth.

            The bottom line is that you either believe that people and parents in the case of children are capable of thinking for themselves or you don’t. If you don’t, then the answer is for the government to completely control all forms of expression it thinks might fool people into doing harmful t hings or feeling bad. There is nothing special about fashion advertising. This thinking applies to nearly everything.

            1. This is kind of my point though John. The concern about the negative effects on young people of this sort of thing are the same really as concerns about the effects of any other cultural item on kids. I think every parent has some cultural strains they think potentially could have a negative impact on their kids.

              Of course that doesn’t warrant a call for censorship. As you say, parents can address this sort of thing with their kids in ways that don’t abridge the basic rights of others to speak and trade.

              1. Yeah. That is why adults have to raise their kids. Kids don’t have experience or perspective and are liable to believe really dumb things. It is the job of their parents to teach them differently. But doing that is hard. Much easier to just try and ban everything you don’t like.

  11. Models are often airbrushed to death regardless of whether they have a thigh gap or not (I wouldn’t be surprised if thigh gaps were achieved in Photoshop, actually) There’s no point in obsessing over 2% of the total Photoshop job. Also, there’s makeup, good lighting, photographic quality. The model doesn’t look like her picture either. It’s supposed to be an advertisement, not a “beauty standard”. It’s only the latter if you’re an idiot.

    1. Yup, that’s exactly what I meant earlier, except my version’s shorter!

  12. “rule 1.3 (Responsible advertising)”

    A law which censors advertising for anything other than fraud is crazy. Where does ‘responsible advertising’ stop? If I show a hamburger, is it ‘irresponsible’ because I should have shown a healthier product?

    1. Hamburgers by and large are healthy — it’s the vegan and anti-McDonalds conspiracy that’s trying to convince you otherwise. A grilled burger with tomato, onion, lettuce, etc is almost like having a small piece of beef with a salad and roll, which you will often see touted as a ‘sensible meal’.

      French fries, on the other hand, are probably the most unhealthy thing available at fast food joints. Why is this almost never pointed out, and instead burgers are vilified? Because french fries are vegans’ favorite food.

  13. True story: When I was 13 or so I actually believed that your legs shouldn’t touch at all between your hips and your knees, with your knees pressed together. If they touched, you were fat.

    Was years before I realized that it is NOT HUMANLY POSSIBLE for your legs not to touch, not without being a 90 lb anorexic. If you are very slim, you MIGHT have a space between the upper thigh and the knee. But the thigh gap thing really is absurd. Nobody’s body looks like that.

    I don’t necessarily think there should be a law against it, but objectively, that is not a picture of a human female. That is an alien life form with a really bizarrely shaped pelvis. One of those planets full of scantily clad women humanoid from star trek.
    Be warned, she probably has head bumps.

    1. Doesn’t look like her knees are together.

      1. It still looks like her legs bow outwards to an abnormal degree. Very likely they photoshopped it to make her thighs look slimmer. The inside curvature on the lower thigh is just wierd.

        1. I’m sure it is. And I agree that it looks weird and not exceptionally attractive. Some people are bow-legged, though. I have a friend who can’t touch his knees together at all with his feet together.

          1. I like to go swimmin’ with bow legged women and swim between their legs.

    2. “True story: When I was 13 or so I actually believed that your legs shouldn’t touch at all between your hips and your knees, with your knees pressed together. If they touched, you were fat”

      This is what i’m talking about.

      its some crazy shit teenage girls spread around *to drive each other nuts*

      Men never knew, cared, gave a fuck.

      In fact, the ‘anorexic ideal’ was always profoundly unappealing to heterosexual men. No one asked what they thought. They were blamed a decade or two after it got old for ‘perpetuating stereotypes’.

    3. One of those planets full of scantily clad women humanoid from star trek.
      Be warned, she probably has head bumps.

      Go on…

    4. Was years before I realized that it is NOT HUMANLY POSSIBLE for your legs not to touch, not without being a 90 lb anorexic

      I am standing here right now calling bullshit. I weigh 130 lbs and my legs do not touch from my coochie down to my ankles. I can’t touch my knees together either without dislocating my hips. I am NOT abnormally thin. Sorry, but humans come in an amazing variety of shapes.

  14. This shit is just stupid. A lot of people don’t have that much thigh gap. Especially older, fatter people. But some people are naturally that thin. Don’t they deserve any consideration.

    As a very thin person myself (thigh gap is especially good when you have testicles) all of this crap about setting up the world to make fat people happier just bugs me.

    1. But some people are naturally that thin.

      No they aren’t. Not healthy people.
      Do your thighs not touch when you put your knees together?

      1. Depends on how tight my thigh muscles are.

      2. When I stand with my feet flat together, neither my thighs nor my knees tough. I have to bend weirdly to make my knees touch, and even then my thighs don’t touch. I’m not exceptionally thin, either — at least not at all unhealthily so — but I have wide hips and I guess am a little bit bow-legged. It’s certainly possible.

        1. Yes Elizabeth, you are just probably in decent shape and a bit bow legged. Some people are like that. If you are knock kneed and your legs bow in, you could be Kate Moss thin and your thighs would still touch.

          The whole obsession with a thigh gap is stupid.

        2. Pics or it didn’t happen…

            1. Poor Elizabeth, did she fully understand what taking a job at Reason actually meant?

        3. Thank you

        4. Go on…

        5. Ride a lot of horses at a young age? (not for that reason, perverts) I know a lot of life-long equestrians who are somewhat bow-legged from years of riding.

          1. I also found life-long equestrian women to have the lower parts of their asses to be somewhat tough and calloused.

    2. “….all of this crap about setting up the world to make fat people happier just bugs me.”…..te-4896729

    3. And how can the UK worry about women being too thin in advertisements when we supposedly have an obesity epidemic?

      Clearly all these anorexic models aren’t having much of an impact on the actual waistlines of Her Majesty’s subjects.

  15. So the Brits think we should be focusing on female crotches?

    OK. Can I get a cameltoe with that?

  16. Some girls and women are built in such a way that even when very thin, they won’t have much thigh gap; others would have to put on an unhealthy amount of weight not to have one.

    Really? Show me a picture of a normal looking female who has thigh gap with her knees touching.

    1. Why do you care about the knees touching?

      1. Damn, Warty, your basement dungeon is a lot more well lit than I would have expected.

  17. The discussion here shows that everyone’s tastes are different in spite of the ‘unfair’ beauty standards pushed by the fashion industry.

    No matter, fascists are going to tell us what we like. To make things even more fair perhaps they could mandate some kind of standard clothing, a dress code. Maybe uniforms, or even better, black pajamas.

  18. Oddly, there’s one thing that no one on this thread points out…

    They’re selling underwear.

    Doesn’t it make the most sense to show as much underwear as possible? Why is anatomical correctness even relevant? Should we adjust how mannequins are built to make sure that half of the product is covered up by plastic spillover?

    1. That is a good point. Models are often more clothes hangers than ideals of beauty. And seeing how it covers the crotch is relevant in selecting underwear, I would imagine.

      1. only if your vag is the same shape as the models. what about beef curtains? this is an unrealistic standard set here.

        1. I had to look up the definition of beef curtains. This is one reason why I come here: to expand my vocabulary in interesting ways.

        2. what about beef curtains? this is an unrealistic standard set here.

          Apparently that’s a thing that women worry about too.

      2. Models are often more clothes hangers than ideals of beauty.

        I made a similar comment to my wife when she commented on some famous model having a less-than-attractive face.

  19. Now I know what Gap stores are selling.

  20. Why is no one talking about the fact that the British government just told a young girl that her body is abnormal and worthy of being banned from public view?

    Way to body shame, UK.

    1. It’s all those Muslim immigrants, it is.

  21. What also amazes me about this is that if Urban Outitters had an advertisement where a woman was just ludicrously obese, like 400 pounds, they would get hailed as ‘brave’ despite the fact that being 400 pounds is just as bad for you as being underweight and can actually be worse.

    There also appears to me to be no evidence about whether or not this model actually is unhealthy. I’ve seen girls who are incredibly skinny but eat normally, so the UK is basically arguing that a particular body shape is by its nature evil regardless of how it is obtained.

    1. It’s all about feelings. Slim models make fatties feel bad, and that’s not fair. So it must be outlawed. Fat models make fatties feel good about themselves, and that’s wonderful. Stop thinking and start emoting.

    2. It is more than anything an attack on merit. The assumption behind objecting to this is that holding up an ideal for people to meet is bad because it makes people feel bad for not meeting it.

      As sarcasmic says, it is all about feelings. We can’t hurt anyone’s feelings. We can’t expect them to be inspired by an ideal, because doing that would be giving them their own agency. Better to worry about their feelings and treat them like slaves who can never be expected to even see better much less do better.

      1. It also makes the mistake of assuming that anything short of the ideal is worthless.

        I have, in my mind, an image of what the perfect body would be if I could somehow conjure up a woman out of thin air. My wife doesn’t look like that. I’ve never met, and probably never will meet, anyone that looks like that. And that’s OK. I still find my wife unbelievably gorgeous and sexy, along with plenty of other women.

    3. The thing is, there is plenty of market for realistically proportioned models. Just look at a Walmart catalog or something.
      It shouldn’t be a surprise that high fashion and companies that target hip young people use super thin models.

      1. The women in the LL Bean Catalogs are always hot but hardly perfect ideals or size zero skinny. When you are selling clothes to teenagers, many of whom really are a size zero, using late 20 something MILFs with normal if attractive figures isn’t going to work.

        1. John you’re supposed to whack it to the Victoria Secrets catalog, not the LL Bean… Unless you’re into lumberjacks?

          1. I am married. I don’t need to do that anymore. And LL Bean sells women’s clothes and they don’t use lumberjacks for models.

            1. I am married. I don’t need to do that anymore.

              WTF are you even talking about? Is your wife monitoring your posts?

              1. He’s saying that his wife puts out. Duh.

        2. If you ever are in New England, check out the store. It’s a trip. They’ve got live trout even. And it’s open 24/7/365. I hear it’s not uncommon to go in there at midnight and see Kirstie Alley or John Travolta shopping there. Not that I’d give a shit about either of them, but it’s a really cool store.

    4. It is worth keeping in mind when you are analyzing proggie thought that the foundation of everything they believe is the concept of equality, that inequality must be combatted in all of its forms.

  22. It’s awesome that on my screen the image for this article can be seen at the same time as the headline for the next: “California to Begin Digging Giant Ditch to Dump In Billions of Dollars”

  23. The “bold stand” taken by British officials was ordering retailer Urban Outfitters to remove a photo from its website because of too much space between the model’s thighs.

    “Bold stand”? Fuck. These. People.

  24. Do these campaigners complain about the fact that movie stars have become ludicrously roided-up? If looking at thigh gaps causes low self-esteem and eating disorders in girls, then seeing Chris Pratt’s glistening abs is bad for boys too.

    1. I mean, boys who aren’t Jesse.

        1. Now I’m going to have to do 100 pushups in my office while crying about how fat and ugly I am!

          1. If it makes you feel any better, I wouldn’t turn down fat Chris Pratt either, he seems absurdly charming, but Chris Pratt + abz would get to cut in line.

            1. Too late, already onto doing 1000 crunches while watching… uh… whatever the analog to the Notebook would be for boys with self-esteem/body issues.

                1. This looks like it might work. Though does he later get tons of chicks for being jacked at the end? It’s a long one so it’ll take me a while to get there.

                  1. Nevermind, just got to him literally picking up women. Perfect.

                  2. My favorite part is when he’s doing the photoshoot for some sort of bullshit Joe Weider spring device. He has some hot chick sitting on his shoulders and what Weider is really selling is very transparent.

      1. Some do. I have read some media reports about how boys’ action figures have gone from an in shape but normal looking GI Joe in the 1960s to roided out inhuman freaks in the last 20 years. This somehow affects boys, who also get eating disorders apparently.

        Maybe the problem is getting your self image from magazine ads and action figures. But that is just me.

        1. There are occasionally articles (note the conflation of protein and steroids) about the terrible curse of bigorexia, but the hysteria is obviously nothing like that for its female counterparts.

          1. That is hysterical. You can tell that article is written by some pencil necked nerd who has never been in a weight room in his life. If he had ever lifted a weight, he would realize who much work it is to get into shape and how no amount of “I must look like a movie star” is going to get most people to do it. If anything, most people would do well to have a case of biorexia. Do they have pills for that? I sure would like to have a case.

            1. Do they have pills for that?

              They do.

              1. It has been found during research that high doses of Dianabol can cause many liver problems, for example hepatitis, jaundice, liver cancer and liver tumors. There are also many other side effects associated with high doses, and it is recommended to take low doses to avoid these health problems. Anti Estrogen drugs can also be added to this anabolic in order to avoid further estrogenic side effects. It is also reported that acne, hair growth, deepening of voice and many sex related problems also become worse with its use.

                Fuck it. I will live with low self esteem.

                1. My understanding of all these drugs is that low doses are harmless. But yeah. I wouldn’t go messing with my endocrine system without a good reason to, like having an NFL contract or AIDS.

                  1. I read something years and years ago during one of the roid panics from a doctor who said in small doses or for short periods of time, roids really weren’t all that bad for you.

                    His contention was that if you didn’t ban them, people could go talk to a doctor and get on a sensible plan that didn’t cause any long term damage.

                    And with the current situation you end up with a meat head like Jose Canseco shooting you up with roids instead.

                    1. Even higher doses can be safe. Arnold has been on steroids since he was 13 years old. His doses are probably sane now, but he was renowned for taking what was then considered ludicrous doses during his bodybuilding career.

                    2. I think you probably are right about that Jimbo. People are proscribed steroids all of the time for other illnesses.

                    3. I was on steroids from ages 13-17 because of an illness (though sadly not the anabolic kind).

                  2. I probably should be taking testosterone. That is something that is supposed to be in my body. I am as big of a lover of the pharmaceutical solution as anyone. But really, I find it hard to believe that there isn’t some kind of long term price to be paid for drugs that really do improve your performance. You don’t just get things for free. Your body is set up as it is for a reason. You start putting a bunch of shit into it and getting it to do things it normally wouldn’t do, there has to be some kind of price for that. It is like sticking a big carburetor on an engine. Sure, it makes it pump out more power, but you pay a price for doing that because your engine isn’t going to last as long.

                    1. Low-dose TRT appears to be harmless. Find some shady doctor and see what he can do for you.

                2. high doses of Dianabol can cause many liver problems, for example hepatitis, jaundice, liver cancer and liver tumors

                  I’m gonna call shenanigans here. I could maybe see a drug making one more prone to developing a chronic hepatitis infection if you’re exposed, but hepatitis is a virus not something that spontaneously generates in the liver.

                  1. I think that there are auto-immune and other non-virus-caused forms of hepatitis.

                    1. Hmm, further research indicates you’re correct. I should’ve known better with the -itis suffix.

                      I blame medical professionals for naming the virus and the condition it causes the same thing.

            2. A winter storm is headed my way. There is a pill for that and I will be taking it in preparation for the coming winter weather.

              You can get one here:


          2. “Pediatricians are starting to sound alarm bells about boys who take unhealthy measures to try to achieve Charles Atlas bodies that only genetics can truly confer.”

            Wow, that is some horseshit. Very few people who are in good shape get that way entirely through genetics.

            Genetics obviously play a role, but a lot of it comes down to work. It’s not surprising to see the NYT pretend that being strong is the result of luck rather than effort.

            That part about how 38% of boys used protein and 6% used steroids is also hilarious. No one would think it was that terrible a number if only 6% ever tried a steroid, but when you put the number right after 38% who have used protein, it suddenly makes it sound like a scourge.

            1. What does “use protein” even mean? Eat chicken and track macros? The horror!

            2. Everyone has the genetics to be strong and fast. Our ancestors were killing each other with spears not too long ago, after all. These things are first and foremost about sad-sack fat fucks who want to give themselves permission to continue to be pussies.

              1. It is about that Warty and about making war on masculinity. Men are not supposed to do masculine things like lift weights and get strong. They are supposed to do things like distance running or cycling that will make them thin and more like women.

                1. There’s also a longstanding class distinction between male body types. Rich men did no physical labor and played sports like yachting and polo and fox hunting, while poor men picked up heavy things all day for their jobs and in their off time they’d do things like wrestle and have stone-throwing contests. You could make an entire academic career about this observation, I’m sure.

                2. In terms of interests I’m about as stereotypical for a straight man as you can get. The way so many women respond favorably yet surprised by this leads me to the conclusion that this is actually really uncommon among millennials.

                  1. It is funny you should say that Auric. I am a decent looking guy, but way too old for women that I find flirting with me all the time. When I first noticed it I was flattered. Then I realized it wasn’t really me, it was that their generation of males was……not male. No matter what the proggies say, women like men. Manly, masculine men and young women today can’t find that very easily in men their age.

                    Oh well, turns out that I am not special after all.

                3. “They are supposed to do things like distance running or cycling that will make them thin and more like women.”

                  John, have you ever seen a male cyclist?

                  They do not look like women.

                  1. Nor do distance runners, who tend to have a certain body type.

                    Women trying to look like male distance runners is more of an issue.

              2. Laziness has survival value, namely in conservation of energy. Aquiring as much energy as possible while expending the least possible and storing the excess for later use is a good strategy……..once upon a not too long ago. In the the modern post-industrial society it has become a liability.

                Now we have a huge excess of food energy available to us year round and no foreseeable use for the stored excess. People who are unable to rise above their animal nature and either limit intake or find productive ways to use excess are going to suffer.

                1. “…and don’t either….”


            3. Also, holy sampling error:

              “Over all, 90 percent of the 1,307 boys in the survey ? who lived in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area, but typify what doctors say is a national phenomenon ? said they exercised at least occasionally to add muscle.”

              So you picked people who live in and around one city and held it up as if it were nationally representative.

              That’s not how you science.

              1. The whole thing is hilarious. Young men want to be physically impressive? OH NOES

              2. And isn’t exercising to add muscle a good thing? Sort of the point, even if you aren’t going for a body-builder look.

            4. Pediatricians are starting to sound alarm bells about boys who take unhealthy measures to try to achieve Charles Atlas bodies that only genetics can truly confer.

              That’s a particularly stupid thing to write condidering it’s only 2 paragraphs down from this:

              Take David Abusheikh. At age 15, he started lifting weights for two hours a day, six days a week.

              Wow, just… wow…

              1. Whut? I worked out more than that at that age. I grew up on a farm. I would have killed to only have to work two hours a day, six days a week.

                1. No kidding. My oldest son at that age had a fairly lucrative side business of digging ditches and basements for the local farmers, and the average job was WAY more than 2 hours a day. It gave him awesome abs and chest muscles. (It also attracted world’s best future DIL to his manly physique.)

              2. How terrible. A kid wants to exercise. Get back to your video games!

          3. “The problem with supplements is they’re not regulated like drugs, so it’s very hard to know what’s in them,” said Dr. Shalender Bhasin

            …and there it is. WE NEED TEH GOVMENT TO MAKE SOME COMMEN SINSE REGULASHUNZ!!11!111!!!!!!

        2. I don’t know about the 60s and 70s, but there were plenty of roided out looking action figures in the 80s.

          1. He Man springs to mind.

    2. then seeing Chris Pratt’s glistening abs is bad for boys too.

      Never did anything for me. Then again, I’m not a closet homo. NTTAWWT.

      1. Who says WARTY is in the closet?

        1. No closet can contain all that is Warty.

      2. Wait, isn’t this your truck?…../IGYGF.jpg

        1. Never owned a truck, and the only bumper sticker I have is from the college radio station.

    3. Charles Atlas ruined a generation of comic book reading boys.


      1. “Ruined”

      2. Man, Alice is a bitch. Once he got jacked, I don’t know why that guy didn’t find a girl who was less of a horrible person.

        1. Alice was negging men into loving her before PUAs were even a thing. GENIUS.

        2. Now you know the origin of the Mac character on Sunny in Philly.

  25. ENB forced the alt-text to starve itself so thin it disappeared.

  26. but “the U.K.’s National Health Service cites a healthy waistline as one up to 31.5 inches.”

    Yes…if you’re a woman over 5’10”. In the case of the rest, your just a fattie.

    1. YOU’RE, even.

  27. Britain does not have freedom of speech, expression, or the press, contrary to what low information dullards in America claim. You can be arrested for posting offensive items or saying offensive things in public. Offensive- whatever that is.

    1. So… HnR is morally equivalent to genocide?

    2. I don’t know what offensive is but I’ll know when I see it………

  28. Christ, it’s not that fucking hard to get thigh gap. Just be a healthy woman who doesn’t sit on her ass all day eating pies and hot dogs. I’ve been married to a woman with a delicious gap for 20 years and the only time thigh gap was a challenge for her was when she was lugging around tummy luggage called a fetus.

    I like thigh gap. It’s sexy and feminists hate it. What’s not to love about an inch or so between the lovely thighs? Women who are nasty and meanly jealous of a thigh gap are caustic fools. Oh, by the way, Fuck the UK.

  29. my best friend’s mother-in-law makes $88 an hour on the laptop . She has been without a job for ten months but last month her check was $12564 just working on the laptop for a few hours. check out here………

  30. 239 comments so far, and no one has yet explained why the University of Kentucky thinks it has the right to ban pictures!

    1. I’ll explain. We are transitioning into a centralized international nanny state and NGOs all over the world meet to decide what the rules are. The surveillance apparatus is not yet complete, but once the cashless system is set up enforcement of correctness will be easy — and eventually automated. Rousseau said that if we cannot convince men to be good we nevertheless can force them to be good. Averageness, mediocrity and conformity is true equality. The U of K is doing what universities do — enforce the totalitarian utopian agenda they are charged with promoting. Education is a mere sideline to them.

      1. You can’t say “average”! It’s too negative and stigmatizing. Use something more positive, like “meets standards” (no wait, standards = judgement). Um, how about “befitting the community”, Yeah, that’s the ticket.


  31. Urban Outfitters should tell the ASA to go fuck themselves.

  32. This reminds me of George C. Scott in Dr. Strange Love. I paraphrase of course)(Gentlemen we can not allow America to have a THIGH GAP.

    1. Meant to say “a THIGH GAP gap…..
      damn no edit capabilities sirs?

      1. They don’t want to encourage all the corny birds with an edit button so clunky roundabout we’re stuck with I guess. Lots of corny birds in these parts.

  33. Sense and Sensibility in the UK (ASA – NHS), but Lonely Are the Brave.

    Those who market the misconception that “thigh gap” is “natural” and attractive are “slim customers,” indeed. The misperceptions that form in young minds are hard to change, but this sort of action can help turn the tide towards healthier hearts and fuller lives (See; electrolytes).

  34. Ok, this is the most fucking stupid thing I’ve heard of in a decent while. My wife is illegal to show in a bathing suit in Britain.

  35. So they’re only supposed to hire models with thunder thighs and a bowling pin body shape?

  36. Feminism’s ambitious competitive goal in 2015. To “land” a giant rocket-propelled dildo “on” a black hole located ten thousand light years away. Designs for the blouses of the technicians are now in the final completion stages. Phase one of project, dubbed Cosmic Equity, will be an international tour of a runway fashion display exhibiting the blouse design.

  37. And yet if they were to have an unhealthily obese model they would be lauded as paragons of virtue and tolerance. This has nothing to do with “health standards” and everything to do with the feminist agenda of imposing middle class white women’s sensibilities on the world.

  38. When will we be protected from their male models too?
    It is the worst kind of micriaggression to see these muscular young men in ads, we must demand that all male models conform to the Peter Griffin body style in the future.

  39. So, the ASA is now in the business of defining what is and isn’t acceptable body shapes? Shaming women who do not conform to their acceptable standards f beauty, such as having thigh gap… which is entirely natural in many women. So the ASA is now, effectively, telling these women who DO have thigh gaps they are … freaks? Unhealthy? What exactly are they telling those girls?

  40. “Urban Outfitters may consider a 23.5-inch waist normal,” but “the U.K.’s National Health Service cites a healthy waistline as one up to 31.5 inches.”…showing a 32″ waist should be similarly prohibited? Or is that “different”.

  41. I make up to $90 an hour working from my home. My story is that I quit working at Walmart to work online and with a little effort I easily bring in around $40h to $86h Someone was good tome by sharing this link with me, so now i am hoping i could help someone else out there by sharing this link… Try it, you

    won’t regret it!….


  42. What is funny is if the model simply positions her legs slightly differently its allows ……..GERIE-EU#/

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.