this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2025

274 points (99.6% liked)

World News

49182 readers

2174 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Recommendations

How to spot Misinformation and Propaganda

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

NewsAutoMod@lemmy.world

jordanlund@lemmy.world

Tenthrow@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

lemmyAtom@lemmy.world

274

Zara ads banned in Britain because of 'unhealthily thin' models (www.bbc.com)

submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by Davriellelouna@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

91 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 86 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

What's with all the stupid comments here?
She is obviously unhealthily thin, and of course she is allowed to be thin.
What is not allowed, and shouldn't be anywhere, is to idealize such extreme unhealthy standards in advertisements, and particularly not as a "fashion statement".

Edit PS:
The reason it is banned in some places, and should be banned, is that it sets an unhealthy standard, and causes eating disorders among especially teenager girls. It's basically for the same reason that advertising tobacco is illegal in most places.

[–] Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Why do you say she's obviously unhealthily thin? Per the article:

both models in question had medical certification proving they were in good health when the pictures were taken.

The only evidence the article gives to there unhealthiness is the protruding collarbone. As someone who is naturally very thin I can assure you that you can be healthy and have a protruding collarbone.

I understand ads are setting beauty standards that are unachievable for a lot of girls and women which causes a lot of problems, but I don't think ths solution is to mark certain body shapes as unhealthy and ban them, there is no universal healthy body shape, what is healthy for some is unhealthy for others. This isn't even getting into issues of race and other unchangeable attributes someone else might have and feel bad for not matching a standard. The solution is to ban fashion advertising in general, or at least to teenage girls, so you don't have to deal with these issues.

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Trump also has stellar health certificates despite being obese, when they are obviously false, why should I give a shit about a piece of paper where you can be paid to write anything?

I did not make my conclusion based on the wording in the article, but based on the pictures. And 2 things stood out to me, her sunken eyes, and her very thin legs.
Regarding the protruding collarbone, it's not just protruding which I agree can be normal, but hers is extremely protruding.
She may be built that way maybe having some fat burning gene or something, but she is still extremely thin, and using that kind of models to depict what is fashionable, has been very well documented to be harmful to especially teenage girls and cause eating disorders.

[–] tacosanonymous@mander.xyz 19 points 1 week ago

Welcome to the internet. Lemmy is better than a lot of places but we’ve still got people who need to be deprogrammed and/or don’t understand nuance.

In this instance, there seem to be people that believe pushing an unrealistic beauty standard on young people is some monumental effort to curb obesity or that tackling that problem is promoting obesity.

And just bc I’m on the internet and it’s expected that I have no nuance, I’ll go ahead and guess it’s a bunch of dudes that think they know what’s best for women. Real, "I’m a feminist bc I protect them" types.

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

So by that logic we should ban all ads featuring fat people too?

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (10 children)

You have to compare this to being obese, not simply being fat, that girl is not simply slim, she is extremely thin bordering on anorexic.

So no, and the reason it is banned in some places and should be in all, is that it causes eating disorders especially among teenage girls that try to become unhealthily thin to live up to an impossible fashion ideal.

There is no similar fashion ideal for being obese. But if hypothetically there was, and it caused a similar effect, it should also hypothetically be illegal to use obese models.

[–] Glitterbomb@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'm that thin too. Do you know how fucking tired I am of hearing about how I'm "bordering on anorexic"? Shut the fuck up, I probably eat more than you. You're right, there are a lot of stupid comments in here, as you put it. But they all sound like you. Reread your comments with the new understanding that there are thin people reading them too.

This is just a bunch of fat people collectively saying 'ew you should eat more' and it's gross.

[–] Zamboni_Driver@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 week ago

Seriously. This was my take too. It's gross that people are calling a thin person that they know nothing about "unhealthy".

[–] Tired@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

This assumption that young women are so silly and impressionable that they can't be allowed to see thin women modelling clothes because they might be inspired to become dangerously underweight, is really starting to annoy me.

Yes having only very thin women modelling in adverts is bad, but this isn't bad because 'fashion obsessed girls are so dumb they're gonna stop eating if they see this', it's bad because not all women are thin, and advertising only with the thinnest narrows the market you appeal to.

And if eating disorders in young women were really such a big worry for the government, surely they would instead fund nhs mental health services properly to make getting help for disordered eating and the issues which cause it (here's a hint, it's not fashion), much easier and safer to access?

But no, this is not what is being done, they're banning adverts with thin models instead.

Starmer really doesn't like women it seems. Too thin and you're stupid and impressionable and promote mental illness by existing, too many children and you're a scrounger who doesn't deserve government support, lacking an extra X chromosome and you're banned from public loos and refused healthcare.

load more comments (8 replies)

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 76 points 1 week ago (11 children)

That's good news.

Can we also ban ads with obese people in them, too?

There are two ends to the unhealthy weight spectrum, so it's not right that only one is being targeted.

[–] dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 week ago

And then we ban the rest of the ads! I like it. Write that down.

[–] kbobabob@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Do you have any examples of ads that you would be in favor of banning?

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 week ago (13 children)

Honestly, no, because I block all ads... and have no reason to see fashion ads at all.

Buy if I recall correctly, there have been several beauty brands that have overweight models and then frame it as "perfect" or something like that.

Like like with malnurished models, promoting obesity as "perfect" is damaging to anyone influenced by the marketing, especially teens.

I get their inclusion and body positivity mission, but neither obesity or severe malnutrition should be promoted as anything but unhealthy.

load more comments (13 replies)

load more comments (9 replies)

[–] vzqq@lemmy.blahaj.zone 36 points 1 week ago (1 children)

UK try to go a day without banning something challenge: impossible

[–] Fleur_@aussie.zone 20 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Got a liocense for that physique

[–] Gamoc@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

America just deports you to el Salvador without due process instead.

[–] Fleur_@aussie.zone 5 points 1 week ago

In America you have the license but the officer can't read so you're under arrest (shot in self defense) anyway

[–] icelimit@lemmy.ml 36 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

'protruding collarbones'

Isn't that normal in a healthy person?

[–] ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 19 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It should protude if you do the

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 week ago

Dude looks like Ruby Weapon

[–] Codpiece@feddit.uk 2 points 1 week ago

The what, mind flayer?

[–] ToastedRavioli@midwest.social 19 points 1 week ago

As someone with their six pack stored in the cooler, even I have protruding collar bones

[–] waterSticksToMyBalls@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yes but she didn't have a license for protruding collarbones

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

There’s a difference between seeing someone’s collar bone and accidentally slicing your hand on it.

[–] T156@lemmy.world 28 points 1 week ago

Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have

Why is the description a snippet of Rule 3?

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Dated a Jamaican woman back in the day, 5'10", maybe 110lbs, perfectly healthy, did nothing to keep her weight down. People can be fine looking like this model.

This story seems so odd to me, like crazy overreach in service of a fine goal. Meh, what do I know. Fat people were rare when I was young. What's now considered "skinny" was perfectly normal in the last century.

In the early 1960s, roughly 13% of people were considered obese by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines. Recent figures suggest that a current national obesity rate closer to 43%.

In addition, nearly 10% of all Americans were morbidly obese during the 2017–2018 survey, compared to less than 1% in 1960–1962. Childhood obesity rates tripled from 5% in the early 1970s to more than 19% by March 2020.

https://usafacts.org/articles/obesity-rate-nearly-triples-united-states-over-last-50-years/

[–] ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

crazy overreach in service of a fine goal

The UK

Is anyone surprised? That's their MO.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

LOL, the cops over there all proud of their pocket knife angel.

[–] Droggelbecher@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I used to be similar to your ex, and stuff like in this post is why I wore a t-shirt to the pool until I was like 20. Not saying I had it as bad as a fat person, but body shaming the other end of the spectrum ain't it either.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

LOL, think you misread me or misstated. You were tall and thin as a rail but had to hide that at the pool? 😆

I do not wish to shame anyone. I merely want to scream to the heavens that where we are at is not normal or sane.

What if the same stats showed such a rise in alcoholism? Wouldn't we find that to be a major problem? Wouldn't we be questioning the impact on societal health? Wouldn't we be questioning the impact on all of our medical systems?

Here's NYC in the 1900s. Spot the fat people. No one is going to tell me those people were suffering starvation. They had plenty of other problems, but that seems like a thriving society to me.

We can talk all day long about why they were normal sized. We can talk all day about why everyone's fat now days. We need to talk about BOTH.

[–] Droggelbecher@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I think I was being unclear! I was trying to agree with you that banning ads with thin people is shitty, because when I was growing up, that was a huge thing, with 'real men like curves' and generally all the media being all about how gross it is to be skinny. And so I felt compelled to hide my underweight body. 'protruding collar bones' like in the article is pretty much a direct quote from quite a few of my bullies. It's important to fight fat phobia, but this really ain't it.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] skeezix@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

this is thin shaming.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] teslasaur@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

I don't see the issue with thin models, or that people would rather look at them. What should be banned is retouching the images to the point of being unrealistic.

[–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (3 children)

They look anorexic. I don't know why so many people are into that skeletal look.

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

They absolutely do not look anorexic - are we looking at the same pictures?

This seems like just a different flavor of bullying just now skinny people instead of fat. Some people are naturally frail and shouldn't be outcast from society for something they cant control (unlike most fat people).

[–] Noodle07@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

We're talking modeling here, unfortunately a lot of those girls are forced down anorexia street and dont just appear to be thin naturally

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] Fleur_@aussie.zone 6 points 1 week ago

Idk, I thought they looked good. I wouldn't describe that as skeletal

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

I love women so thin that other guys find it borderline gross. But damn, I'm afraid that model is skeletal under her clothes.

[–] haloduder@thelemmy.club 3 points 1 week ago

Anyone who shops at zara is a moron.

What's sad is I'm sure most of them are the kinds of idiots that think they "need" more money.

load more comments