You are here

Amanda Platell on fashion’s ultimate insult to women by using a man to model clothes for women

This is a comment on a Daily Mail article by Amanda Platell on how the fashion world is insulting womanhood by using a man, Andrej Pejic, to model women’s clothes.

The article begins:

For years now the debate has raged over size zero models, yet each year they became skinnier and less like women. No breasts, no curves, so desiccated by starvation they’d be unable to have a child even if they wanted to.

They became utterly defeminised.

This is a good sign because Platell does not just point out the thinness of high-fashion models but a second important correlate typical of them that has not been as well addressed in the mainstream, namely the below average femininity of the female models.

Then Platell addresses the people “who drove this obsession to strip women of their femininity”:

It was an edict by the fashion mafia — buyers, trend-setters, photographers, but especially the designers. They decreed that to look good in their creations a model couldn’t look like a woman. She had to be flat-chested, devoid of hips, with collar bones you could hook a clothes hanger on. In fact, she has to look less like a woman and more like a boy.

Size zero turned out to be an apt term as the most feted designers, mostly brilliant gay men,effectively tried to squeeze women out of the fashion equation. And now they have.

How did we ever get to the stage where we allowed a small group of designers — however talented —to determine that this is what is beautiful in a woman?

So step by step the elite of mostly gay designers has been creating catwalk designs for pre-pubescent teenagers, and each year wanting models who looked less and less like women.

One can excuse Platell for referencing buyers and photographers in the beginning as she makes it clear that gay fashion designers are responsible.  In a mainstream publication this acknowledgement would have to be made indirectly or the blame cast vaguely followed by sufficient references to the guilty party for readers to make the right inference.  Platell’s article goes far, for a mainstream publication, in assigning blame upon gay fashion designers.

Then Platell addresses the underlying reason:

It’s the ultimate in woman hating, to create a half-man, half-woman creature because the girls are simply not up to the job. They’re too, let’s face it boys, womanly, even when they’ve been starved to within an inch of their lives.

What an act of abject misogyny [marketing clothes to women using a man to model women’s wear].

Now Platell reads like a feminist, except that she is not one in writing this article.  Platell uses expressions such as “Real women started to love their curves long before Christina Hendricks wowed the world in Mad Men with hers.”  Feminists would not equate “real womanhood” with curves because women come in all shapes and sizes and slender women without curves are not lesser women compared to the more curvaceous ones, with which I agree.

Does Platell not address the real underlying reason because of the constraints under which she is operating (writing for a major mainstream publication) or because she does not have a clue?  I incline toward her not having a clue.

Why would gay fashion designers hate the women who buy their clothes and thus provide them with their source of livelihood, earned doing work that pleases them?

To figure out the underlying reason, one should also consider a third important correlate of female high-fashion models.  Fashion designers prefer to use girls in their mid-teens to market clothes to adult women, and they would use more girls in their early teens for this purpose were it not for public relations issues; keep in mind that women able to afford expensive fashion merchandize are those with disposable income and hence disproportionately women who are past young adulthood.

The explanation is straightforward.  Slender boyish-looking teenage girls come closest to approximating the physical appearance of adolescent boys whose looks many gay fashion designers, who dominate the top ranks of the fashion world, find highly appealing.  Gay fashion designers can push the boundaries when it comes to male models but they cannot make it blatantly obvious to the masses.

The underlying reason is an aesthetic preference, not misogyny, which feminists, and presumably also Platell, have either no clue about, a difficult time understanding or are unable to acknowledge.

Aesthetic preferences also underlie fashion imagery depicting women in collars or bondage paraphernalia; women in leather, with whips; featuring themes involving domination and subjugation, rape, gang rape; and the use of nudity and sexuality when it is not needed.  These reflect the disproportionate interests of homosexuals in bondage & discipline, sadomasochism and sexually charged environments; they do not stem from dislike or hatred of women.

Platell has the timing of the beginning of “the obsession with models who looked like boys” wrong.  She traces it to September 2006 when model Luisel Ramos died from malnutrition.  Readers should refer to twentieth century trends among high-fashion models to get a clearer picture.




Looks like you are steadily being vindicated.

I mentioned (years ago in my 20s) to female friends, that the fashion industry was obviously dominated by gay men...and what did they know about femininity? I was dismissed as 'homophobic' for daring to suggest such a concept.

What's fascinating is that this is in a mainstream publication.

One wonders if women are going to wake up soon? Most men are largely unaware (they are even unaware they are blamed for it - most of them have never heard of Naomi Wolf)!

I was delighted to see this article, and I hope you were too, Erik. I think it is monumental to see this opinion shared in a mainstream publication, even if you disagree with some of the nitty-gritties about it!

And I have to say I made the mistake of searching for "Chloe Memisevic" in Google images and I almost vomited. What a horrifically hideous creature.

Apollyon: Speaking of daring, this guy contacted me that he was pleasantly surprised to come across my argument on gay fashion designers being responsible for selecting high-fashion models who were very thin and with other characteristic features, something that he had presented, of all places, in women’s studies class! He contacted me a few years ago and the incident had occurred years earlier. Basically he was laughed out of class as homophobic.

This guy came across as left leaning, apparently had nothing against gays and did not appear to be someone who had enrolled in women’s studies class to have fun messing around with feminists, i.e., his viewpoint was a non-malicious inference rather than indicative of prejudice against gays. In contrast, if I were to insist that my argument on the gay fashion designer influence is independent of the attitude that I have toward homosexuals in general, many people would not believe it. So I let the evidence speak for itself.

Regarding people waking up, this will be a gradual process. Before the internet, the mainstream media—who are under the control of a small number of entities—had a monopoly on mass communications. The internet age has exposed an increasing number of people to an entirely different world out there. Confronted with novel, confusing, contrasting and contradicting information, those better at critical thinking have been quicker to separate the wheat from the chaff and others have had their critical thinking skills sharpened. People like me, who would not have a chance to introduce unorthodox ideas to the public via the mainstream media, can reach out to tens of thousands of people on the internet for a nominal cost—it costs a mere $15 per month to run this website, and I could run it for $10 a month or less if I change the service provider, but I like the service provider and the extra is practically nothing.

When html 5 specifications are finalized and we get to use it widely, people less tech savvy than me will be able to come up with more sophisticated websites for a similar or lower cost. A number of orthodox stances are doomed in the long run.

all these people who laugh at your thesis are simply doing so because they feel they have to. the herd is stampeding in the gay direction at the moment. gays must constantly be prodding them because they know the herd doesn't really care about anything except being cool. so if cool were to change they would lose control and may even get it from all the people they chose as enemies. it all comes down to what's cool right now. they want to be cool.

Erik says: "One wonders if women are going to wake up soon? Most men are largely unaware (they are even unaware they are blamed for it - most of them have never heard of Naomi Wolf)!"

they are not going to wake up erik. rather they all ready know but don't have the will to buck the trend. they'll wake up when men make it unfashionable.


That comment was mine, not Eric's.

Men will not make it unfashionable (heterosexual ones anyway). They are not in control of fashion. It will remain 'fashionable' so long as homosexual men dominate the industry.

Unless there is a viable alternative, women will continue to complain about the (mythical) hetero-patriarchy that forces normal sized women to shop for clothes designed for skinny, boyish adolescent girls.

Until the general population is made aware of why the fashion industry is the way it is, and until there is a viable alternative, things will continue as is.

Tim: I did not write the quote you have ascribed to me; Apollyon did.

Bluto: I do not believe that gays are prodding the herd. It is more like some gays are among those prodding the herd, but gays by themselves could not bring themselves to prod the herd. The herd mentality or more specifically endorsing what is cool, manifest in an extreme manner, is most extensively a characteristic of people with a leftist political orientation. Thus, pre-1970s, when homosexuality was “not cool,” leftists persecuted homosexuals; now they promote “gay rights.”

One of the major events that precipitated change was a few days of riots centered around Stonewall inn in Greenwich, New York, which catered to homosexuals, transvestites and the like, and was run by a mobster, homosexual as far as I recall. The criminals had paid off the state police but not the federal police and a raid by the feds followed regarding criminal activity at the inn. The local homosexual community rioted and the leftist leadership, interested in using marginalized groups, figured that the homosexual community was of use to them.

The leftist movement slowly transitioned from animus toward homosexuals to friendliness. The leftist movement has spent a great deal of effort in explaining the shortcomings of minorities (defined as those who are not straight, able-bodied white heterosexual men) in terms of oppression by or social structures created by the majority, which is the basic paradigm promoted in the mainstream media. So these individuals are naturally reluctant to acknowledge instances of minorities, by virtue of intrinsic characteristics, creating troubles for the majority. So homosexuals are only part of those doing the prodding.


Thanks for your interesting response. Yes it is true that the so-called leftists had opposed homosexuals initially. The old reds back in Europe in the 30's were often accusing the right and fascists of being homosexuals (and sometimes accurately so). what happened with them in America is that they never got a hold of the masses, and so they glommed on to whatever minority groups they could find or invent a new separate category or categories. This is were 'sexual minorities' comes into play as well as women as some sort of separate entity. The party of the masses became the party of hyperparticularism.

Interestingly, a leftist that so many claim to admire, Fanon, claimed that homosexuality and sexual deviance was he result of bourgeois and right wing lifestyles and was clearly not in favor of it. The forget to mention that when praising Fanon.

As far as Stonewall goes, all such establishments were a mob enterprise at the time and probably still now. That would explain the raid rather than 'hate.'

the fact that fashion can be "rebellious" says it all right there.

I don't see what's insulting about displaying women's clothes on a man, a hanger, a plastic dummy, or anything else that's handy.

Hi I'm a retard and i love to suck 8=====D

I'm a woman.I don't agree with Erik regarding many things,particularly regarding the pornography on this site etc,however the use of this model isn't correct either.
I mean no offense,but it is naive to think of it in the way you stated.
This model was not just displaying the womans clothing for practical purposes.
Thsi male model was intentionally chosen due to his very feminine looks,the controversy and shock factor it would provide,the media attention etc.
If it was a case where there was no other option,then it would be reasonable to suggest that it's ok to use a man,a clothes dummie,hanger or other to display the women's clothing for practical/functional purposes and what does it matter what displays them as long as it does the job.
However,this isn't the case here.They purposely chose this model,this model would have got paid etc,when there are plenty of female models-of various shapes,nationalities,styles etc to choose from- that they could have gave the job to.

You have claimed in a past reply to a commentator of one of your articles here that there are nonwhite women you find attractive. However, you never mentioned any and I cannot find any post where you mention nonwhite women that you find attractive.

So I ask, Erik may you please mention several nonwhite women that you find just as attractive as the white women you post on this site as "attractive"?


Your work is so creative and I like this very much.
Welcome to FASHION WORLD MAKER!! Be inside the fashion industry, and make your favorite Fashion Show. If you love this nice blog but struggle to find fashionable styles that fit then our range is just what you need.

Jim: I have a bad memory for names, and as you can tell by the nameless women whose pictures I have often posted, I hardly care for names nor know many names. So I can hardly recall names of the non-European women that I have taken a liking to… Zhang Ziyi comes to mind; there are many others, but I have a difficult time recalling names assuming I learned their names in the first place.

It's true that women have reached size zero because more and more designers are gay. It's very hard to fight what you see on media. I was shocked the other day when I put "losing weight" on my bucket list. I actually hate my belly.

I'm sorry but I have to wonder why straight boys care so much about high fashion models and the publications they work for. Its not for you so why do you care so much? You don't read Vogue or Elle so why care what the models look like, it's getting annoying all you chubby chasers on the internet ranting against the fashion industry as if Karl Lagerfeld had just kicked you in the balls? It doesn't affect you it's not for you so move on and quit whining.

I've also been going on about this for 20 years since the whole 'heroin chic' thing started. Women are waking up - the increasing use of men to model women's clothing seems to display a pretty brazen hatred of female sexuality and beauty and it is not going unnoticed. Most women I know do feel very uncomfortable about it. But women are made so insecure by a relentless campaign against their natural curves that their view of female beauty has become very deformed. Even the most beautiful and in shape women I know are insecure about their looks.

Can you ever imagine men accepting a woman with breasts to be the right person to model male clothes?

Some women seem to think that because a guy is gay he can't be misogynistic - and yet the most unpleasant things I have ever heard said about women's bodies were said by a gay man.

Are you male or female? So a man who likes women is a "chubby chaser" is he? Why do you hate women so much?

Jim: the R&B artist Mya would be an example of a feminine woman who happens to be of an ethnicity other than Northern European. She is both Italian and African American.

I apologize for not replying to your comment directly or including my name at the top of the comment posting. The images and description of Mya I posted were intended to be a response to your comment, hence your name is present.

I am completely astonished by the non-issue being discussed here. The fact that women support the fashion industry en masse, appears to be irrelevant or that gays run the industry is at best some level of evil, is applied. Why ?
Is it because the gays do it better than women or is it solely due to the fact that it's males running an industry that most of you believe should be run solely by women. This entire discussion is just incomprehensible and borders on the ridiculous. The other issue is apparently the fact that Hefner has introduced a masculine style females into those magazines which is really an irrelevancy as well. The information on body type, size etc was interesting to some degree but that is it. Naomi Wolf by the way is just a typical feminist hypocrite who raged against the fashion industry for selling the flesh, so to speak but meanwhile try and find a photo where she does not "flash" herself as well. She has also used the services of the same people she criticises in her book.

Christian J.: Whereas women generally support the fashion industry by buying its products, this is not an endorsement of the greater physical attractiveness of the very thin, boyish-looking teenage girls that the industry prefers as high-fashion models. In this case, a desire to be well-dressed is common and people will buy good attire even if the models are not exactly to their liking because of the absence of alternatives.

This site does not argue that the industry should be run by women. It should be run by those capable of running it. The top fashion-designers are capable of running the industry and they have generally earned their rank or placement. To the extent that their choice of female models causes some problems, this site is an educational tool that counters the negatives without arguing that the designers should be replaced by others or even that the models should be replaced by others (although some people commenting here disagree). In my estimation, the burden of proof should be on the fashion designers to show that the thin models they use are naturally thin and reasonably healthy, and if they meet this burden, then they should be free to use the kind of models they prefer.

On Hefner, it is certainly a matter of curiosity that a pioneering and prominent men’s magazine, Playboy, would be featuring so many non-feminine women, and I needed to address it in light of Hefner’s non-heterosexual orientation as some people may refer to Playboy centerfolds to counter my assertion that most people prefer above-average femininity in the looks of women.

I dont think mentally healthy women consider high fashion models attractive or want to look like them.
We are so used to their strange looks that we basically ignore them completely and just focus on the clothes/accessories,at least thats how most of the women I know feel.
Young impressionable girls might try to look like them ,but it's the parent who should tell them that their looks are abnormal and unacceptable by most people and therefore trying to emulate them is wrong.
I think most gay men don't like the female body for whatever reason it is... Envy maybe? I have heard lots of gay men saying women with feminine desirable bodies are fat cows or have a fat ass.
Im a mentally stable woman in my 30s and Im not affected at all by this since I have no interest in pleasing gay men by any means since I don't have to,and before someone labels me as homophobe...I have gay friends and work with homosexual men ,but I just basically ignore them when they think women are "fierce" when they are size 0 and basically look 12year old gay boys stealing their moms clothes ( I know most of them did).

It's just a phase, a lot of amateurs are in the business right now and they focus on a) the "shock" factor and b) generic attractivity. As a studied designer, I don't even take this whole thing seriously.

btw several of the females you have in the "attractive women" list, I don't find attractive at all

Click here to post a new comment