Target’s (Thigh) Gap in Judgment

Target’s had a rough go of it in the body image world lately, it seems. First there was the “manatee gray” controversy, in which a plus-sized dress color was named after a large, gentle sea creature, whereas the dress in regular sizes was simply called “dark heather gray.” Then it put its plus-sized clothing on a pregnant model. And now, really, the most royal blunder of all: Photoshopping errors so insane that my 2-year-old would be able to detect the errors.

Now, I’d love it if we nixed Photoshop in magazines and ads and on websites altogether; it gives an unrealistic image of what’s beautiful. It’s unattainable and it hinders women embracing themselves for who they are and their flaws that actually made them pretty perfect. But I understand that photo editing is going to happen to smooth out blemishes and tweak perceived flaws here and there. But when it is so clearly aimed at getting rid of the “thigh gap” and giving women proportions that make them look like they’ve been in horrific accidents, well, that’s taking it a bit too far.

Seriously, click on each of the pictures on the right — there is the extended white space into the butt, and the sides of the women have been mangled to thin them out. And then there are missing fingers. I mean, I’m terrible at photo-editing, and I could do better than that (by leaving it alone). It’s like a Target newbie was just aching to get fired. (Like Cassey, we hope it’s an editor rebelling against what they were told to do!)

But to wash all of that nonsense, I’ll leave you with a more uplifting video of women who get edited to look like cover models — and find they prefer themselves with their “flaws” after all.

Can’t see the video? Click here to watch real women get photoshopped.

Ah, that’s better. What did you think about the Target photoshopping abomination? —Erin