...so now they're saying they actually did this? I thought this was a joke from the start - did an ad with that photo in it actually get used?

How about representing what women look like appropriately?

The photo was freakish and the way Lauren handled it was classless.

I hope the bad press gets Ms. Hamilton more work than she was getting through Lauren.

I wear Hanes and Levi's, so I missed this ad. But seeing this pisses me off. Not only is the model the victim here, but so are the hundreds of thousands of girls who see this as a stadnard look to achieve.

Wow, I'm 5'10' and I weigh 190 (I know I'm overweight) apparently Ralph Lauren thinks I'm a whale!

I've been pretty quiet this week cause staring at a computer screen reminds me too much of work and I'm on vacation right now...but I decided to check Consumerist and now I'm commenting again. See how this is a slipper slope?

120 lbs. isn't even normal weight for a woman who is 5'10. 120 is normal weight for someone around 5'2 to 5'5. And I don't think she's carrying any muscle, so it really is all bones and skin, which is sad for Ralph Lauren because really - don't they know the kind of ridicule they would face for doing what it did? Sample sizes are usually 2s and 4s. If she couldn't fit into sample sizes, that means either RL was bringing in size 0s and 2s as sample sizes or she was approaching size 6. It's RL's problem, not hers.

And I think from the regular photo of her, she looks reasonably sized (though 120 for her height is still pretty low) and she doesn't look emaciated. Thin, but not like the bad Photoshop.

Maybe I am a conspiracy theorist, but the more I see this story online, the more I think some parts of this were intentional on RL's part. National ads get seen be many people before publication, and I find it hard to believe not one person intimated that perhaps its a bit odd to publish a young woman altered to look like a two legged lollipop. I guess they got the best bang for their buck.

As for her being "fired" for "being too fat": she's a model and typically a fit model must by definition fit the clothes. If she did at one point increase in weight and the clothes didn't fit, I can see why she was not hired for more shoots. I think overall the process is repugnant, but I can't say I have a whole lot of sympathy for models who make young girls feel fat for a living but complain when the tables are turned.

Either way, shame on RL.

Polo/Ralph Lauren will go down in the business literature for this one.
As the WORST, most inept way to handle a PR problem, then to come back and slap on solid-fuel boosters to restart ignition all over again.
Where's Tim Gunn when you need him?

@YouDidWhatNow?: No, they definitely did this. There's no indication that it was a joke.

@pecan 3.14159265_Pi on the run: Oh look! Pi is here. Had a vacation or what?

If she's too fat for his clothes, what hope do any of us have?

So they admit to manipulating photos, and simply got caught by taking one to the extreme. If they really cared about women, and their self-image/esteem, the only photo retouching they would do is perhaps some lighting, etc...not removing every single blemish and attempting to create some kind of abomination to nature that couldn't exist. The model on the left is still in better shape than 99.9% of American women, and they think she is fat? How about designing clothes that people who haven't have their lower few ribs removed can fit in? I'd boycott that company if I were a woman.

@YouDidWhatNow?: I understand that the "skinny" photo was used in an advertisement in one store in Japan. RL did admit that they Photosho... err.."Digitally altered" the photograph, pulled the advertisement and apoligized for the misleading advertisement.

This story keeps getting better and better.

I hope that this finally puts an end to such drastic photo alterations. I don't have a problem with doing minor alterations to the photos to fix a bad angle, bright lights, or an unexpected pimple, but shrinking a 20" waist to a 10" waist is taking it a bit too far.

@pecan 3.14159265_Pi on the run: The Ralph Lauren photo can hardly be called 'skinny'. She looks alien, like District 9 Alien alien.

@surfer88: seriously? hundreds of thousands of girls? I'm sure exactly no one was fooled into thinking this is a real person.

@pecan 3.14159265_Pi on the run: Yeah, 120 for 5'10 is tad low. My ex was 5'6 at 120 iirc, during grad school days, and it looked about right ;)

And yeah, she looks healthy enough in the regular photo.

Also, blogs need to stop posting that altered pic. Its making me feel all weird.

Blame the economy. Mr. Lauren has had to cut costs, which means cutting back on material. So the easy way is to make women lose more weight. Haven't you heard? If your weight is in the triple digits, you're morbidly obese!

The model is already too scrawny as it is. When will we as a society get over this whole "If she's not showing ribs, she's not beautiful" crap?

@pecan 3.14159265_Pi on the run: Nevermind. I just read the post below.

On second thoughts, it might just be the angle, but her thighs look like they need some help. Maybe Baby McGee can donate some?

@nucwin83: Depression-chic!

Total hypocrisy! Ralph Lauren is much taller than 5'10" and definitely weighs more than 120 lbs.

@Oranges w/ Cheese needs guidance: This article is a little more refreshing [today.msnbc.msn.com]

@valleyval: The answer is to become nudists.

Ok, so this may not mean much to those not in the healthcare industry, but I instantly now calculate BMI (body mass index) when presented with a height and weight - and hers is 17.2 (assuming the measurements are correct). The low end of healthy is defined as 18.5 by the NIH, and overweight is 25, 30 is obese. So technically to even qualify as healthy she would have to gain 9 pounds. If her story is correct, this is ridiculous. I know America is overweight as a whole, but there is no need to promote being underweight - it can be just as unhealthy as being overweight.

Damn her for having kidneys. We must remedy this.

And this just popped up. Heads larger than pelvises seem to be It these days.

[photoshopdisasters.blogspot.com]

@Raekwon: That is gross.

Another Ralph Lauren disaster: [lh4.ggpht.com]

(via [photoshopdisasters.blogspot.com])

@Trai_Dep: It'll fit right in there next to Polish Microsoft.

@mrgenius: It's "No-Fat-chics!"

So the way they 'addressed the problem' was by firing the model? Something tells me that they missed the point.

@Zyzzyva100: I wonder if she could file a lawsuit for being fired for being "overweight" when clearly by the BMI standard, she is nowhere near overweight.

@Crushmeguy: Ah, yes, no doubt the attractive, naked woman has cooties. Good thing I'm inoculated against it.

@MostlyHarmless: Based on what my old skool doctor has always said, a healthy woman should weigh 5 pounds over 100 pounds for every inch they are above 5 feet. Based on that logic a woman who is 5' 4" would be considered healthy at 120 lbs and a woman who is 5' 10" would be considered healthy up to 150 lbs.
If I bought their clothes already, I would stop buying them. Fashion advertising is the worst when it comes to creating serious body image problems for women.

PS You know what's a funny experiment? Show young girls film footage/photos of Marilyn Monroe - some of the not so iconic ones. We've done that in my mentoring class before and overwhelmingly one of the things the girls say is "She's fat."
Houston, we have a problem!

I wonder if this isn't someone within RL reacting to her firing by creating this 'art' ad in protest. That's what I would do.

@Crushmeguy: Why is it gross? If a woman is comfortable about her weight and is healthy I see nothing wrong with it. Normal people look like that. We are too brainwashed by advertising to realize it.

Why are they dressing her up as Larry the Cable Guy?

5'10 at 120 is probably too thin as it is.

@Crushmeguy: Why is it gross? Because she doesn't look like an undernourished 12-year-old with a boob job? You should stick to anime.

@mrgenius: So who are these clothes supposed to fit? The market for women who are 5'10" and are at a weight that makes 120 pounds look "fat" is miniscule. Presumably RL wants to sell clothing to a large market. Why are they making clothes that not even underweight models can fit into?

@lmarconi: "She's fat, and yet, she rejected more men than will ever want to date you in your life. Maybe you need to eat some more cheezburgers."

Okay, that's probably not an appropriate comment for a mentoring class.

I can see it being accidental if, say, the image was too wide and someone squeezed the image to fit within the boundaries without keeping the height/width ratios consistent...except that the head looks normal.

Nothing accidental about that.

@surfer88:

Yeah, in a way, I think it might be better for the image manipulation to be this obvious- at least no young girl thinks this is a real person she's supposed to look like.

@valleyval:

I don't know, its wierd but when I go and shop at Holt Renfrew. (Its the Nordstrom's of Canada) I can find RL not only in my size (size 10-12) but also in my husband's size (38-34, pants and XL shirts) Why they would hire someone who's a size 4-6 and then fire her because she's "fat" is beyond me. Maybe they need to stop making my and my husband's size clothing if they're going to be this picky.

@Crushmeguy: That's not gross. Step into the real world where everyday women do not fit Ralph Lauren's standards of what is acceptable.

The woman featured in that article is very active as an avid softball player. How would you like her to look??

Nevermind - I don't care.

Next time I go shopping I'll buy two size 6-8 shirts, go home and "alter" them and then mail them back to the company to remind them that the average size of a woman isn't a 0-2 but a 12-16. If that doesn't send a wake up call then I'll boycott them.

@lmarconi: I don't like to go with sweeping generalizations like that. I (a 26 y/o female) weight train and play rugby so since muscle weighs more than fat, I'm going to naturally weigh more.

@UCLAri: You get the bathtub, I got the ice.

Well I guess I'm really into fatties then because she's smokin' hot. Who knew I had such low standards?

@foodfeed: Yeah, except quite a few people above the art director have to approve the ad before it can be placed anywhere.