PSA!

As some of you may know, the following topic of discussion is particularly near and dear to my heart ...

If you haven't seen or heard, yet ANOTHER photoshop scandal has made its way into headlines recently. This time, the controversy surrounds Vogue magazine's cover photo and spread of Lena Dunham.

For those who might be unaware, Dunham is both the producer and star of the HBO hit series, Girls. The show has received plenty of criticism and backlash about casting, story line, nudity, et cetera, but that has only helped to propel it further into the realm of extreme popularity. And, as expected, as the show becomes increasingly popular, so too do the stars - most notably, Dunham.

Just like her show, Dunham has been the focal point of unwarranted criticism. Her appearance - generally in relation to her weight - has been, and clearly continues to be, a topic of discussion amongst the media. Although Dunham always responds in a manner that suggests she is not only unfazed by the comments, but also that she is completely comfortable in her own skin, the criticism just doesn't seem to fizzle out.

It's no secret, Dunham doesn't have the body of a Victoria's Secret model, but then again, how many of us do? Instead, Dunahm rocks a body that is but a reflection of the norm in our society. She is not a stick. She is a woman with curves, and she is proud of it.

Now, a while back, Vogue made an international pledge to use "healthy" models within the pages of their magazines. Since, Beyonce (a self-proclaimed modern-day feminist), Michelle Obama (a health and fitness spokesperson), and Jennifer Lawrence (a voice for positive body image) have all graced the cover of the U.S. Vogue.

That being said, it isn't necessarily a shocker that Vogue chose Dunham for their next cover. However, you'd think that in putting Dunham (a curvy woman known to have positive body image) front and center, Vogue would be working toward cultivating a healthy body image for women. And it's true, having Dunham grace the cover is a step in the right direction as far as breaking hegemonic stereotypes is concerned. BUT, in my opinion, that one step forward is only followed by two steps backward once the photoshopping comes into play.

Recently, Dunham told Time that the controversy surrounding her shoot "confuses" her. According to the article, she said, "I don’t understand why, photoshop or no, having a woman who is different than the typical Vogue cover girl, could be a bad thing." (Time article)

Although I agree with her in that having an atypical woman on the cover of Vogue isn't a bad thing (in fact, I think it's a GREAT thing!), I disagree with her view on the use of photoshop.

I understand that the photoshop used on these photos isn't drastic, but I think it's the principle. Photoshopping someone who has come out as having a positive body image and that speaks in favor of being comfortable in one's own skin nearly defeats the entire purpose of placing Dunham on the cover. In essence, this is Vogue telling their readers that although Dunham is a great role model for embracing who she is inside and out, she still needs touching up in order to be accepted in our society. One step forward, two steps back.

**You can see more of the before and after photos from her shoot here.
 
The controversy surrounding models, photoshop, unrealistic ideals, and body image is not new. And unfortunately it doesn't seem to be going away any time soon. There are plenty of instances far worse than Dunham's, and I understand that. I just find it to be incredibly important for women AND men to know the difference between realism and idealism.

At this point in my life, I can't do much to make a difference one way or another, but I hope by educating myself (and hopefully others) and speaking out about it, changes will be made.

//Images courtesy of Google//