[bluethunder]

alright, i feel my sociology major kickin' in...
when it comes to the media--especially in the case of magazines-- anything that deviates from the "norm" will not be featured... when we discuss diversity, we usually end up asking, "where are all the minorities at?" and this is an appropriate question, given that we have the same issues and concerns as everybody else... however, let us consider diversity in it's fuller sense: when was the last time we saw a plus-sized woman of ANY color in a magazine besides the lane bryant catalog? have we seen a big girl--or hell, an AVERAGE girl--advertise in ANYBODY's lingerie catalog? when was the last time we saw a bald-headed woman or one with a big gap in her smile or a woman with LOTS of freckles in an advertisement or in a magazine? when was the last time we saw an OLDER woman in a magazine? i know i am going on a tangent, but the bottom line for me is that diversity comes in so many forms and when i acknowledge that as a black woman i see images that don't represent me, i cannot neglect that there is a slew of other women(asians, indians, plus sized, older...) who similarly aren't represented and as a woman, i have an obligation to question why that is as well. we need to start pulling for realistic images for EVERBODY. until we get positive and realistic representation, my solution is simple:
don't buy or support what doesn't reflect you or your interests. this summer, in my women's studies class, i did an evaluation of several magazines--those that were mainstream and those that were geared toward african-americans and BOTH sets were biased and narrow in what they represented. i was shocked at the magazine XYZ(a black woman's magazine), but prior to my evaluation, i failed to realize how black publishers and advertisers do the same thing as say, ALLURE or YM-, just in a different way. maybe folks need to start dropping some letters to these magazines and letting them know what we're thinking.