[Gaston]

(10-13-2012 11:26 PM)tenderman100 Wrote:  

The blonde actually looks OK except for the belly rolls... look at her legs compared to the brunette on the left. Herr ankles are more or less normal. The brunette is a fatty

Interesting that you should mention that since the inside photos feature that same brunette with near-perfect lower legs, calves and ankles as opposed to the fat ones in the joint photo (unless it's somehow suddenly a different woman, but I don't think it is considering the same issue/spread, not to mention that the hand jewelery is the same).



So they are obviously lying (first to themselves and then to their audience) because it's a photoshop job somewhere in there.

Either they made her legs look fatter than they are in the joint photo which goes to show you that even a fat mag has to pander to the politics of the hour.

Or they made them look slimmer in the above single shot, in which case they just body shamed their own model in the article about body shaming.

Or a bit of both; perhaps making them a bit fatter in the joint photo, and a bit slimmer in the single photo.

Either way, one or the other appears to be the case since her calves here don't appear to be nearly as thin as they are in the above single shot.



And that's how deep the rabbit hole goes in America
(bears repeating, airbrushing the thickness of their own model's legs in an article about body shamming).