Well...I guess the knives were bound to come out. The proposed National Body Image Strategy has barely left the hands of the advisory group and media reporting has turned what should be a forward thinking and positive initiative into a farcial debate about the merits of some of the more well known advisory group members. What is this based on? Predictably, but unfortunately, it's about what they look like.
I'm not going to link to any of these reports or blog and newspaper readers comments, because, put plainly, some of what is being said is vile. I can't see how reading it would add any value to anyone's life. What we have going on here is a selection of journalists and hate insighting readers who were never going to be happy with what was put forward about this important societal issue. It is, I think, potentially too tied up in how they feel about themselves.
Minister Kate Ellis, Mia Freedman and Sarah Murdoch are being touted as too attractive to be informing others about body image. They are too good looking, too young and too pretty to have any intellect, commitment to the issue, compassion for others or ability to see past their own faces. How absolutely ironic and ridiculous that sentiment is. As Mia herself says "It's been disappointing that some snarky people have chosen to focus on looks rather than substance and try to denigrate what we've tried to do based on our appearance. That would be IRONIC."
We are trying to create a society that focuses less on what people look like and yet these women are being lampooned based purely on their appearance. How is someone's crediblity for addressing an important community issue based on what they look like? How is that even possible? Reports that say it is ridiculous that such women even have a say on body image is outrageous and should be offensive to all women and indeed men. Once again it sends a message that if you look a certain way or are a certain size, that you forego the right to have any say on body image, self esteem and confidence issues. Judgement much? Judgement alot.
Let's not forget here that the advisory group was made up of a variety of people who, just in case you wanted to know, would not actually be seen by societal standards like the aforementioned women. There were two grandmothers in the group, a man with greying hair and more than one plus sized woman. They were all there because they have an intense interest and/or expertise in the body image field. They, just like Mia and Sarah, were not chosen by Kate based on what they looked like.
None of the media wanted to run photographs of any of the other advisory group members. Just Sarah and Mia. The choice was there's to profile them and then tear them apart based on what they looked like. Well done to you press core. You just justified very, very clearly why we need a strategy like this so that we can teach young people and the wider community that every single person is more, much more, than what they look like and deserves to be given a chance to show their inherent talents and abilities.
Next time, try to think about doing something positive and instead focusing on the importance of the issue. I note that you haven't said nearly as much about the strategy as you have about Sarah's appearance. Look and read a little deeper next time. You might find something very worthwhile that is more than skin deep.
Members of the National Body Image Advisory Group with Minister Kate Ellis and young people at Parliament House. That's me at the front far right holding a stack of young people's coats. Must remember to dress so I don't look like so much like a wardrobe!
