Posted on 06/25/2015 10:38:25 PM PDT by nickcarraway
Caitlyn Jenner may have snagged that Vanity Fair cover, but she’s not the only photogenic trans woman making moves and shaking up the game.
Despite the ever-present specter of tokenism, openly transgender models have in the past few years forged an important presence in fashion — on top runways, in glossy editorials and even in high-profile campaigns. There’s still a long way to go, but as a toast to progress and Pride month (celebrated internationally in June), here are five barrier-smashing stunners who represent a good start.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
It was wrong for homosexual men to take over the fashion industry. Their standards of beauty were making women look like prepubescent boys, flat, thin, hairless, curveless.
Now they are bypassing the women altogether, using androgenized males.
This desire to destroy monogamy is often referred to by its practitioners as sex-positive. The idea being that all conceivable (or more likely inconceivable, pun intended) forms of sexual expression should be not only tolerated but celebrated.
I’m afraid I will never understand their root assumption that all other human drives can be misdirected and turned to evil, but somehow the sexual drive, the most powerful of all, can only lead to good.
Fashion designers always seemed to prefer models with the figures of 12 year old boys. Well, rather than use anorexic women....
It is an act of cultural revolution. The Weather Underground too wanted to Smash Monogamy (they engaged in partner swapping/swinging even with members of the same sex and it was wrong to say no to someone).
Free love isn’t free. It’s about smashing the institution of marriage and fidelity.
Maybe it is considered an opiate of the masses (have them distracted always searching for a hookup).
Planned Parenthood is a sex positive proponent. They claim that abstinence ‘doesn’t work’ but dig deeper and you’ll find that they abhor abstinence because it is counter to their worldview. It’s ‘unhealthy’ because it is a denial of sexual desire. On a corporate level, they oppose it because it is bad for business (gotta keep ‘accidents’ happening to keep the money rolling in).
It isn’t about ‘family planning’. Margaret Sanger is on youtube (Pathe News, 1947, UK) demanding ‘no more babies’ for 10 years in Western Europe (no ‘choice’ in the matter, if you can’t have them after the 10 year ban is up, then it sucks being you).
So they want to divorce the sex act from the procreative act. This too smashes the concept of ‘family’ (married or not).
They consider this opening new doors to trannies but really it is another front in the Left’s real war on women.
How SICK...
Fashion models are supposed to be walking clothes-racks. The bodies of young men are actually better suited for this than the bodies of almost all healthy women.
The use of men in fashion marketing may be healthy, emphasizing the fact that normal women are never going to look like the models and shouldn’t try.
Sugar coated arsnic, they are not beautiful. Their expressions bring to mind the question, why do they call them gay?
transgender models have “forged an important presence in the fashion industry”...
YEAH, THAT ABOUT SUMS UP THE IMPORTANCE OF THE “ISSUE” THAT THESE FREAKS HAVE BROUGHT INTO THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA DOMAIN... MANUFACTURING AN ISSUE AND MEDIA COVERAGE, IN LIEU OF REAL NEWS AND ISSUES THAT ARE DESTROYING THIS COUNTRY...
92 million people out of the workforce
47% getting freesheet
a traitor in the white house
IRAN NUKES
N KOREA RUN BY A LUNATIC
and TRANSGENDER IS IMPORTANT... TO WHOM?
1. the fashion industry is a manipulative joke on those who seriously engage in its functioning and consumption... how can a garment be worth $50-60000..... except to Marie Antoinette OR muchelle obumbler (the my waist is right under my manboobs doublewideass look) and look where it got Marie...
IS THIS A SIGN THAT THERE IS A shortage of good looking women models .... hahahaha or a sign of lunacy..... yeah
Time to bring on the i married a goat crew and the i got laid in the mortuary crew to round out the complete fukkin freakshow..... AND THE libtard race-card crew WANT TO BAN THE CONFED FLAG.... hey its fashion ...
FWIW, I think the sex act has already been comprehensively divorced (nice choice of words, BTW) from procreation.
Most people today think of pregnancy not as the natural and normal consequence of sexuality, but as an accident or even a disease.
Of course, there is no possibility of pregnancy with a great many of the sexual activities they are most anxious to promote.
I’m no fashion expert, so I can’t figure out why clothes meant to be worn by women should look better on men.
It’s not so much a question of “looking better” as of being displayed in a way that emphasizes the design of the garment rather than the body it’s on.
If the fashions they design are not going to look good on their real female customers, then what’s the point?
Most fashion modeling is not intended to make sales to customers, but to wholesalers and retailers. They just want to see the garment.
Regarding sales to customers, my opinion is that about 90% of the people I see have no idea what looks good on them - it’s certainly not what they’re wearing - so their choices are driven by other factors.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.