Yup, she’s on the pleasant side of normal, some [well, it ain’t meat] on the bones shows she’s not wanting for sustenance & nutrition and not suffering ill health, some young man will find her desirable amid his options and enjoy what she has to offer. No need to be hard on her [; must...refrain...from...entendre...]. Historically & realistically, she’d make some man happy.
That said, she’s not the aspiring goddess of the sheets which the audience buys the magazine for. A sculptor will not be rendering her likeness in stone. She’s a featured item in a publication as part of an AGENDA attempting to grind down natural & classical values (and I use “values” as loosely as possible here). People may reference Orwell’s “1984” often, but they rarely mention something so prominent in society being pushed by the Left: the Party’s “Anti-Sex League”, he11-bent on destroying the norms of procreation, in this case “dumbing down” the sought-after genetic & behavioral ideals.
The point of the magazine is to sell depictions of unattainably high standards. I have to wonder why that content is deliberately lowered to what is, um, widely available.
all points well taken.