Dear SELF Magazine

One of the requirements of my kickass counseling class this semester is to participate in some social justice advocacy. Those of you who know me, know I like this kind of thing. However, there is a catch. Whatever we say we’re going to do on paper…well…we have to actually do it. So I have to actually send this letter to SELF magazine…outlining why I will no longer buy their publication and why other women should do the same…

Dear SELF Magazine,

I have been a long time on-again, off-again reader of your publication for the last ten years or so. I am also a consumer of other health and fitness magazines. After looking through several different publications in recent months, I became increasingly aware of the impact of magazines such as yours on perpetuating impossible physical ideals for women.

I have long appreciated your information on health and fitness, particularly the annual SELF Challenge. I also feel inspired about your success stories of real women who improved their own health and quality of life by making significant changes in their own lives. More recently, I have also come to appreciate the quality of your advertising. Your magazine includes advertisements for running shoes (as opposed to the uber thin model wearing them), natural health and beauty products such as Burt’s Bees, and wholesome, mostly natural foods. Your ads contribute to your overarching message that women can and should be healthy, fit and happy from the inside out.

My primary concern, however, is that you ultimately are selling a mixed message. Recently, you have come under scrutiny for the issue in which Kelly Clarkson is on the cover as well as a feature story. Anyone who has paid attention to entertainment media in the last few months is aware that Kelly Clarkson’s weight has changed from her days on American Idol. Right now, she is at what she calls her “happy weight”—what you call “being healthy, fit and happy from the inside out.” That part is fine. What is not in any way acceptable is the fact that you tell women to love themselves as they are (which Ms. Clarkson seems to be doing these days) while you retouch and airbrush not only Ms. Clarkson’s cover photo, but all other cover models as well. Your message is clearly inconsistent. However, your editor does not seem to find that to be the case—which brings me to my next concern.

Your editor, in interviews with morning talk shows, said that SELF did not retouch Clarkson’s photo to make her look slim. Then she posted a couple of blogs about this situation, in which she makes the case for retouching photos. She even goes so far as to describe using the magazine’s staff to retouch photos of herself that she didn’t find to be flattering after she finished a marathon. What happened to being healthy, fit and happy from the inside out? Your editor said that creating beautiful photos is “meant to inspire women to want to be their best.” The question I have is this: what does it really inspire/motivate women to want to be? With the number of women who read your publication—likely for the promise of flat abs without a single crunch…or the best body of our lives—I have to wonder if they aren’t also trying to look like your cover models as opposed to looking like their own healthy and beautiful selves. Also, if Ms. Clarkson doesn’t care what people think of her weight, and if you think that she is the role model for the rest of us, then why did you retouch her photo?

Speaking of models, you have (retouched) cover models and role models and modeling the standard for the norm. If you are going to spread the message that women of any size of any age can be “healthy, fit and happy from the inside out,” then you need to take responsibility for how you spread that message. Right now, you are not modeling your own ideas. You create a beautiful cover model in order to sell the magazine. The model you have created—on the cover and in the promises of thin beauty you offer—contributes to the impossible ideal women spend billions of dollars a year to try to attain. Many of them never do, of course, and continue to feel badly about themselves, developing poor body image and a lower sense of self worth. Instead, it would be great for you to lead the charge—to really be a model of a healthy women’s health/fitness/beauty industry publication. It would be great if you would sell a healthy message—one that’s realistic and attainable.

When you retouched Ms. Clarkson’s photo, you squelched the very message she was trying to convey. You took away from her inspirational power and you destroyed your own integrity. What’s more, you did it with such hubris, thinking it was perfectly acceptable to do so. I disagree. It is perfectly unacceptable. Consequently, I want to call you to begin to be a role model for the women’s magazine industry. For the next three issues (October-December), don’t retouch a single photo. In the mean time, I think Ms. Clarkson deserves an apology for usurping her very positive and healthy outlook for your own financial gain. You did it to sell covers, and that is not OK.

I will be looking out for the next few months to see if you have done these things. If not, I will not purchase another issue of your magazine, and I will encourage other women to consider whether SELF is worth their time and money, given the message they would actually be buying.

Thank you for your consideration in this matter.

Advertisements

My New Friends

I made two new friends today. It was an unexpected meeting…not my usual crowd. But I think we’re going to have a good relationship. I hope so, at least. I’m hoping they’ll stay with me through thick and thin…come rain or shine…on the road and off…on bad days and good. Because on January 10, when I cross the finish line at the Disney Marathon, they’ll be with me. Still going strong.

New Friends

Fill The Truck

I had a conversation with a minister friend yesterday about why we left one church for another. Reason #1: we were persona non grata. A close second: the church isn’t a good fit for us and our ideas about ministry. She asked what we liked about the new church…and about their stance on women in leadership. Currently, the church is not in favor of the latter–but I think it’s moving that way…and doing so the right way. She wondered aloud at the fact that, more and more, intelligent, educated women are willing to attend churches that wouldn’t allow them to fill certain leadership positions. I told her that, for me and where I am currently, this church meets other needs and that, consequently, the woman thing isn’t a deal breaker.

This morning, we “had” to go to our former church. Before doing so, I went over to our current church…not to attend a service–though it turned out to be the most worshipful part of my day. Today was “fill the truck” day to help restock the Durham Rescue Mission with things such as clothing and household items in order to help them continue to meet the needs of people in the community as they try to get back on their feet. (In a crappy economy, non-profits are among the hardest hit.)

The truck was to be at church from 8-1. When I arrived at 9:40, there was no truck. I thought maybe it was in another part of the parking lot where I couldn’t see it. Nope. No truck. I drove around the parking lot and still didn’t see a truck, but there were a few spaces blocked off with cones and there was a table with a few chair sitting there. Still no truck, though. There were, however, a few men standing out front and I pulled up to ask about the truck. Turns out, the truck had already been filled once, and they had taken it back to unload it so it could be reloaded.

In an hour and a half, the truck was filled.

At that rate, they could have conceivably filled it a total of 2-3 times.

That’s just one example of why I like this church. The other is even more powerful. The church has partnered to do ministry in Haiti to care for poor, orphaned children. A piece of land on the coast came up for sale. It had an AMAZING view that would heal any soul. To be able to provide housing for a number of children there was the epitome of heaven on earth. The land cost $400,000. The pastor felt the burden of wanting and needing to buy the land, but also the burden of asking his congregation to raise that much money above and beyond their budget…at the time the recession was starting.

And they had to put up the money within a week to be able to buy it.

The pastor asked the church to raise the money, hoping people would be willing to follow the example of Jesus…or even the widow who gave her last two cents…but uncertain of their reaction.

Within one week, the church raised that $400,000.

No committee. No vote. No let’s table the motion and think about it. No let’s put together a team to determine the best way to finance this operation.

Just a big fat check at the end of 7 days.

What church does that?!

Added to that is the fact that most Sundays I walk out chewing on something from the sermon.

The woman thing can wait. The bottom line is that we’re called to love God and love people. Regardless of where people stand theologically or politically, that bottom line is the one thing that can unify people and bring them into a deeper and more meaningful relationship and way of life. And that is where the rubber meets the road.

I’m thankful for the truck I didn’t see this morning. I’m thankful that it was full by 9:40. I’m thankful that moment in the parking lot at one church helped me to be OK with sitting in the pew at another. And I’m thankful for the 2 minutes of worship I experienced before my day really got started.