Hotness

Y'know what really bugs me about this... not the lack of obese models (or anorexic models for all those who hate skinny people), but the fact that all 3 models are the same height. Make me a pair of jeans that fit someone shorter than average without needing them taken up. THEN you might be covering all sizes.

This particular advertisement just seems to cover "a variety of shapes". Because some women have wider hips, some have booty, some have belly problems, some have saddle bags or thunder thighs and some are just straight up and down.

@MadMolecule: lol

@hmm...

None of those models is anoxeric, and I wasn't saying that I would prefer to see skin and bones models.

You can say that's just my opinion, but you know it's not.

Are you telling me you deliberately shop for clothes that you think are unflattering? Of course not. You look for clothes that you think will look good on you. When advertisers make ads, tehy present the ideal to us, not the real.

The one on the right.

So its obvious Levis has a size issue. That ad so missed the mark. I too wrote an article on it. http://modelfashion.info/levis-jeans-ads-where-are-the-curvy-models/ To be KINDA fair, I have seen them use 'plus' models before. However, to be frank, when they did use plus models, these 'plus' models would never be called 'plus' in real life. Mainstream fashion has some serious issues when dealing with anything over size 6...heck Mainstream fashion wanted to call size 8 plus size!!! 8!!!

I think part of the ad is cut off. It was supposed to say:

HOTNESS
COMES IN ALL
SHAPES AND SIZES
(not pictured)

>> You wouldn’t want to see fat models in an ad.

And neither do I want to see anorexic models.

>> People shop for the ideal, not for the truth.

Speak for yourself.

It doesn't say "all sizes". It says "all shapes and sizes". Obviously, the emphasis here is on the shape aspect. It's a shame the differences are barely perceptible.

And let's be honest, You wouldn't want to see fat models in an ad. People shop for the ideal, not for the truth. I know some of you will say "I would applaud their daring blah...blah...blah...", but you know the truth.

Referring to normal women as obese is common in the fashion industry, but this is such a severe exaggeration of that phenomenon that I suspect that it's an unintentional error.

Why is the free market economy failing when it comes to advertising? (Or aren't they?)

Surferdude, your claim that obesity treatment and prevention is the provenance of the U.S. government is frighteningly ignorant. The duties of the federal government are spelled out in this, like, really old document called the Constitution. I've read through it and couldn't find the part about commanding we citizens not to eat Ho-Hos. Monitoring an adult's health is his or her own responsibility.

Also, the girl in the middle is fat.

Surferdude, you're missing the point entirely. Nobody is claiming that Levi's is obligated to make plus-sized jeans. The point is that it's ridiculous to say "Hotness comes in ALL sizes" and then illustrate with pictures of women in three sizes: skinny, skinny with a waist, and skinny with a narrow waist, as if those represent the entire range of what can be considered "hot".

Including non-model shaped women wouldn't necessarily mean including obese women. The fashion industry seems to have a problem understanding the difference between "thin" "normal" and "obese". Very thin women are "normal" models, while average healthy women are "plus sized", and obese women are used whenever somebody is trying to show that they accept women of all sizes. I don't get it.

But yeah, the three women in this add look like they come in a range of sizes: 2, 4, and 6.

And apparently hotness depends on having a ponytail, woe is me, I'm not hot with my pixie cut.

I think they could have taken a hint from ad's like Lane Bryant etc where they use women of different sizes who are still "model" pretty. Though I think this ad was more a focus on how the jeans fit different butt shapes. Other than that, these all seem like thin women.

Levi's is not obligated to include obese women. However, their ad comes across as trying to market to women who are not models. This is where Levi's is either just plain ignorant as to what constitutes "all shapes and sizes" or they are trying to tell certain women that Levi's is not the choice for them. Either way it is insulting.

Levi's would have done better to just stick with a normal ad than to pull a stunt like this. This one will alienate quite a few people and not just people who are obese. There are plenty of people who are fuller figure who are not fat. There are plenty of people who may be in athletic shape or are super thin models who would be offended by the message in the ad and decide to just not buy Levi's.

In the end, no good can come from an ad like this.

I can only assume they are referring to the differences in waste, hip, and groin shape, for women who want tight fitting jeans regardless. Still a stupid advertisement with the wrong connotation though - that only addresses shape, not size.

Or maybe the intern in charge of the ad just grabbed the profiles of the women he liked best. :)

Also, I'm such a guy, first difference I looked at was chest size. :P

the shape of the ad itself would make it impossible to include very obese women

also i can't see any reason why levis would be obligated to do so

addressing obesity is the job of the us government and health organizations

(also adults themselves)

levis makes pants and is therefore not responsible to do anything beyond manufacturing products that fit their advertised description

Levi's... for skinny women with slightly different waistlines.

Good sentiment...REALLY poorly executed!