Youth Minister Kate Ellis wrote a terrific endorsement for my book Getting Real: challenging the sexualisation of girls. I was – and am – very grateful to her for doing so. Ms Ellis wrote:
Young women and girls today face extraordinary pressures to meet body image expectations that are unhealthy, unhelpful and unrealistic. The contributors to this book make a valuable contribution to an important national debate on how we can help young women to grow up with a healthy self-image and with the freedom and strength to be their real selves.
I believe the Minister is sincere in her commitment to addressing this issue. But her photo shoot for Grazia – which goes on sale today – raises questions about whether her message needs to be more consistent and whether there are a few dots still to be joined up.
Lydia Turner, a Sydney psychologist specialising in eating disorder prevention and who I’ve published here before
argues that the Grazia shoot is problematic on a number of levels: sending conflicting messages about body image, encouraging judgement and surveillance of other women’s bodies and reducing a member of parliament to her sexual desirability.
Yet again we’ve seen another body image blunder pushed into the spotlight with Minister for Youth, Kate Ellis, donning tight-fitting leather clothes and dominatrix-style 8-inch heels in a bid to improve body image in Australian women.
According to the Courier Mail in the shoot done on an athletics track in her electorate of Adelaide, the 32-year-old minister sports a pair of killer $1790 Gucci heels and a curve-hugging $695 leather Karen Millen dress and looks more like a runway model than a Member of Parliament.
“I really enjoyed it!” she said of the experience. “I didn’t think it would be so much fun – I didn’t want it to stop.”
Celebrity magazine, Grazia, had approached Ellis to model for its annual ’Body Image Special’. They thought she would say no. She gave an “enthusiastic yes.”
Grazia tells us Ellis was voted the sexiest MP by her male colleagues and recently “chuckled” when invited to pose for lads mag Zoo.
Ellis said her reason for modelling was to “spark a debate on body image” (she said similar when posing in a bikini for The Daily Telegraph not too long ago). She wanted to draw attention to the results of the body image survey in Grazia. But something just doesn’t sit right.
When Ellis was asked whether or not her images were airbrushed, she dodged the question, replying that she had made her views about airbrushing “clear” to the magazine editors. Ellis avoided disclosing whether or not the images were airbrushed, yet disclosure of airbrushed images was one of the key recommendations put forward by the National Advisory Board on Body Image – a board Ellis initiated.
Flipping through the magazine, it’s hard to understand how Grazia’s editors could possibly think they were doing women any body image favours – and harder to understand why Ellis would want to support a magazine like this.
The cover itself shouts “Jen: You voted her BEST BODY. Posh: You voted her TOO THIN. Beyonce: You voted her KEEPING CURVY COOL.” On page 16, four female celebrities are lined up side-by-side, each with numbers scrawled across their image indicating the percentage of readers who approve of their bodies. Beyonce scores a lousy 13%.
Yet when discussing the results of the body image survey, the headline of the article screams “Why are we our own worst enemies? 71% of [women] judge other women based on their bodies” as though it was oblivious to fact that it actively promotes women monitoring and surveillencing other women’s bodies.
In her opening editorial, Editor-in-Chief Alison Veness-McGourty announces that “curves are back” and that women should rush out to buy pencil skirts so they won’t have to be “endlessly watching [their] weight.” Yet the top four out of five most popular articles listed on Grazia’s website focus on dieting. Fad dieting. Dieting to make you “thin by Friday.”
Throughout the ‘Body Image Special’, article after article features celebrities talking about why they loathe their bodies. Sienna Miller confesses that she is “all in favour of airbrushing” and that in ten years time she will “probably be stuffed full of botox and fillers … with fake lips!” How is this supposed to be empowering?
While Ellis says she intends to “work with industry” to improve women’s body image, it’s difficult to imagine how effective this approach might be given that the fashion industry’s profits are significantly inflated by instilling a sense of inadequacy in its consumers. It is also unlikely that a voluntary code of conduct will ever be adhered to.
How will corporations agree to something that runs contrary to their profit margins? Just look at the Weight Council of Australia. It is a voluntary body that requires businesses in the weight loss industry to adhere to a set of guidelines, designed to protect the health of Australians and the quality of weight loss product. Of the tens of thousands of weight loss businesses in Australia, only five are members.
It shouldn’t surprise anyone when Grazia quotes Jennifer Aniston, “looking good is the best revenge!”. But what is Ellis doing supporting this tokenistic stunt? Having recommended, through her National Advisory Board, that a diverse range of body sizes and shapes should be portrayed in magazines, it is rather odd to then engage in a photoshoot that upholds current beauty standards and allowing images of oneself that are most likely airbrushed. Perhaps she just wants to look glamorous in a fashion shoot but needs to cover it in tokenistic body image/self-esteem jargon?
Perhaps most frustrating is that young, smart, high-profile women are routinely subjected to sexualised scrutiny, regardless of their profession. Natasha Stott-Despoja, Stephanie Rice, Julia Gillard, Penny Wong, Gabriella Cilmi – who recently stripped to “prove” she’s “all grown up” – the list is endless.
One of the functions of sexualising powerful women is that they become less threatening. Their abilities fade into the background while whether they are ‘hot-or-not’ becomes the only focus.
It seems the message girls and women are continually sent is that until you’re hot, you don’t count. Girl With a Satchel Erica Bartle summed it up well when she wrote, “…even smart MPs have to fit the fashion mould to become successful”.
Instead of giving in to the pressure to sexualise herself, Ellis could have taken the offer to pose for Zoo and later Grazia, as opportunities to speak out against the pressures on women to consent to objectification. She could have highlighted this as a problematic message sent to girls.
How awkward would it be if you found out that all the men in your workplace had voted you the sexiest worker? If every time you spoke you had to worry about whether they were actually paying attention or just checking out your breasts? Your boss would be strapped for sexual harassment for handing out the survey to begin with.
Yet Ellis accepted the ‘honour’ of being voted sexiest and has allowed herself to be presented in a sexualised manner. And she still wants to be taken seriously as a MP with a portfolio caring for young people.
‘Mick of Brisbane’ provides an example of how some men see the Grazia shots. He commented online in the Courier Mail April 4:
“She is the sexiest politician I have ever seen!!! I wonder if she would do a photo shoot for Penthouse? With all funds raised going to the community of course!!! I think she could pull off a centrefold with ease!!!”
Yes, Mick, as long as it’s for a good cause. So many of the comments posted in response to Ellis’ photoshoot have been about whether she is ‘hot or not.” Because that’s what counts.
There are no easy solutions to our current plague of body image problems. At the same time, none of us should have to put up with faux attempts to put things right. Grazia is merely giving the appearance of wanting to empower women. Ellis’ participation only upholds existing beauty standards while catering to the sexual fantasies of men.
Given that girls and women are already taught that their worth is measured by how sexually desirable they are, having our youth minister reiterate that message just trivialises an issue she seems to care deeply about.
22 Responses
I am (naively?) astounded to read our contradictory and hypocritical this magazine is with their content! For Ellis to align herself with this rubbish is unbelievably disappointing!
I long for intelligent and influential women such as herself to maintain their desire to be a force for positive change but to actually do it rather than falling into contradictory and unhelpful stunts like that photo shoot!
Ha ha ha – you have to laugh at the fact that Ellis wanted to “spark debate re body image” because, well, she’s certainly doing that by putting herself in the middle of what’s wrong out there hey?
This is a terrific response Melinda.
Yes yes yes! Lydia you have totally nailed it! Great article.
Actions like this demonstrate that Kate Ellis doesn’t understand the issues, no matter how well intentioned she might be. It boggles the mind that someone would think that posing for a beauty mag in this way would somehow “help women with body image issues.” Just like Jennifer Hawkins, what were they thinking?? There is nothing different in these photos, nothing radical, revolutionary, subversive, counter-cultural, which is what we need to be thinking about if we are really to effect change. She’s compromised her message through her conformity as once again. The focus is *still* on women’s bodies. How about we put the focus back on women’s lives.
Love your work Lydia.
This reeks of self serving vote gathering exercise. In Kate Ellis’s case as long as she feels like she is getting good publicity, she probably feels this will help keep her seat in parliament. Time for the opposition in government to point out how damaging this is for youth who feel the only way to be accepted by their peers is to be gorgeous and skinny. What about the youth who have no chance of ever looking like without starving herself. Prime Minister Rudd and the older female health Minister Roxon ought to remind their colleague what they are really in parliament for to protect sheep from the attack of the wolves not provide more reason for the wolves to eat the lambs.
Could Kate Ellis do a real day’s work in parliament house in these shoes? Why not challenge her to spend a day trampling around the parliament house in these especially when she has to run to the house for a vote that has a time limit on it. As for the price of these shoes what youth has this kind of money? This just proves how the fashion houses are so out of touch with reality.
“Grazia tells us Ellis was voted the sexiest MP by her male colleagues…”
What disturbs me here is not that the question was asked, but that it was answered. I can’t imagine how you justify answering that question as an MP.
As for the photo shoot itself, while it may send mixed messages, Ellis’ enjoyment of the shoot, to me, doesn’t make it wrong. She enjoyed herself, and that’s all that’s really important.
Can anyone attest to Julia Gillard or Penny Wong being called on this? I do recall the ‘deliberately barren’ statements of the horrible Bill Heffernan. That had almost universal condemnation, but I can’t say I recall any other such labelling on either. Gillard is absolutely my preferred Prime Minister. Senator Kate Lundy is a good performer as well, that really seems to understand the issues in the portfolios she’s been given. My impression of Ellis has always been that she is a party hack.
Do we really need our MPs voting on ‘sexiest member of parliament?’
Arved von Brasch
To answer your question, Julia Gillard was recently offered $50 000 to pose for Ralph magazine. Unlike Kate Ellis, Ralph magazine got no response. The Herald Sun also reports that Gillard was “miffed” when asked about the issue on radio http://www.heraldsun.com.au/entertainment/confidential/julia-gillard-offered-50k-for-bikini-shots/story-e6frf96x-1111115597754
Not sure about Penny Wong but it wouldn’t be surprising.
does anyone else think they’ve photoshopped her right leg to look like a stick?? to me the proportions of her left leg mean the right leg should touch the left before it gets to the hem line… weird that they would do that ( and do such a bad job of it) for a body image article…
Wow. Unbelievable.
Sometimes I’m quite convinced that these men’s mags like Zoo and Ralph only offer shoots to accomplished women not so much for the sales and sensation value, but partly as a kind of coup, as if to prove any woman can be brought into submission. I hope and pray there will be a backlash just like the eco movement in the 90s was a backlash to 80s excess!
I agree Arved… Imagine if work colleagues voted on who was the “hottest” in the office & the results were formally released… That’s tantamount to sexual harrassment & would violate the law on this issue. Why should politics be any different?
Great article Lydia. How could something so shortsighted from Ellis occur? She has triggered some great inroads in terms of improving body image in Australia however these recent antics position initaitives such as the national body image advisory board as exhibiting lip service to the issue of body image. The ambiguity around airbrushing is particularly discrediting.
Shame, Ellis, shame!
“Men’s mags like Zoo and Ralph only offer shoots to accomplished women not so much for the sales and sensation value, but partly as a kind of coup, as if to prove any woman can be brought into submission.” Del, you are so right! That is what makes it so disappointing that Kate Ellis agreed to it. I feel really let down.
If there was a serious attempt at improving women’s body image, then there should be women of all sizes looking fabulous. Then, MPs should be fighting to prevent magazines using super-thin models (this is actually impossible because its the advertisers who decide that and threaten to pull their lucrative contracts if the mags show women over size 10).
The fact is, magazines, like TV schedules, are merely vehicles to sell these days and as an ex-journo who worked on a magazine which folded when they tried to uphold beauty standards for all sizes, I know just what a stranglehold the fashion, diet and cosmetics industries has on magazines.
The whole concept of voting on women- not only the sexiest mp but also on celebrities as Lydia has highlighted demonstrates that a womans worth is still very much dependant on her appearance. Getting females to vote on celebrities is an alarming practice that is so mainstream now so many women do so without even considering the practice or it’s consequences. Essentially it is playing women off one another- & reminds me of Foucault’s “panopticon”, the self governing jail, where “the sentiment of invisible omniscience” means that women must constantly watch themselves- because they are always being watched. Thinking about this issue within such a paradigm may go some way in explaining Kates behaviour as quite natural- however ultimately as an MP she needs to seperate her role as a (so called) “leader” on this issue with her (natural & normal) desires to be seen as “sexy”.
I wonder if Kate Ellis would have had this opportunity if she was fat and ugly… and I also wonder what would have happened if she did participate in the shoot if she was fat and ugly?
Hmmm. Wow politics is becoming more and more appealing a vocation. From Abbotts current Pollie Pedal to Ellis’ recent fashion mag shoot, it sounds like sheer fun and games to me! Add in the fact that there is basically no accountability for Pollies- and great pension plans. Politicians, forget about making a difference and serving Australia- just toe the party line then have fun at any cost.
Doesn’t she have the right to feel good about herself?
She’s posing for a magazine and looking her best for it. She enjoyed it. Get over it and stop cutting her down.
I certainly recall you, Ms Reist, dressing up nicely and putting on makeup when you gave a talk to my church a few years back.
oh good grief Andy, there is a whole world of difference between dressing appropriately for an occasion and posing for a magazine that usually compares and criticises women’s bodies, airbrushes their models and promotes fad diets.
The article has actually affirmed Kate Ellis’s previous action on this issue but questions her consistency for involving herself in a publication that does exactly what she has previously spoken out against. Questioning her actions here is not “cutting her down.”
You’ve completely missed the point of the article Andy, I suggest you read it again.
YAAAAAAAAAY – I agree with every single word !!
I have been watching this issue with interest and I was STUNNED when I saw the magazine, it’s not a Body Image Issue as originally position by Kate Ellis’s office – it’s a Body Issue.
I am concerned that the Minister Championing Womens Body Image Issues doesn’t seem to have a good grasp of the issue – clearly her intention is right, but the execution leaves alot to be desired.
The Grazia Issue was typical trash mag fodder – I found the whole, “you voted Jennifer Aniston the best body, and isn’t it great that Jen feels so good shedding some weight after a celeb blogger criticised her of being bloated at the Golden Globes – she got her own back by looking fantastic” – appalling.
Grazia gave examples of women with Body Image Issues in the form of interviews with Sophie Monk who thinks her torsoe is too short, the ballerina who thought she was too muscly, and the stunning red headed model who complained that her boobs were too big – these examples were quite fluffy and a little bit insulting to our intelligence
I agree! Why can’t these attractive women realize that no one will respect their minds until they pack on 30 pounds, cut their hair, and start wearing a nice, sensible corduroy sack over a pair of paper slippers? How dare Mz. Ellis suggest that being smart, successful, AND attractive is something for girls to aspire to? What about my daughter? She’s bound to be cursed with her mother’s wide hips, stringy hair, inability to compute simple addition problems, and an eating disorder where only Hagen Daas can relieve their chronic fibromyalgia. What is she to think of this spectacle? Shame, Mz. Ellis, shame. Try to set a better example for our nations girls! Would she have been asked to participate if she were born with the disadvantages of being fat, poor, lazy, and stupid? I think not. Role model indeed.