I think it does, because it's more insidious than any sort of active movement. Are websites showing plus sized models because they want to be body positive or just because that's who research shows buys their clothing.
> It still remains accurate to point out the health issues associated with obesity and the folly of remaining in that state.
Absolutely - it's a danger, I'm not saying it's not.
My point is that you can change the narrative of a movement much more easily than you can change how a society as a whole unthinkingly deals with something. A deliberate normalization has a voice which can change what it's saying, this phenomena really doesn't.
I think websites are showing plus sized models because the movements told them "look at your customer analytics instead of assuming the status quo of people imagining they'll look like size 0 models when they wear this"
It is all very interrelated from my perspective.
If I did have an opinion I would say that a more collaborate and holistic approach with a movement's narrative is possible and necessary. For example, if some people to go to the extreme of wanting magazines to make disclaimers that models are photoshopped to help people in all BMI ranges have higher self esteem, then people normalizing unhealthy but common BMI ranges should also have disclaimers about the issues associated with remaining in that state.
A distinction that doesn't really matter right?
In one example, I think it's good that clothing websites will show people in their clothes that look like their larger customers. I think it's good that this is less jarring to see due to prevalence alone. There was little utility for the polar opposite at size 0 and size 2 to model for everything, aside from overvaluing the addictiveness of frustration.
It still remains accurate to point out the health issues associated with obesity and the folly of remaining in that state.