CAVEAT: If you are offended by my snarky tone then might I suggest you do not read this blog post and go read something about finding Talbots clothing.
And Talbots target consumer being the “over 50 woman”, ponder why a younger woman with no visible wrinkles is in the ad.
If you haven’t heard the news by now, please allow me to inform you. Martha Stewart is the Cover Girl (Or rather, cover mature Woman of the 2023 Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition. In addition, her photos are also displayed among the infamous Swimsuit editorial.
Making history with a photoshopped, filtered, edited 81 year-old Martha Steward on Sports Illustrated. I will say that her titties look great because they left the natural sagginess of the girls. That’s about the only thing that doesn’t scream “Quiet Ageism”
At 81 years old, she is the oldest woman to grace both the cover and pages of SI—and the swimsuit edition.
Megan Fox is also celebrated in the SI Swimsuit Issue. She, too, has had a ton of stuff done to her. But seriously folks, check out the Martha on the right. That’s more what she looks like.
Older women, for the most part that I’ve seen or read, are thrilled with this. And comments regarding the use of photoshop and editing are being called out from these same older women that humbly adore what SI has done, as the negative commenters being deemed “haters”.
“Haters”–the new word for “You don’t agree with me and you are mean for not agreeing with me”. Sing it Snow!
If an 81-year old man had been splayed in a swimsuit in any publication, without editing and showcasing his beer belly and his hairy body, he would be applauded—but a woman apparently has to be photoshopped. It’s a disgusting and misogynistic double standard.
Old men are acceptable. Even with their ripples and wrinkles. Old women are not acceptable unless they are photoshopped!
Now, while I think it’s great that an older woman is included in the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit edition, I’m also disgusted, disappointed and angry.
Any phase of aging has been erased from the images. Truth be told, Martha looks like an AI image of herself. And that’s wrong. If the editors of SI had any balls or any sense of respect for the senior community, they would have left her image alone. Had we been subjected to what Martha really looks like at her present season in life, it would have been a landmark and it would have showcased the true beauty of the aging process.
Quiet Photoshopping. Keep the softened crow’s feet but get rid of the textured skin. Erase the lines. Add a glow…
Middle pic of me is no filters or Facetune. I have freckles on my body and many wrinkles (thanks to baby oil and iodine and sun damage. I take full responsibility). The pic on the far right is also me but with smoothed out skin and some lines erased. I tried making my mouth bigger but Facetune couldn’t do it because my mouth is already big.
I’m gonna skip around here before I come back to Martha.
It’s the “Quiet Ageism” that is daunting. Yes. Sports Illustrated did showcase an 81-year-old woman. However, it was done with photoshopping, filtering and the best damned lighting you could ever imagine. On one hand she’s old. On the other, she’s been erased of all signs indicating she’s old.
Those titties again! You can tell the outline at her arms that even those were slimmed down a bit and the hands have been edited. For crissakes, Stewart has been blessed with great genes–showcase her in her unedited state and she would still look good.
Quiet Ageism is that ad for skincare where the vulgar term “anti-aging” is printed on the ads and the model is a 20-year-old who has been filtered to the point of no skin texture.
Hey Aveeno, show a NORMAL, AVERAGE 55 to 65 year old after using this for a few months. I guarantee the wrinkles will still be there. And stop using young models and Jennifer Aniston. We know you photoshop Jennifer!
Quiet Ageism is the ad from clothing companies that are “mature” women brands yet their models are nowhere near 50 or over.
Talbots. The model on the far right, I believe IS older–but she’s been photoshopped to look younger. Even with conservative clothing brands quiet ageism is worse than quiet luxury.
Society looks down upon racism, antisemitism, sexism, and all the other “isms” but yet, ageism is the only ism to be swept under the carpet. Society also looks down on ageing. Ads for Juvéderm, Botox and other fillers will halt the process of ageing. Stop wrinkles before they appear.
Trust me, racism IS a public health crisis and so is ageism. But ageism is the “acceptable” ism.
The fact is, wrinkles are part of the process. Age spots are too. Crepe-paper skin is as are drooping eyelids and thinning lips and hair. And instead of trying to hide the fact this happens; we should be working with this—and enhancing the great features that have remained our personal greatness.
This is how we age. This is what the ageing process does. And quite frankly, this woman is looking pretty darn good!
How many senior citizens have the same job opportunities as young people?
This illustration is for an article regarding jobs for seniors. And the illustration is ageist. It showcases old people with white hair, bad haircuts and bad clothing.
How many older women are included on a regular basis in clothing ads, cosmetic ads and luxury brand advertisements? Not many. And our demographic should be included in every ad where a group of women from all cultural and racial backgrounds are showcased.
Ad for CTZN Cosmetics celebrating diversity. WTF is the old woman? And all these young people are photoshopped. It’s BS all the way!
I’ve read comments on social media discussing how “boomers” thankfully will be gone soon. Yes. I’ve actually read shit like this. There’s plenty of Boomer Bullying out there so open your eyes.
Pretty much the welcome Boomers receive on social media and in real life.
In all honesty, I can’t really place the blame on Martha, she had an opportunity and went with it. And I’m pretty sure she’s had surgery—if I had her money, I would have that saggy chin lifted—but I would own it.
I honestly can’t place the blame on Martha. But for someone who pontificates baking from scratch and being organic–these photos aren’t very organic!
I couldn’t get The Frenchman to pour water over my head. But you can see from my top photo that I’m full of wrinkles and on the bottom one I erased them!!
And she does look great. When I see a “regular” picture of her she looks wonderful—old and wonderful. Trust me, it isn’t Christmas in our home unless I start preparing my Martha Stewart Eggnog the day after Thanksgiving and I don’t make Pain aux Raisins without her pastry cream recipe. So, if you’re reading this and think I’m a “hater”—think again.
Regular Martha from a few years back. HEY! She looks older there than now. And don’t scrimp on the booze in the Martha Stewart Eggnog!
Here’s a photo from one of my old blog posts in which I make Martha Stewart Eggnog. After three cups of this, EVERYONE begins to look younger!!
For those who refuse to believe that photo editing of any kind was used on Ms. Stewart, I would say to get to your ophthalmologist and check for cataracts or go into therapy for your delusional thoughts because girlfriend’s been edited—and heavily!
Yeah. Keep looking at Martha through an eye patch and get yer eyes checked!
My favorite comeback to this whole Martha thing is an Instagram post from @isthattomhearn who portrays my beloved Ina Garten in the funniest and most loving way. It’s his rendition of Ina on the cover. Tom gets it.
Tom’s Ina is filtered! But I swear you HAVE to follow him on Instagram. His impersonations of Ina are fabulous..and he does Martha too!
So, what are your thoughts on this? I’m really interested to know…
And let me know which ME you prefer. Real me or fake me!