So it appears Miranda Kerr has been Photoshopping herself. Or someone else has. This makes me feel a bit sick and incredibly exasperated. At her and at the messed up world she lives in.
This week, on the day of the Victoria’s Secret show (the first she’s missed in six years after her contract was cancelled in April) Miranda Instagrammed a photo of herself with two of the current VS angels, Doutzen Kroes and Alessandra Ambrosio. It was from last year’s show, when Miranda was still an Angel and it went out to her 2.7m followers with a sweet enough message: “Sending love and best wishes to the #vsangels from Japan xxx”
The whole idea of ‘Angels’ is possibly one of the most brilliant, inane marketing ideas of this century. How do you take women modelling lingerie and make sure they don’t seem sleazy? Call them Angels. Give them wings. Bestow on them magic powers to wear g-strings and push-up bras while retaining a wholesome innocence on par with your average 5 year old girl playing dress-ups.
But wait. That’s not even the issue here. The issue is Miranda’s body. Because when she posted the photo this week, eagle-eyed fans who watch all things Miranda remembered having seen that photo before, when she shared it on her Instagram when it was taken in 2012.
Except back then, it looked different. Let’s compare them:
Spot the difference? In this week’s version on the left, it looks a lot like Miranda has had several ribs and assorted internal organs removed – how else to explain the freakishly tiny waist. And even more strangely, it seems that her fellow Angel, Doutzen Kroes has had her waist widened. Maybe Miranda’s missing ribs and organs were transplanted into her model friend? How perplexing.
Top Comments
It's very hard when relying on the 'mainstream' media, not that it remotely deserves the title, for accurate information on 'news' stories, let alone trying to wade through this constant glamorisation of reality that media uses to indoctrinate our senses daily. The Miranda projection is part of the latter fantasy, focused on meaningless narcissim for commercial advantage through every sentence. It's a new kind of propaganda designed to encourage the cult of individuality (the kind that gets the right to spend and shop and have above all else) and consumerism, at the cost of what used to be meaningful values - social cohesion, social co-operation, altruism, tolerance, sharing and caring without a self-centred payoff. Those ideas are seen as passe nowadays and only seem to take shape through the daily wisdoms of Oprah or Dr Phil.
I found your article not only enlightening and incisive but intelligent in its analysis. These are the energies behind such projections of 'beauty', 'sex' and 'success', celebrity - all elements morphing into the same carrot for young female readers, and perhaps young males as well. These stories are not about the girl from Gunnedah doing 'good' or the lure that you can have it all if only you deliver a sultry come to bed pout and hook up with a handsome movie star. It's about legitimising what is pure commercial exploitation for yet again, financial gain. In Miranda's case, her personal choices and that's as it is. But in the process, as you pointed out so well in your article, hooking into the emotional background of those it's aiming at. The vulnerability of teenagers and young adults, maybe even older adults, who want the belonging, inclusion, identity that these fantasies put out.
I agree with your views and again, am grateful when I get to read words that cut through the spin and deliver intelligent analysis and relevance to what is becoming an increasingly 'fantasised and inauthentic' world, that has little to do with the experience of people's day to day lives.
I LOVE Miranda but she sends mixed messages in the form of her support for all things organics but then is the face of a shampoo company who's products main ingredients are the same chemicals Miranda's own website warns it's follows to fiercely avoid! It's a mixed and confusing message!!!