The Skinny on Maura Kelly's Bias ...

I was outraged reading Maura Kelly's incendiary post on MarieClaire.com, for a variety of reasons. It's doubtful this will ever find its way to her eyes; let's just say that writing it makes me feel better. So ...

Dear Ms. Kelly:

As a journalist I embrace the right of free speech as one of the most sacred tenets of our democracy. Having said that: Man, are you full of it. And I mean that not only as a journalist, but very much also as a fashion editor.

Your words betray the sisterhood in so many ways, and quite frankly I am shocked that Marie Claire saw fit to publish your ignorant blather. I can only surmise that someone at MC rubbed their hands together gleefully while reading it, envisioning the controversy that would ensue, and the resulting increased traffic to their site. Your obvious bias toward a considerable sector of American women only benefited your employers in the long run, making them equally culpable. And I respect Marie Claire, so that's really a shame.

So allow me to unleash a little of my own bias: The fashion press is filled with far too many stick-thin, mean-spirited, above-it-all editors who not only view women of larger sizes to be inferior, but also have absolutely no problem saying such objectionable things out loud -- and then pondering with wide-eyed wonder why they've caused such a fuss. After all, you're just pointing out what you believe to be a standard of beauty to which we should all aspire, right? Well, wrong. Very, very wrong, and you should be ashamed.

Marilyn Monroe fought her weight issues her entire life. At her heaviest, a size 14 by today's standards, would you have looked upon her with derision if she had the unmitigated gall of crossing your sanctimonious field of vision? The most celebrated sex symbol of the 20th century wasn't "aesthetically pleasing" to you? Or in a museum, do you view with disdain the paintings of Peter Paul Rubens, Sandro Botticelli or Pierre-Auguste Renoir? After all, it doesn't look like Venus has been to bikram yoga anytime recently, while Renoir's nude bathers probably should cut out the carbs. Meanwhile, I'm pretty sure any one of those immensely gifted men, who saw beauty all around them, might look at you and think, Um, no. Because you are not the standard of beauty celebrated during their respective times.

Of course, this isn't the 15th, 16th or 19th century. It's the 21st century, which only makes your words all the more hateful. Even if it's difficult to imagine how tough it was to be a woman then, doesn't so much of our current conversation center around how difficult it is to be a woman right now? I seriously question almost every day the unfortunate notion of whether feminism still really exists, and while you are a fine example of being part of the problem, it's doubtful you will ever be part of the solution.

By simply putting out an annual "Shape Issue," so many fashion magazines only give lip service to the larger-size women who according to statistics comprise the majority of the U.S. female population; how ironic, then, that Marie Claire goes one step further with a regular column by the lovely Ashley Falcon, whose "Big Girl in a Skinny World" is rooted precisely in the notion that women of all shapes and sizes should be celebrated. Personally I hope one morning she spikes your coffee with whatever Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson slipped into Bradley Cooper's drink in Wedding Crashers. Because ultimately I find you objectionable, Ms. Kelly, not primarily because your boney self assaults my sensibilities of what it means to be a good and well-raised person; rather, it's because you have a voice at a major fashion magazine, and you have squandered it with your ignorance.

Finally, in the interest of full disclosure: Am I a size 0? No, I'm not. I have starved myself in recent years to get to a 4-6, but genetics demand that I starve myself, and I'm just not willing to do that (yes, genetics, not laziness or an inability to overcome a temptation similar to alcohol or drugs, one of your most egregious suppositions). So sure, I'm also one of the women you insulted -- trust me, my feelings weren't hurt by you, because I saw your words for exactly what they were: just plain ugly.

Of course there's the saying that beauty is in the eye of the beholder; combined with the right of free speech, I can't argue your ability to do what you did. But there's that other saying that beauty is only skin deep; and right now, Ms. Kelly, you have proven your heart and soul to be wholly unattractive.