Gemma Ward Has Gained Some Weight
A lot of people are talking about Gemma Ward’s appearance at the Chanel fashion show last Friday… it seems she has now put on enough weight to be in the “normal” weight category, unlike most supermodels.
There has been a LOT of controversy lately over the skinny model phenomenon. Size zero models have been banned from shows in some countries. Maybe this is why Gemma put on the weight?
In any case, she still looks fabulous.
But what do you all think - is it OK for models to look like normal people, or should they be thinner? Personally (and I know I’ll be blasted for saying this, but oh well), I think clothing models should be thinner than the average person, for various reasons.
254 Responses to “Gemma Ward Has Gained Some Weight”
By Rachel on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I think models are supposed to be skinny, it just makes clothes look better.
Maybe Gemma is just growing into a women now and this is her natural shape, either way she still looked better when she was pin-thin.
By greenisland on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
They should definitely look like normal ppl so you get an idea how the clothes would look on you!
By Devon on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I think the same. she looks too normal for me but I she would be a normal girl i would say: really good looking. as a model: her legs are really “big” and seh seems like she hasn’t seen a gym for a really long time
By lux on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I think its radical and attractive. Real sized models are totally avangard. Hurray Channel and hurray Gemma.
By dani on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Why? Why do models have to be 5′9 and a size zero? Who said that? I don’t get it. Models used to be thin yet curvy like Cindy Crawford. I think models should be at a healthy weight not say “normal” but thin, the model above in the pics shows that. And she looks fabulous. Without the makeup and everything those anorexic looking models look well like an anorexic (sunken cheeks,no light in eyes/skin, brittle hair).
By Troublegirl843 on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Definately looked better skinny.
Look at those thunder thighs!!
Horrible!!
By katie on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
i love gemma.
all she needs to do it tone up
By Ally on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Wow she has gained a lot of weight. Her legs are more like tree trunks now. I dont believe model have to be size zero but they should at least be healthy and in shape!
By Bleach on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Oh no! who will all those pro ana teens worship now?
By Judy on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I’m sorry but a heavier weight doesn’t look well on her, AT ALL. Just look at her thighs! Not toned at all, eww. I bet she’s get super skinny again if she wants to keep up with all the other models. That’s the business, take it or leave it.
By Model on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Gemma looks fine. Yes she gained some weight but I think that’s good because the models on the runways now are way too skeletal.
By Christy on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I don’t know her and have no idea what she was looking like before, but I think this is unattractive for a model. I want models in high fashion and print ads to be thin and gorgeous, otherwise I could be making millions walking down runways, too!
By Maria on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
This is a very unflattering photograph of the beautiful Gemma. There are many other new photos of her from a better angle, where her legs don’t look as “big” as some of you are saying.
Gemma looks healthy, unlike some models that look like they could collapse any second.
By Vee on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
hmmm it’s a difficult one. On the one hand I do agree that models should reflect the people who will buy the clothes. Yet I do think she looked better before. And will she contine to get the high profile campaigns like this?
By Maria on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Oh and before you start bitching about how big her “thunder thighs” are, remember that she’s the one making millions of dollars for walking down the runway!
By Kay_K on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
definitely too big for the runway now…
By Hailey on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I get upset when I hear people saying models should be thinner, being underweight is as bad as being over weight so that’s like saying that you think they should live an unhealthy life! Maybe if everyone could start gettin a bit more real, models wouldnt drop like flies! Just google it, you’ll see how many models die from being under weight.
By poops on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
She looks like dog shit from top to bottom.
By mem on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Gemma is beautiful…
But the runway is made for tall, thin models. Of course I don’t want to see them dropping dead while striking a pose. But models are coat hangers, display racks for clothes. Just a thought…
By beth on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Is it just me or does her head look too small for her body in this pic?
By Joelle on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
She would look really gorgeous if she toned up. She would be more sculpted and contoured.
By Rian on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
For the record, I never said that models should be a size zero or underweight, just thinner than the average woman.
By anon on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
a girl i was in rehab with was obsessed with Gemma; she thought she was the ideal for perfection. I say the less inspiration for anorexic girls, the better.
By Jennie on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Her legs actually look kind of big! But who knows…it could be the angle, the oufit…anything. I also like to see skinny models on the runway, it’s just more appealing.
By Jojo on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
What I’m wondering is WHY is it okay for Movie Stars to be size zero (in fact, if they’re not, they’ll be laughed at and called fat), but Models have to gain weight? I just don’t understand it.
By Mia on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
i think its part of the modeljob to be skinny. (its like buisness women have to look in a special way, things like green hair are not allowed. and so models shouldnt have the same weight as ordinary people.)
and gemma, omfg, its horrible!! look at her a few moths ago and than look at this pictures: it seems like she is kind of fat right now!! (and she was always skinny, i dont think it came with starving herself!!)
By Christine on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I think models should be slender, but not emaciated. I personally would rather see models slimmer than your average woman. The clothing looks better. If I want to see “average” women in clothes, I’ll just look around me….they are everywhere.
By jess on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I think she is definitely prettier now.
By Nele on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Hmm…I think she looks better before gaining weight.
By Pink Cashmere on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
This is what happens when these skinny models who starve themselves to be thin gain some weight.
It becomes obvious how out of shape they really are– this chick has no muscle tone. Looks like she hasn’t exercised a day of her life.
By ess on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I think that’s a bad picture of her.
She just needs to tone up
By lambman on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
she has gained, but it was probably steady over time and just hat hideous outfit makes it more apparent. She became hugely famous at 16 and is now over 18 so it makes sense that she’s not the same size…she’s a woman now, not a girl.
regardless she is an extrordianary and unique beauty!
By parissucksliterally on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
she has some lumpy thighs- try working out Gemma.
I thnk her face is weird though- not pretty to me
By Lima on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
she looks friggin horrible
By Noortje on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Her legs are not really that big!! thats either photoshoped or a really bad angle, cuz if you check other recent pictures of her you can see that she’s not that heavy!!
By Sarah on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I think she looks gorgeous, and she finally has boobs now. I do however think that this image in particular is unflattering regaurding her legs.
By kate on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
i love the fact that she has gained. let’s send out this message of normal girls on the runway and let normal people realize they are beautiful
By amma on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
…my legs look better than hers. I want supermodels who look better than me. BUT I am so much more prone to buy the clothes if I see how they will look on me and my body type. I definitely support models looking like the people they are selling to {albeit a more glam version of course}. It’s in the best interest of the designers.
By Barb on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I think there should be a mix of models — I want all body types represented. While I will say that the really thin models are like clothes hangers — it doesn’t give you an idea of what the clothes would look like on a real body - If I wanted to see clothes on a hanger I wouldn’t need a person.
However, Gemma used to be extremely thin. She has gained weight and her face has changed. Her bone structure looked better with less weight.
This looks to be a bad angle also - her legs look large here but if it was a straight on angle they would appear smaller. I’d like to see other angles.
And I never noticed it before but her ears seem to stick out a lot!
By missmarnip on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
skinny or normal or plus-size, models should be beautiful or somehow stand out in the mass.
gemma just has this je ne sais quoi. that’s why she is booked for those shows despite her “normal” size.
haven’t you seen the pictures of that italian(?) anorexic girl during the fashion week? skinny, but who wants to see her in chanel? or me, a normal size woman? fashion is so not just about a thin, normal/average or plumb body, is it?
By bleh on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
those people who said that she is now unhealthily fat are just retarded
By qwerty on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Is this photoshopped? Her legs look wavy. She has reverse bobble-head: her head looks way too small to match her thighs. If she toned up her legs she would look fine.
My thoughts on models: I don’t have a problem with thin models. I have a problem with teenagers. Alot of teenagers are naturally skinny, even naturally look-severely-malnourished skinny. And they have those fresh childlike faces. No adult women can look like that. If you starve yourself your face and hair look like crap and naturally skinny women just aren’t as skinny as they were as teenagers.
By hernameisaphrodite on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I think models should be skinnier. The idea is that the designer wants people to pay attention to the clothes, not the person wearing them, so in a sense runway models are more like walking clothing hangers (horrible way to put it, but they get paid well)
Of course it defeats the point when they are so skinny everyone notices that first.
By kate on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I agree that models should be thin. their job isn’t to satisfy peoples self-esteem. its to do the opposite, to make them believe that buying a certain product will make them more attractive - and if the models aren’t aren’t attractive, or their appearances seem at all achievable by the masses, then they won’t sell.
not saying its fair but our consumerist world is cold.
By hope on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
” But models are coat hangers, display racks for clothes.”
Actually, models are human beings who deserve to take part in the basic human right of eating. If designers want their clothes on coat hangers, they should buy a revolving closet and just hang their clothes on hangers. She DOES NOT have thunder thighs. Ugh, I think I’m going to be sick.
By Asuka on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I’d like to hear a good explanation as to why models must be thiner than the average woman. More specifically, I want a justification other than ‘clothes look better on clothes hangers’, because that is not acceptable when you consider that: a) most women are not shaped like a clothes hanger; b) one of the most important objectives of a fashion designer should be to make flattering clothes for his/her clients.
For Haute Couture I understand that the function of fashion as a practical concept is eliminated, transforming itself in art. I get it that a more ‘mainstream’ body shape may not be as suitable for it, but there’s no excuse for ready-to-wear collections to be modeled exclusively by extremely underweight models.
By Jasmine on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
she looked better skinnier !!! her thighs look weird now !
By Kaleena on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Hmm. She’s not all that pretty to me. But I’m glad she’s of average weight. I think clothing models should be of average weight, because the purpose of them originally is for us, the consumers, to decide if we want to buy these clothes or not, based on how they look on the model.
It’s not going to be the same at all if that model is rail thin, haha.
By Deryn on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Gosh is this photoshopped? She looks really bloated. Sorry, I like my models to be skinny. This is why they get paid the big bucks. I could lay off a couple meals if I got paid like they do.
By heidi on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Gemma still looks gorgeous but I think models should be thinner than the average woman. They’re supposed to be like hangers so they don’t distract from the clothes. I like my models skinny too! Sorry!
By Sophie on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
This is definitely photoshopped and they did a bad job. I even know what tool they used and it looks like shit (uneven stretching technique is what gives the rippled appearance on the leg). There is no way this is real
By Rina on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Oh god, she looks AWFUL. That’s too bad, she was my favorite model.
By Dani on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
i’m not impressed with this photo of her
By Bee on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I think she was fine before, she looks good either way. I think it depends honestly.
By schuk on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Gorgeous !
By Frankie on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I get what u mean, their bodies are supposed to be like hangers for clothes, but still, as long as they’re slim it’s ok..
By kelly lee on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
uhm no…she looks out of shape! You don’t have to be ANOREXICAL (haha i know that’s not a word, but it works right?) to look good on the runway. Like someone said early here, models used to be curvier and TONED and just regular thin. She just looks flabby skinny now like that Mischa Barton and her legs are nasty nasty nasty. If Gemma gets in the gym, do some squats and lunges she would be on FIRE! I hope she starts lookin like the ol’ skool Cindy Crawford…HOTTNESS!
By ceelee on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
God, she does look big doesnt she?! I think this is maybe an unfortune angle…anyway…if anyone here worked in the fashion industry they would know that most clothes on the catwalk that the models wear are a UK sample size 8 (a US 4), barely any models are actually a ’size zero’. i recently did a fittings session during fashion week for a well known designer and all the clothes fitted me even (i’m not that skinny!) its just that models are tall.
By gina on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
she doesn’t look bad with the extra weight.
i think she looks beautiful, she should tone up her legs a bit though
By V on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
OMFG :O:O:O:O:O:OO:O:O:O:O:O:
By Ashley on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
If you think she has Thunder THIGHS then you’ve got some issues, I think models should be all sizes, not just 0s. Why must you all make fun of her, i bet your all the FAT ASSES, just jealous, i guess??
By Jess on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
This is an obvious photoshop. She’s not gained this much weight. If someone’s going to photoshop a picture, they should at least do a good job.
By Serendipity on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
It’s part of advertising. Buy our product, and you’ll look like the happy, giggling thin models on our commericals - it’s the unspoken message.
By Reese on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I do think models should not look like every average person, but this model is far from average! This is not what the average woman looks like but that is funny that some people think that!
By Jessica-Louise on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
So obviously photoshopped!!
By Lisa on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Her legs look huge.
By julia on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
i couldnt help but exclaim “holy shit” out loud…But i dont know why she gained weight…did “they” make her gain weight because of restrictions? but i thought those restrictions are only in Spain. So maybe its her own decision or just it happened? Im surprised, but its ok, she’s Gemma…shes beautiful!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
on the other hand, Im kind of sick of the whole “i want models to be anorexic….nono..”very thin” not because its my own perverted obsession with thinness…its because the clothes looks better! yes! the clothes!”
im sooo happy that the days of the anorexic cocaine bitch are over
)))
By julia on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
ps is this photoshopped or not? im having doubts…
By han on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
wow she looks absolutely beautiful!
By emma on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
this is not a good look for a catwalk model. why go from one extreme to the next? catwalk models should be thinner than average, not deathly skinny of course, but certainly not this big.
though in all seriousness, i think someone has just stuck her head on someone elses body.
By mem on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Well apparently some of you didn’t like my clothes hanger comment. I’m sorry but that is the way it is, like it or not. And yes, of course they are human, but when your whole job is walking and looking pretty, then you better fit the job description. Its not like they are supposed to be normal, everyday women walking down the street. Anyone any where can see a normal woman. Fashion is about fantasy and beauty, not some housewife in her bathrob. For some of us, its about the clothes. Sorry, that’s why its fashion, not the “look at me, I’m starving for my job” part.
By star***55 on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
it looks as if this pic was photoshopped..btw she looks horrible and fat..i usually really like here.but this is definitely a no!
By Sophie on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
THIS IS PHOTOSHOPPED OMG.
srsly. you can tell by look at her left arm.
its bigger where you can see the flesh.
duh.
By pauline on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I don’t have a problem with how her body is now, I think it’s quite nice that it’s realistic and womanly. What I don’t like about the new Gemma is how she seemed to have lost that baby, alien doll face that made her popular. She seems almost boring now…but it could just be an unflattering picture.
By danielle on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
she looks to fat for a runway model…
miss old gemma!
By beautyqueen18 on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I’m going to say that this is photo-shopped. If it isn’t, then Gemma really needs to go to the gym. Her legs looks really lumpy. I’m not saying she is fat, but she has absolutely no muscle tone. I don’t think Gemma was even one of those super skinny models. She never looked like she wasn’t eating. I’m sure her BMI used to be 18-19. Gemma looks better when she is a bit thinner. I also want to add that I’m glad models are gaining weight, but it just doesn’t look good on her.
By Taylor on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Honestly you guys saying that models have to be super- thin and clothes hanger read too many fashion articles. Yeah I agree they should be in shape and thin but if the clothes are so great you wouldnt need models that eat an orange a day and have heart failures to be a size zero.
Gemma Ward IS BEAUTIFUL I hope she doesnt lose contracts because of weight gain. Id laugh in a cynical way if then designers all of a sudden ignore since she gains weight, because it will show how superficial and greedy they are. After all they were the ones saying shes an exotic beauty shes out of this world.
By elle on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
woah shes almost plus size! :O
By Asuka on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Hey, Rian, not trying to blast your or grill you on this issue, but can you elaborate on the various reasons you cited for the necessity of models being thinner than the average woman? Indulge my curiosity, please!
Oh and I’m dying to know if cossey would still hit it
By Mouse on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Wow, she looks puffy and bloated and not like someone who’s put on some weight and healthier for it.
Hope, the job of a model is ONLY to show off the clothes. Literally just as clothes hangers. Yes they are human beings, but that’s what the job is. It’s a J.O.B.
If you’re not NATURALLY built to be stick thin and want to eat, then don’t be a model. Simple.
Asuka, I couldn’t agree with you more.
By lilie on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
it looks so fake - the pic
well if its not
.. shes well fat!too fat for a model..runway model!
By Ultra-skinny girl on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
If she gaines more,she will look like Beyoncé,her thighs,anyway.
By charliii on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
i liked her better skinny… i dont think models should weigh the same as the average person… that’s like saying they should be the height of the average person… let’s face it, the clothes look better on super tall, super thin women. period.
By plastichearts on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
she looks better skinny imo.
but if she toned up she’d be hot.
By bored on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
she looked pretty. once.
By Ana on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
oh my god!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
my fav model is a fatass now???
I mean I was REALLY speechless when I saw that pic of her!!!! O_O
By Agnes on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Google her and you’ll see some more flattering photos of her, the new curves looks REALLY, REALLY fab on her! Good on ya girl
By Yuppers on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
She’s beautiful. I love her.
By katya on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
those are really bad pics of that show, i’ve seen others, and she really doesn’t look bad at all and her legs are much more toned then they look in that pic. she’s still really skinny.
By Radio America on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I suppose it makes you consider whether she really was “naturally skinny” after all, if she can gain weight this easily.
Oddly, it only seems to be on her legs/upper arms. Her stomach appears perfectly flat (her ‘outie’ belly button is still there, obviously not viable for overweight people). However, she could just be bulimic. It brings most people to an average weight from overtly skinny builds, as it retains calories with each purge. It would also explain water loss that has caused the developing cellulite in her legs.
Cheeks looking unusually chubby to justify this idea.
By jacky on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
She looks good, thunder thighs ?? come on ! She is still pretty slim no ? Models should be really thin, but never as scary skinny as most of them are.
By bella on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
it’s natural…she’s a woman now! when she started to modelling she was 16,she was a little girl…she can loose 8-10 pounds and be healthy…
By sky on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I think clothes models should be of a slim and healthy weight…like this! I think she looks gorgoues and it’s nice to see somebody as popular as she is walking down a runway with a bit of thigh on her, probably like every other girl looking up to this as beautiful and fashionable and at the show or looking at it in the fashion magazines, because clothes can look good on people that aren’t stick skinny and size zero!!
By Supermodel_thin on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Now I don’t envy anything about her. (I’m thinner than her now AND I eat lots as I have a high metabolism & everyone in my family are the same.. all us Norwegians are thin people)
Her legs are big.. she looked better thin. They don’t need to be size zero but a UK size 6-8 is normal for models
which I am.
By ksb on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
The Victoria Secret models are the perfect size! All models should be that size, and they still have meat on their bones
By jammie on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Take a look on vogue’s www.style.com for the full spring 2008 chanel ready to wear. Gemma certainly looks bigger but still so lithe and lean.
I reckon she’s about 5 foot 10 and no larger than 118 to 120 pounds or for us British people, about 8 stone 8 max.
By Supermodel_thin on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Another thing (haha) - I bet her weight will go down again as there were photos of her a few months ago where she gained some weight but her legs were not as big. I guess it;’s the pressure of being thin.. sad but true.
It’s so bad.. you read all the tabloids/gossip mags and if a celebrity loses weight, they are too thin and if they gain a little, they are considered fat.. It’s awful. If I saw an article about me saying I was fat, i’d be like, maybe I should tone up or something.. it can’t be nice having people saying you’re fat, when you are not. As long as you are happy with you and your body, that is the main thing. Leave them alone.
By tutu on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
If that’s real; that girl is fat; these legs aren’t beautiful. But I think that’s photoshopped; and not of her
By Josie on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I’d hate to say this, but she’d look better minus 15ish pounds. =/
She’s one of those models who just looks a lot better skinny. Her “curvy” body doesn’t have curves in the right places.
By Jen#2 on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
It does look as if it’s been touched down (ha) to make her look larger.
Why must these models risk their lives to work in this industry? If the clothes don’t look good on a regular sized woman then they’re not worth buying. Woman shouldn’t have to starve themselves to feel accepted or to feel as if they look good. It gives an awful message to young girls. Clothes aren’t made for coat hangers so they shouldn’t be modeled on them either. If the designer isn’t talented enough to make them look good on a regular size woman then they should find a new career path.
You have to be painfully skinny to be a model, you have to either never eat or take drugs or throw up when you do eat, lovely message to send to young people.
By lindsay on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
karl lagerfeld said he turned 4 models away from this show because he said they looked like they were from a 3rd world country. i was surprised, since le karl has always been a fan of the frail and petite.
anyways, i love gemma. i’ve watched her from about 3 years ago, and she’s one of my fav’s… she;s never been “boney”; you can tell she’s naturally skinny.
By adelle on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
This photo has been altered. There are real photos from the chanel show on style.com.. She has not gained THIS much weight.
By lindsay on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
my god, she does not need to lose weight. that’s a bad angle. how do YOU look when you’re walking in a bikini??
she has muscle definition now, whereas she used to be 16 and had none. get over yourselves.
By lola on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
My first impression was that she looked very big for a model, but of course that’s what were used to seeing. Because we have been conditioned to expect models to be underweight, she looks pretty big. But when I looked closer, I could see that her stomach was very flat and that if she was just wearing a bikini on a beach, she would probably still be thought of as thin.
Overall, it’s definitely a good thing. She’s still beautiful, just healthier looking. Fashion shouldn’t be about promoting eating disorders in its followers.
By Cheryl on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
OMG!!! What is the world coming to??? When they let that model Chanel…. Hello??? I mean she’s a model? Models aren’t meant to eat!!! and she has clearly been eating???!!!
What next?? Hilary Duff doing the runways?
By andy on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I don’t think they should be average because the average person (at least in America) is overweight..
I think they should be fit, and healthy. They’re models of what girls and women want to look like… I would love to see fashion models that look like fitness models. Or Jessica Biel. Or Christina Ricci (her buff bod, I mean), etc.
By Emily on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
i’m glad she has put on a few. Maybe that will help change the minds of some of these designers who insists there models look as if they are going to die. The size 0 trend is unreasonable. For anyone. I know I suffered with an eating disorder for over 20 years, and my body is not meant to be a zero. She looks awesome.
By ej on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
shes at an okay size but she looks completely out of shape.. so it doesnt look good. her legs look funny
but personally and maybe its because were used to seeing smaller models i think it looks better but chan ge is always god but it should at least be a positive change and her look is not positive.
By Ellie on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
You people can easily say that she’s too big to walk to the runway now, but obviously the designers don’t seem to think so. I think models should portray a healthy image. They should be at a healthy weight (within their HEALTHY BMI range). I think models look disgusting when they are 6 foot, and weigh 110 pounds. It’s very unattractive. I don’t think clothes look better on super skinny individuals. I think they look good when women have curves. When they actually have a behind, boobs, and hips, like women are supposed to have. Gemma is not fat, she doesn’t have thunder thighs, she looks good. Jealousy much? Even when gaining weight, she’s still making millions on her body and face. Something many people wish they could do. Slender looks good, but not emaciated. Plus size also looks good. I prefer seeing plus size models. Many plus size models are much more beautiful in the face than these weird looking alien runway models, and they have the curves that they embrace, which is 100% beautiful. If I had to choose between Kelly Osbourne and Victoria Beckham, i’d choose Kelly. I’d choose Kelly over a lot of people these days. Thin may be in, but that doesn’t mean that it’s more attractive to the average person walking down the street.
By blondie on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
oh. my. god.
she looks absolutely horrible and it looks like she put on 20 pounds!!!!
Models are supposed to be skinny - I mean, honestly it’s their job. I’m not saying it’s that easy, but it isn’t as if a lot of thought goes into not eating…
Models need to at least be thin, if not skeletal, but Gemma isn’t even thin at ALL anymore - she’s probably fatter than half of the people that were even at the fashion show! right now she just has too much flesh and fat - it’s taking away from the clothes!! I’m seriously shocked that she got so big….
By kat on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
wow that little bit of weight gain really uglied up her face
but i agree she is sending a good message about the proana girls. she looks ‘kinda chunky’ (compared to before ) but shes by no means gross looking. and seeing her on a catwalk like that sends a good message. models are people just like everyone else.
By oh em gee on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
omg she looks horrible! she was my idol! and now her legs are enormous! who would want to be wearing so little looking like that
she needs to get back to how she was.
By eh on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
people are calling gemma fat? what are you bitches smoking.
By corey on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
oh, it cracks me up to read all of these comments.
i’d like to see all of you guys in that outfit.
THEN, we’ll talk.
By Sandy on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
- Christine, on October 11th, 2007 at 12:32 pm Said:
I think models should be slender, but not emaciated. I personally would rather see models slimmer than your average woman. The clothing looks better. If I want to see “average” women in clothes, I’ll just look around me….they are everywhere.
- I agree 100% percent. Just being honest.
By Melissa.Marissa on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
THEY LOOK LIKE MY THIGHS!!!!
By michelle c on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
i’m divided on this, she looked so beautiful before, but then again she was a child and looked like a child and i thought it was really freaky for her to model for womens clothes when she obviously wasn’t a woman.
now she looks like a woman and i think she has grown into a womans body. her thighs look a little wobly, but i think she just needs to tone up. but considering she has put weight on her stomach still looks really flat.
By cali girl on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I am not against normal-sized models but I personally think Gemma looked so much better a little skinnier.
By blabla on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
she doesn’t look good in this pic, but maybe it’s just the pic..
By Ashley on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
kSB ur completely wrong, Americas newest top model, Jaseline (or w/e) is a victoria secret model and she is def. not meaty
By Lucy on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Ewww. It’s okay to be healthy, but healthy doesnt mean you have to be fat. She needs a good workout, models should not look like that. It looks disgusting, who would want to buy that! fat makes it looks like wal-mart clothes.
By Steph on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
i don’t mind that models are thinner than average, esp high-fashion models, i just don’t like the bony, emaciated ones. but i’d prefer them to look like rebecca romijn, naomi campbell, josie maran etc than to look “normal”!!! sure normal is better than that heroin-chic crap, but why should i have to look at normal? i like “normal” in the dove ads, do it but no way do i think the high fashion world should follow. i like that fantasy element when i look at victoria’s secret models, even though i’m an A-cup! if you have a brain and a backbone you’re not going to be one of those impressionable idiots who feels like the fashion world causes all their self-esteem problems and is telling them to get a boob job & starve
she’s still 19, alot of naturally pin-thin teens fill out later like they get older. remember what mandy moore looked like at 15 compared to 19? anyways, if she weren’t a model i wouldn’t see anything wrong with her figure, but she’s filled out in a strange & lumpy way that i don’t think suits the modeling world anymore. it actually looks photoshopped! but i think in person she’d still look better than average
By El on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
That image has been photoshopped.
Personally, I think it’s a shitty photo.
And secondly.. the only reason she looks plus size is because we’re used to seeing her look anorexic..
But really, who cares?
By Ava Adore on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
She looks terrible!
By tash on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I’m not really “into” her new look to be honest, all womanly with a tan. I liked her better when she was pale as a whost with feline eyes & lithe body. It was just better for the artistic purposes of high fashion.
she more “hot” now but before she was eretheral. perhaps her more commercial look now will be better for her acting career?
By kamaakaa on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Have any of you ever made clothing?
Did you know that clothing can be made to fit, look best, emphasize, or minimize ANY SHAPE or SIZE?
Models do not HAVE to be thin to look good in clothing, though some clothing - like trapeeze dresses- look ‘better’ on thin/small chested people. However, some clothing looks better on hourglass shaped ladies, or tall girls, or short ones, or girls with large bottoms.
I personally think that we should not think twice about having all size models. Why not have a curvy size 14 in a curvy dress (instead of padding it out - as has been done at many shows)? Why not have the size 2 girl in the oversized top and skinny jeans? And just for good measure a size 6 or 8 in the tailored pants and jacket?
At Prada they had a ‘normal’ sized girl on the runway - she had a bust measurement of 86cm… that’s 33inches - compared to the ‘average’ person, that’s still quite small. But I don’t think that size matters so much as what the designer is looking for. Afterall, fashion, isn’t about weight. It’s about clothes and how to interpret the designers clothing/vision.
By tash on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
HAHA ghost sorry
By woord on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
she’s probably just coming off of coke.
By LilyATX on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Well, she just gave ME a huge ego boost! I’m a model as well, and I think it’s necessary to eat a healthy diet and stay in peak physical shape. I have to fit the size 2 sample sizes, and nobody wants to see cellulite/thunder thighs on the runway.
By mazz on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Omg.. as if her legs are big or whatever! She probably gained a few but its probably also an unflattering photo/outfit.. geez! She started modelling very young remember….
By arev on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
she looks horrid
By lala on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
its been photoshopped. don’t you see the ripples of her skin layering over the back ground…its fakeee. I wonder why someone would feel the need to do that to the photo.
By No One on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
This is a fake image. I wish you guys would check, or apply some critical reasoning, before perpetuating fake images like this.
By cass on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
her legs look disgusting
By the confused on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Let’s hope, it is just an angle that makes her look enormous
models are models for a reason. they are a canvas for clothing. they must be different from regular folk. if models are average-looking that takes away from the fantasy aspect of fashion. They must be thin, lean gorgeous, so that it is not attainable by the regular women.
Let’s get real, fashion magazines would loose money if they used “normal weight” girls.
By fashionqueen on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
i don’t think fashion models ‘need’ to be skinnier than average women….
if they looked more average than more of us would accept our bodies for what God gave us… as opposed to starving oursevlves thin..
anyone out there agree?
By Tara on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
gemma is gorgeous and i think its admirable that she would put on the weight (to set a good example or just so she won’t be banned from modeling in certain countries?) but the allure of the model is because its something out of our grasp…
and as awful as this sounds designers don’t look at models as people, models are merely walking hangers to display their designs and thats why rail thin models are used, clothes just look better on skinny people…
the models shouldn’t look like they’re on the verge of death but they should certainly be waif-like.
By Amanda on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
My opinion is that, if they can’t make clothes look good on a normal sized person, they shouldn’t be selling it.
And how about some petite models? If you’re going to have plus sized models, open up the game to short girls too.
A runway show should be as versatile as artwork. It should represent ALL shapes, sizes, and ethnicities.
Show more range and wear-ability!!
By Banana456 on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
She’s defintely one of the ugliest supermodels. Uggh that face looks gross
By KT on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
yea i deffinatly think these photos have been messed with. i mean it doesnt even look natural. shes all bummpy looking as if she stuffed cotton balls underneath panty hose. they would never send any model out on the runway looking like that. as for why shes such a big model i have not a clue for a think her face is unattractive but she always had a great model like figure. id be very surprized if these photos are actully legit.
By KT on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
looking at it again its terribly photoshopped and who ever did it did a horrific job. look at the form of her shoulders and arms its ridiculous.
By Jodi on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
The so-called “average” woman is a fucking load. I don’t want to see that gallumphing down a runway. If I want to see that, I’ll TiVo a thousand Dove commercials.
By lambman on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
WTF,
Now that I see it on my moniter at home, not work, I see that this is total BS!
that is NOT Gemma’s body. Just go to gettyimages and search for current, real, unphotoshoped pics.
Look how freakishly small her head is, it does not belong to that body.
By beks on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
theres no way that is her body, they wouldn’t of let her on the runway!
By Anonymous1 on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
She probably just finally hit puberty. I know that my weight caught up with me when I was about 17 or 18, and I was a stick before.
By Jeneroni on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
yeah, her legs definetly look HORRENDOUS…
really gross!
I don’t know why she gained weight! Being thin is a models job! If she wants to gain weight, THEN DONT BE A MODEL!
this picture just blew me away…
her head looks SUPER small… i think that women with little boobs have to be thin, or else it looks wierd…
for example, kelly clarkson wouold look better thinner, keira knightley looks good thin rather than if she put on some weight because her boobs are so small…
my boobs are small and i know that if i gain weight, it’ll look wierd…
By Anonymous1 on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
PS - Her body looks gross. Go to the gym and gain muscle weight.
By Spectra on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Here’s my take on the whole “skinny model thing”. I think models should be slim, but why do they all have to be 6′ tall??? I would LOVE to see some models that are a more normal height…say, 5′4″-5′9″, so average height women could see what the clothes would look like on them. I don’t think they should be plus sized or anything, but seeing regular-looking women modeling clothes would inspire me to find outfits that flatter me.
I also think fashion designers that can design clothes for curvier women are more talented than others. Tyra Banks had this one designer (can’t remember his name) that designed a ton of gowns for people like Oprah, Star Jones, etc….and he was really proud of it. His clothes were amazing, btw. Anyone know his name??
By Talyor on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Jen #2 thats what im saying!!!! If your clothes are so great why do you need to starve yourself to look good in them?
By sara on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
i totaly agre with sictra or whatever they should be skinny butt why do thy have to be tall !?!?!? i mean i am bearly 5ft4 she is not fat butt dafntly not skinn i wouldnt want to have her body butt i am so shoked of how thy lett her walke on the runway she is probobly at east a saiz 8!!! and i saw the september issu of english vouge and she looked mutch thiner wow
By sara on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
i mean skinny and they sorry
By alexis on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
she looks hotttt now!!!!
By Marie on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
why’d you have to go and pick the most unflattering picture of her out of the whole set? If you look at the other pictures from the Chanel and Hermes show …she looks perfectly fine.
By Sarah on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
eww, those legs are disgusting.
i think this must be fake - I work in the industry, and NO high fashion couture designer would cast her in a show if her legs looked like that.
By Mel on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
EWW! Her cellulite on her jiggly fat jello legs look REPULSIVE!! She looks horrible!! She needs to lose some weight asap! Why is she even allowed on the catwalk now!?
By Kimberly Lawson on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Considering the average woman is a 12/14 here in the US, yes models should be thinner than average. But I don’t think anyone over 5′8″ needs to be smaller than a size 4.
By gb on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I would like to know what the reasons are… personally, I disagree… skinny models have to go. It sets a bad standard and nobody really looks like that anyway. her arms and legs look bigger… and what’s up with her eyes? does she have FAS?
By Elle on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I believe that fashion models should be thinner than the average girl. Clothing flatters tall, thin figures better. They shouldn’t be sick looking but lean is good. I think the whole appeal of models is that they are almost unreal.
By muffintuft on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
BREASTS! omg. She looks fab.
By as if on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
SKINNY!!!!!!!!!
IM NOT SAYING THEY SHOULD KILL THEMSELVES OR BE EXTREMLY SKINNY IF THEY’RE NOT NATURALLY BUILT THAT WAY (BCOUZ THAT SETS A BAD EXAMPLE …BLAH BLAH BLAH …)
BUT THATS WHAT THEY GET PAID FOR!!!
THERE ARE “BIG” MODELS….RUNWAY MODELS SHOULD BE THIN … IF NOT …EVERYONE COULD BE A MODEL …AND WHATS THE FUN IN THAT … MODELS ARE BLESSED HUMAN BEINGS WITH SLIM BODIES AND GORGEOUS FACES … PPL JUST NEED TO FACE THE FACT THAT THEY’RE AVARAGE AND SUCCED IN DEIFFERENT THINGS….
U WEREN’T BORN PERFECT?? TOUGH LUCK!!!…
DEAL!!!
STOP BLAMING THE MODELS FOR EVERYTHING
STOP BANNING SKINNY PRETTY GIRLS!!!
MAYBE SOME ARE SICK
BUT IM SURE A LOT OF THEM ARE NATURALLY THAT WAY BECAUSE MODELS ARE DISCOVERED YOUNG … !!!!
STOP TRYING TO BE SOMETHING YOU’RE NOT!!…THEN KILLING YOURSELVE FOR IT ….THEN BLAMMING THOSE GORGEOUS HUMAN BEINGS THAT ARE JUST TRYING TO EARN A DECENT LIVING!!!!
GOD!!!!!!!!!!
GOD BLESS THE MODELS!!!!!
EVEN THE PIN THIN STICK ONES!!! (THEY’RE THE ONES WHO MODEL COTURE THE BEST!!!)
By as if on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
about gemma … she was waaay prettier before…
if this is photoshoped then …whatever ill still love her
if it is real then it goes to show she’s never been naturally thin and that she’s not making an effort now because ppl are imature enough to blame models for teenage anorexia around the world..
By just say NO to FAT models on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Bitch is CHUBBY, ’nuff said.
She needs to get her ass some cocaine to shed that weight, asap.
By Denise on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Her stomach looks okay from what we can see, but her arms look lumpy and her legs look terrible.
By Fiona on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
They photoshopped Gemma’s head onto a heavier person’s body. Go to imdb.com and there’s pictures of her from 2007, so unless she’s packed on a LOT of weight in a couple of months, then this is just a horrific photoshop job!
By RaisinGirl on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Spectra - I think the designer you’re talking about might be Bradley Bayou?
By skinnyhappy on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
Is it just me or does she look like that creature from “Lord of the Rings”? You know…the one that said “my precious” and lived in the swamp.
By daringdancer on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
First I must say that I do think models should be more normal sized. Then I must add that, perhaps because I am so used to seeing her skinny, she looks chubby here, particularly in the thigh area. These almost look photoshopped to me, they are so weird…..(the head too small for the body)>
Oh well, better that models aren’t dying size zeros.
By lovefashion on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
ahhh that does not suit her at all!
By sweet tooth on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
“thinner than average” and skeletal/dying of anorexia are completely different things
By Tyra Banks on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
btw she looks good in the oringinal pic. all models should be at least her size.
By mrs. norton on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
those legs aren’t looking too hot.
By nike on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
Normally I really love your comments but I hate this comment : ” I think clothing models should be thinner than the average person, for various reasons. ”
Wyh should they? They should show an ideal clothing for normal slim people. If they are thinner than normal slim people, everything is just art but no clothing!
By Ashlee on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
Ewwwww! I prefer skinny models. she look’s so tree trunkish. her legs are waful and her face is fat and ugly. she should go back to skinny.
By tallenglishgirl on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
Wow. She looks like the supermodels of the 80’s & 90’s - big and curvy. She’s a lovely looking girl so can get away with it.
By causethisiswhyi'mhot on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
putting on weight doesn’t seem to have done a lot for her.but then the photo could be photoshopped.
i tend to agree that models should be thinner than the average person.Mainly because,we’re supposed to be paying attention to the clothes on the catwalk,not the model wearing them,which means,models shouldn’t be horribly emaciated either.
slender and healthy is better than either looking ‘average’ or looking too thin.
i also really find it irritating that people honestly think there will ever be size 16’s on the catwalk,it’s never going to happen because no one,i mean no one,wants to see it.
By She is too heavy on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
she wont be working much longer if she continues at this weight.
Seriously, her unusual and interesting face cant even compensate because her head looks comically small in comparison to her body.
(She is NOT fat - but she is looking too heavy to be a catwalk model - even for someone as in demand as herself)
By nicole on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
Hm, her head looks reallly small now compared to her body and it is not just because of the hair do.
By mazz on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
click on my name for my website and you will see Gemma ward in the SAME outfit but from a different angle..
VERY Thin
By mazz on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
go to style dot com , go into slideslows and fashion shows and click on chanel and you will see gemma in the SAME outfit in a different angle and she looks VERY slim
By Natalia D on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
She still looks amazing… It is from a bad angle…
By Sunshine on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
Photoshopped!!!
She she lose weight if it isnt.
By kitson on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
I’d personally kill to look as good as this, bodywise, but I think she’s a little heavy for the outfit she’s wearing.
By Miss M on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
Haute Couture is not made for “normal” sized people, I think models who present fashion on the catwalk can be thinner than the average person. Let’s face it, who of us can afford that kind of fashion anyway?
By Asuka on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
Thing is this is a ready to wear collection. Also, most of us won’t be buying Channel, but Channel design concepts will influence the upcoming trends, being reproduced by department stores all across the country and eventually make its way to Target, or whatever other mass retailer.
It’s already been stated that the purpose of Haute Couture is not mass consumption. As such, a designer can send a dog down the runway dressed in his designs if that’s what will convey his idea. For this kinds of fashion shows, I get it that it doesn’t matter what kind of models are utilized.
Many of you have stated that because these women are paid handsomely they should starve themselves. I wonder if we’ve come to believe that sacrificing one’s health for such a superfluous cause warrants high paid salaries.
Personally, I don’t think models should be highly paid to begin with. I’d rather see our educators, health care professionals and other workers — who contribute so much to our society — getting paid more than these women.
What kind of skill does it take to hit the genetic jackpot and prance around in designer clothes anyway? Certainly it cannot be compared to the preparation and dedication required to become a researcher, lawyer, doctor, professor, etc.
By anelej on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
i think they should look like normal skinny people. not super scary skinny!
and have beautiful faces.
as for gemma. i think this is an unflattering picture.
she has gained but looks good.
By samba on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
nar that is definately Gemma! Look at old photos of her…her legs are stick thin back then but they are the same shape as this jst way smaller! no matter how big/small ppl get the overall leg shape seems to stay the same (i know u can change it a bit with different exercise and diet) but overall i mean…
also her face looks like it filled out here! it was always cutesy but her jawline was way more angular!
By gossipp on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
i agree with troublegirl843….this is not fattering, models need to be really thin otherwise the clothes just dont look good.
By samba on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
ASOKA- I toatally agree! thats so smart =o) it would be better for that money to go towards health pros ect then i reckon u could wipe out 1/2 the ED’s in the world cuz not so much emphasis would be placed on this idea of “beauty” which really isnt in my eyes and in many other ppls eyes the epitome of “beauty”
everyone finds beautiful and prfect to be different- some ppl like shapely muscle legs others like stick thin, some like big boobs others like small…then in the end i think it depends on the individual everyone looks different everyone has their faults honestly who in this world has the right to define “beauty”
and why is there so much emphasis on one perfect physical beauty- wat about emphasis on individuality and diversity and most important the inner beauty (i know that sounds so cliche) but its so easy to get lost in this superficial world and we jst gotta take a step back and realise wat really matters in the end- we are all ppl we all sh*t in the same bowl
By samba on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
Sorry ASUKA…not ASOKA!!! my bad
By Bunny on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
As a woman, these comments really make me want to duck my head in shame. Why are women such idiots? It actually makes sense to see the clothes on a average sized woman because this way you really SEE how the clothes will hang on the majority of people. Its just dumb otherwise. Further, it is ridiculous to show women’s clothes on a child’s body. I mean very few of us are the same size now as we were in 10th and 11th grade which is the age of the majority of runway models. Not that we are bigger necessarily, but your weight shifts.
Women who wonder why men reduce them to less than the sum of their parts should come here and read the post..herein lies your answer.
By Asuka on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
Np, samba! We all make a few typos here and there.
I think there’s a lot of wisdom in what you said about beauty representing different things for everyone. I also totally agree with what you said about placing less emphasis on physical appearances.
Gemma’s face is still very unique and that alone sets her apart from the average, not to mention her height is far from common. Maybe that’s enough to qualify her to be a model?
By Edan on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
I checked. It’s photoshopped. She is not as thin as she once was, but in the real photos she looks good.
I like seeing thin women model clothes. Notice I say thin. I do not say “I like seeing a brain attached to a spinal cord model clothes.”
If I did, I’d check out Angelina’s daily parade to pick up her kid from School.
By FW on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
maybe it’s just the picture but i think she looks awful - the weight has settled only in her hips and thighs and her legs look oddly ripply - her legs looks like they bend inward at the knees - i think models these days are too skinny, but i also agree that they should be slightly skinnier than the average woman - maybe 1 or 2 size skinnier, not 5 sizes skinnier - i also think models these days are not as attractive as they used to be it is now the norm for “quirky” or “imperfect” models to be the favored
By dani on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
EVERYONE LISTEN!
This pic is photoshopped. If you google it and look around you will come across the REAL pictures. I did and I saw them, and looks much thinner than this.
By georgie on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
who cares. she’s still ugly and always will be, however much she weighs…
By georgie on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
also, just to add my mite to the stick-thin model debate:
IMO, clothing is there to compliment a woman and it’s not the case that women are supposed to compliment the clothing.
that’s why i would prefer to see normal-sized women on the catwalk so i can an idea of what it looks like on me - not rail-thin bobble-heads who make the clothing appear to it’s best advantage.
By Mouse on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
kamaakaa, you are probably the only person who has a good perspecitve on this having designed and dressed models.
To those who say: I think models should be normal sized… you aren’t in the busines (neither am I, but I’m going with the industry’s opinion). Models who cruise down the runway are not wearing these clothes for the whole world to see, it’s just for industry insiders. And it is about how the garment is being shown, not the girl behind the clothes.
If you want to b*tch about not enough “normal” looking women, rail on corporations, advertisers and even health magazines. They’re the ones targeting the general public.
By Prinzz on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
She looks dead…
By ccc on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
it’s photoshopped. it’s fake. i’ve seen a bunch of pictures of her at the fashion show including the ones with this exact outfit and she doesn’t look like that.
By Elisabeth on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
If this photo is not photoshopped she really needs to hit the gym….
I know lots of you might disagre with me, but i think models are suppose to be skinny, also skinnier than the average woman, otherwise every woman could be a model, and models would not be something special. If I got paid lots of millions I would be able to starve myself too….
By Aurora on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
Has this picture been photoshopped? Her head looks so small compared to her body!
By css on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
I find it hilarious that half of you are calling her fat, while I’d be willing to be bet that you’re all at least 20lbs overweight.
By catseyesvc on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
her thighs look gross. yikes.
By conscience on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
oh no, I surely don’t like those legs.
By anja on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
i think its pgotoshoped, i dont belive it…
By ino on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
Fashion is an art form… it’s meant to be different and extreme… so models, the representatives of this art form, should be different and extreme in terms of their beauty. The best models tend to be oddly beautiful and exceptionally thin because clothing, the art, fits the best on that body type and appearance, or the frame for the art.
By seriously on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
theres a reason thin is always in. lets face it. it just looks so much better. this proves it doesnt it?
By sassy on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
now her head looks tiny.
By Stephanie on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
Ok. That is so NOT attractive.
Runway is runway. Those models are supposed to be super-skinny. That is simply how it has always been and how it should always be.
She’s not even commercial modeling attractive anymore.
By Christy on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
I just love her either way! Although she seems to have some cellulite in this picture…
By ccc on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
it IS photoshopped. just look her up on style.com. there’s a picture of her wearing the same thing and it looks nothing like this.
By jackieO on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
ok this looks really photoshopped to me. but even if it’s not, she still looks way better than “average” but no longer appropriate for high fashion modelling. it’s the way she’s “gained” that makes her proportions look weird. it highlights that her legs aren’t toned, her torso is really long, her shoulders are really broad, and her head is really small…which leads me back to the i-think-it’s-photoshopped theory
By Emi on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
She’s not pretty anymore.
By Ihatecheese on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
Yeah, go to style.com and look her up. SHE LOOKS NOTHING LIKE THIS PICTURE. Seriously.
By cellulite eXpert on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
after viewing the channel video on style.com… yes, gemma’s gams do look bigger than the other models did in that show. i don’t think the photo on here is photoshopped.
as a side note, i found it interesting that karl langerfield admits to having modeled the ankle bracelets(purses) seen on the models in the show after lindsay lohans alchohol detecting bracelet. what’s next….
By Maxx05 on Oct 12, 2007 | Reply
I agree completely with Jodi and Edan, there’s a big surprise! I would bet money that these pics had been photoshopped, and apparently they have. This image is far too large to let go down a runway, sorry people. This is a mess of a body - if this was indeed Gemma’s body she would be called into her agency and told to hit the gym and lose a few before she’d be getting jobs again. I don’t think that models should be dropping dead on the runway, but they still need to be thin.
By Rian on Oct 13, 2007 | Reply
To all the people saying this photo is photoshopped: I got the picture here.
By jen on Oct 13, 2007 | Reply
whoa fatty:) she’s still pretty though!
By lucy on Oct 13, 2007 | Reply
jodi, how can you be so ignorant?
i have always respected your comments
but that was out of line
no need to act like a petty teenage bitch
By lucy on Oct 13, 2007 | Reply
oh i forgot to add, her stomach looks great!
By Tim on Oct 13, 2007 | Reply
Wow. Some of you posters are seriously messed up. What is your obsession with outrageously skinny chicks wearing clothes not suitable to be worn in public?
I know this is from a blokes perspective but, honestly; bikini/lingerie models are attractive, female actors generally are also very attractive (i’m talking Charlize Theron, not Jolie), and the old-school supermodels were hot (elle, claudia, Klum, etc - the ones people recognise, not random fashion coat hangers).
Fashion models, one the other hand, are quite repulsively skinny, and tend to have ‘odd’ faces, if you know what I mean. These are the sort of chicks that most blokes I know wouldn’t look twice at if they walked past. Why is it that you seem to look up to them? Have a re-read of what this bird posted:
“MODELS ARE BLESSED HUMAN BEINGS WITH SLIM BODIES AND GORGEOUS FACES … PPL JUST NEED TO FACE THE FACT THAT THEY’RE AVARAGE AND SUCCED IN DEIFFERENT THINGS….
U WEREN’T BORN PERFECT?? TOUGH LUCK!!!”
Putting aside the distarcting over-use of capitalisation and punctuation, what planet are you people on? Why does this website even exist?
By Line on Oct 13, 2007 | Reply
Well, we still have Vlada…she’s that same type of “Lolita”-model with a doll-like face end she’s still stick thin…
By Lynsey on Oct 13, 2007 | Reply
This is photoshopped, even if she did gain weight, she wouldnt go so flabby.
By jen on Oct 13, 2007 | Reply
I think she has gained weight but its also from a really bad angle. Her stomach still looks really flat and shes seems to have stored the majority of it on her legs. I still love gemma though…
By Chris on Oct 13, 2007 | Reply
Gemma might have gained some weight and that’s ok. But this picture definitely is photoshopped. And I don’t like people “creating” such lies. See other pictures of the same show: uslessthings.blogspot.com/2007/10/gemma-ward-got-fat.html
By Chris on Oct 13, 2007 | Reply
Oops, sorry for the link!
By lilah on Oct 13, 2007 | Reply
gemma looks great! i’m so happy that this size zero phenomenon is vanishing (or then not..but i truly hope it would disappear.) . gemma looks healthy and why should models be so thin?! that’s nor good for health. but of course, models should be in good shape, but that doesn’t mean they should be skeletons and sick! you can be toned without beeig super skinny. i wish that even more models would gain some weight that their BMI would be 18-20. that’d be good.
By karen on Oct 13, 2007 | Reply
she is NOT too fat to be a model and fck all of u who say she is….
how do u think celebs and models starve themseleves???
its because brainless people like u say they are too fat!!
anyhow i doubt most of u look as good as this you are probably just jealous of her because ur fat yourselves
By Chop_Chop on Oct 13, 2007 | Reply
attack of the skinny fat look!
c. crawford has muscular curves. like n. cambell (sp?)
this looks bad because its flabby. and i dont think she is suppose to be this big. her head looks like a pea.
By FAWNE on Oct 13, 2007 | Reply
her legs gained in a bad way… all fat. she should at least tone if she wants to gain weight
and i agree models SHOULD BE SKINNY
then what would the point of models be? then every body could model .
By Bea on Oct 13, 2007 | Reply
i used to worship gemma before i started recovery for my ED.
i thinkk models should look like normal people.
well…what i mean is a BMI of above 18.5 at the least.
they should be fit && healthy I believe.
she looks great.
people who say she has ‘thunder-thighs’ now are trulyy insane.
she does need some toning thoughh;;
i do agree on that but she looks more like..oh i dunno A PERSON.
&& not an alien.
_bea♥
x33
By Elisabeth on Oct 13, 2007 | Reply
i saw the picture of her at style.com.
it might have been photoshopped a bit, but not much, i guess this is just a bad angle.
isnt that what tyra banks said about the the picure in the bathing suit, where she she looked fat????
By Ro on Oct 13, 2007 | Reply
How in anyway does she look fat? Yes she’s put on weight, and yes her legs looks bigger than they were, but calling her legs fat is a bit exaggerated….isn’t it? Or are we living in a world now where anyone who is at a healthy weight is seen as ‘chunky’.
Just look at her mid-section, still skinny. Give the girl a break it’s much better that has gained a few pounds than dropping dead on the catwalk.
By aleek on Oct 13, 2007 | Reply
I agree, this is PHOTOSHOPPED.
Look at her left arm in the picture and you can judge for yourself.
I didnt know arms could be fatter in the bottom (where her jacket cuts off) and then miraculously become two inches skinnier where the jack starts. Its also really lumpy as well. Even her thighs are a bit lumpy too. Why do people make images like this???
Sily silly.
By Meredith Z. on Oct 13, 2007 | Reply
I’ve never liked her….she’s fug and her body isn’t attractive-esp. her.
By Elaine on Oct 13, 2007 | Reply
Fugly.
By TARA on Oct 13, 2007 | Reply
MAYBEE, SHE HAD AN EATING DISORDER WHEN SHE WAS SKINNY… AND WAS THEN SENT TO GET TREATMENT AND HAD TO GAIN THAT WEIGHT.
YOU KNOW WHAT, THERE WILL ALWAYS BE NEGATIVE COMMENTS. BECAUSE THERE ARE ALWAYS NEGATIVE PEOPLE, NEGATIVE PEOPLE WHO HATE THEMSELVES. SO SINCE THEY HATE THEMSELVES THEY WILL HATE ON OTHER POPLE TOO. [TO MAKE THEMSELVES FEEL BETTER I GUESS…] THINKING ITS OKAY TO POINT OUT OTHER PEOPLES FLAWS-THATS SO STUPID. I LOOOVE GEMMA, SHES A STRONG GIRL. AND SHE IS SO DAMN BEAUTIFUL. I LIKE HER BETTER LIKE THIS! ALL SHE GOTTA SO IS SMILEEEEEEEEEE
By danielle on Oct 14, 2007 | Reply
OMG Gemma looks really bad. I mean Im not used on seeing that full figured models on the catwalk. I dont wanna sound mean, I understand she looks more like a real-life person, but now her legs don’t look as good as they used to and her face is wider. Thats the 1st pic I see her with her new body and Im not very thrilled.
By Ellablack on Oct 14, 2007 | Reply
Her face is all scrunched like a crab and she cant walk straight, is that what it takes to get paid the big bucks?
By Rebetta on Oct 14, 2007 | Reply
People I know for a fact this is photoshopped.
By barbra on Oct 14, 2007 | Reply
models should look like the people they are modeling for. whether thinner or thicker.
in this case, most of the people you see/hear about buying clothes from high fashion brands, are thinner/athletic looking.
By LIEEEEEEEEEEERRRRR on Oct 14, 2007 | Reply
IM SO SORRY TO TELL YOU, BUT THIS PIC IS SUCH A LIE!
i have pretty a master in photoshop and i can see how its touched by an expert..or lets call him/herr ‘’expert'’ because its sooooooo obvious that they used phshop tools in this pic, i have the real one and she’s no teven the half of that,, pleaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaase people dont believe this
By holiday on Oct 15, 2007 | Reply
UT had called Gemma Fat 6 days before this site. I read both everyday.
By jules on Oct 16, 2007 | Reply
eugh
just defintely NOT beautiful
her head is wayyy to small for her body when she is so fat. it just looks awful, i cant believe it.
wuagh
By Ryan on Oct 17, 2007 | Reply
models the same size as normal people? it depends what you mean by normal. for high fashion especially, it doesnt matter what it looks like on a “real person” because many of the clothes will never touch a “real person”. clothes hang best on thin people with nearly no curves - fact. if there’s no variation, you dont have to tailor. but snap-you-in-half skinny? that’s overdoing it.
By Jane on Oct 18, 2007 | Reply
Hahaha - shes still thin even though it’s been
photoshopped. It’s great someone’s gone out and edited that photo not for her sake of course but to show up how many truly insecure people there are in the world that are going to call it fat. Psshhh and please someone whos used the word “normal” in one of their comments define it for me…
Has it ever occured to you that there is no such thing as a stereotypical “normal”. Because the thing is EVERYONE is normal. The big girls, the thin girls, and the ones in between.
As many of you probably know - there are actually naturally thin girls in the world. And because there are people out there that distort their natural body size through eating disorders doesn’t give you the right to call naturally thin girls abnormal. They are as normal as any other sized person. It’s just as wrong as calling an overwieght person abnormal. If you want to express your idea of the in-between size you should use the word average. Not “NORMAL”!
By kim on Nov 4, 2007 | Reply
photoshopped to the max
By Jenn on Nov 7, 2007 | Reply
it was not “fixed” there are like a billion sites talking about it omg look around!
and i think she needs to lose it like…now!
By susi on Jan 3, 2008 | Reply
oh for GODS sake!!! that image is totally asnd utterly photoshopped! yes, gemma has gained weight - and now she looks healthy, not anything like that pic here. ive seen her recently in person, and believe you me that girl is THIN. as in TWIG alert.
so get off her back and at least find a real photo, not one that has been altered to make the poor girl look bad.
she’s stunning anyway, and always will be.
By Elaine on Jan 27, 2008 | Reply
This is not the way to be…The attention anyone gives you for this is not healthy..When you are in your mid twenties and persuing a career or keeping up with a child you have drempt of you WILL NOT BE able to-It felt great to be thin but to come back is hard…Normally when you need it most and have no energy to do so..Please as your heart feels an attack, and it will take aspirin and get help oh please you are going to die in alarming rates PLEASE get help now..before you teach your friends and children the same ways!!!Leo13~
By Elaina on Feb 2, 2008 | Reply
Susi made a post on Jan 3rd, well so did others.
and i agree with her.
from what i have heard and seen, the image is altered. gemma doesn’t look like that.
i know i can’t post links. so if you search Chanel spring 2008 on style.com you will be able to view images from the runway show. there are images of gemma. and she doesn’t look like that at all.
sure. you can tell that she gained a bit of weight.
but she looks healthy! at least she can say that she HAS thighs. and what. she’s like a size 2 now?
big deal. the last time i was a size two was back in grade 6!! and i’m 5′6 and 108lbs now. so even at 115lbs gemma is still underweight for her height. nonetheless though, she’s beautiful at any weight. and people who don’t see that? well…i’m sorry that you can’t appreciate it.
By dolly on Feb 25, 2008 | Reply
AMAZING
I LOVE THIS
Gemma, you have sense
its about time that idols
like you are showing that normal
sized people are GORGEOUS
keep it up girl =]
x
By twilight on Mar 7, 2008 | Reply
Her face looks awful! it´s too small for her body! gosh, she was so damn pretty , and now…so average!
By Reenefupnob on