« President-Elect Beefcake | Main | Rethinking the "Man's Man" »

February 11, 2009


Gretchen Fagan

While I admire the magazine's attempt at helping young women accept themselves the way they are I find it a bit shallow when the models in the magazine reflect anything BUT the image that so many feel they need to live up to. Sorry to be Debbie Downer but after seeing Ashlee Simpson's signature and knowing the surgery she has had to change her looks, I am not all that impressed.

Rofigo de la Mancha

I like it.

As a guy, I wish there was something similar for my own gender... but the only "manly" magazines out there for me are things like Maxim and Esquire. Those `zines are too shallow for me.

More women need to learn to feel this way. I might look for a 7 or 8 out of 10 for looks, but that 7 or 8 is a 10 to _me_ because I'll look at the inside of the lady. The hottest 10 is a 1 (or 0) in my books if she's ugly on the inside (especially if she makes fun of those less physically blessed than her). My libido is welcome to make "suggestions" about who I pursue, but it will always be my heart that tells me who I truly find attractive.

Tom Babcock

I applaud this effort. I am a physician and scientist and believe medicine and science havde neglected this issue. The "standards" for height and weight are not based on firm science, but are reinforced by the same prejudices that hace led to overconcern with meeting Hollywood's standards. There is so much about genetics and the factors that determine our physical shape that we do not understand, yet the popular conception is that we look like we do because of choices we make. I hope that one important outcome for this project by Seventeen is that those who sign up and those who read about the signators apply this principle not only to themselves but, as the posting by Carrie suggests, to avoid negative comments and to respect and love others for who they are and not on how they look.


I agree with Gretchen's comment above. That magazine is all about the superficial, and a gesture like this won't erase the many negative messages it gives girls.

Leigh Olivia

I'm with Ms. Fagan--Seventeen magazine making a "Body Peace Treaty," is a little like a butcher joining PETA (not that PETA don't have their own problems) or a the president of the president of an SUV-making company talking about how to preserve the ozone layer. While we might appreciate the sentiment, it seems like a hypocritical attempt to distract from the ways in which they contribute to the problem in the first place.


This is a wonderful idea, and I wish there had been something like this around when I was a teenager.
You don't have to meet some arbitrary standard of "beauty." Such standards change constantly. Mae West was once the icon of sexiness; she'd be considered fat and ugly today. And I, too, particularly like the clause that promises not to put down others. What matters is respect--respect for others, respect for your own body, and respect for your own innate beauty.


I think it is a good idea, but I don't entirely know how much I would personally trust Seventeen magazine (since I feel like they are partly contributing to the overall negativity). Maybe they are just trying to get girls where they're at who read the magazine. But I think it is very important for women to realize that no women really look like they do on front covers and music videos, and very few women are that skinny (something like 12%). I'm not bashing against women who are that skinny, but real women, most of the time, don't look like that.
And if men are looking for someone who is, you have to ask yourself: are they really worth dating?


This article is highly interesting, and food for thought, haha. I'm sure you all will think so too.



I'm glad that 'Seventeen' is trying to make a difference in teen girls' lives, but I agree with some of the comments above that the attempt is rather hypocritical. A fashion magazine talking about loving your body? I thought that those were supposed to throw you into a spell of self-hate.

I don't want to sound too negative here, but a magazine shows a woman exactly everything she's not, or can't be.

'Seventeen' is, after all, still nothing but a magazine - airbrushed photos and all.


I do agree with the comments of Seventeen being hypocritical, but they unlike Teenvogue mak an effort to have fashion spreds with regular looking girls. That and the advice about healthy eating, fitness, and practical advice about things like college admissons are other positive things if thats what girls are going to read. At the end of the day though the mag is so shallow, on every page another five things you feel bad about not haveing. I also find the advice about sex: how to use a condom,how to hook a hottie,what an orgasem feels like, who should bring the condome, and what guys really want very disturbing


Try New Moon Girls magazine. I don't know if all aspects of it would be acceptable to you but they don't take advertisers and they don't encourage girls to be bimbos.

The comments to this entry are closed.