Ashley Graham claps back at Amy Schumer’s plus-sized ‘double standards’

ashley cosmo

To all of those people who said that Ashley Graham looks like Eva Mendes: I really see it. They could be sisters! Ashley covers the August issue of Cosmopolitan, and what’s great about it is that… it’s normal. Cosmopolitan isn’t even making a big deal about putting a plus-sized model on their cover. It’s great! And like every interview Ashley has given this year, I’m really enjoying what she has to say. Ashley talks about being married to a black man and the public reaction to that. She talks about coming to terms with the fact that she had an abusive, alcoholic boyfriend.

Ashley also has some shade for Amy Schumer in this piece. Some background: back in April, Glamour Magazine put out a supplemental sponsored by Lane Bryant, the plus-sized womenswear company. Ashley was the cover girl for the supplemental, which focused on “beautiful at any size,” specially beauty and fashion for women above a size 12. Amy Schumer’s name appeared on the cover of the supplemental, and Schumer was SO pissed about it, which seemed utterly bizarre. Glamour didn’t even call her “plus-sized,” and Schumer’s hissy fit seemed to contradict her comedy brand, which is that she’s normal sized in America but “big” in Hollywood. Schumer did not come across well, and I’m glad Ashley Graham is saying something about her. Some highlights from Cosmo:

On Amy Schumer taking Glamour to task for implying she is plus-size: “I can see both sides, but Amy talks about being a big girl in the industry. You thrive on being a big girl, but when you’re grouped in with us, you’re not happy about it? That, to me, felt like a double standard.”

On calling herself a model and not a plus-size model: “Just because I’m not calling myself plus-size doesn’t mean I’m not representing a woman who is … I’m giving curvy women a seat at a table that we’ve never been invited to before —a table with high-end fashion people who have never considered us beautiful.”

On the trolls who remark on her interracial relationship with husband Justin Ervin: “One comment on Instagram was ‘I knew a girl her size could only be with a black guy.’ I think that’s so ugly. But we talk about the fact that I’m white and he’s black all the time. I’ve seen how racist America is. It’s opened my eyes to how ignorant I have been, how white privilege has taken over a lot of my thoughts and actions because it’s just something that I take for granted.”

On a previous relationship with an alcoholic: “He was abusive in more than one way … He threw a couch on me. He came home drunk. I was sitting on it, and he flipped it upside down. I remember my elbow being jammed but thinking, He didn’t hit me; he was just really angry, you know? You hear stories of women who say the exact same thing — I wasn’t showing up with bruises, he wasn’t beating me every day. Looking back, I should’ve left, but I was an insecure woman in a terrible relationship who did not know herself.”

[From Cosmopolitan]

I’ve always believed that if I was ever in a situation where a man started to abuse me, I would walk. But as I get older, I realize that my ability – and the ability of so many women – to rationalize and excuse abusive behavior is something that I take for granted. I can understand that rationalization: he’s not hitting me, he’s throwing sh-t around. I’m not bruised, but I am terrified, but maybe he’s just having a bad day. It sucks. As for what she says about being married to a black man… I like how she acknowledges her white privilege, and talks about how she’s had to confront that privilege and deal with it head-on.

As for what she says about Amy Schumer… she hit the nail on the head. Schumer came across as hypocritical during that incident.

ashley2

Photos courtesy of Cosmopolitan.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

94 Responses to “Ashley Graham claps back at Amy Schumer’s plus-sized ‘double standards’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Locke Lamora says:

    I love her. I love her so much. She’s stunning and grounded and smart. She’s awesome.

    She does, however, fit into society’s beauty standards. She’s a bit bigger, but her weight is distributed in a way that fits what a woman “should” loke like. But that’s a start, I guess?

    • perplexed says:

      She also has a very pretty face. For that reason, I do think it’s a little weird Schumer didn’t want to be grouped with her — Graham is the one with the much more conventionally pretty face. Ditto for Adele. Schumer might technically be smaller, but the eyes, I tend to think, most likely gravitate towards Graham’s and Adele’s faces. (I think Schumer has claimed she gets confused with Adele, and she says it in a bit of a disparaging way as if she’s mocking herself, and all I keep thinking is “You could only wish you were half as pretty and photogenic as Adele!”)

      • OrigialTessa says:

        I agree. Adele is a beauty, Amy is not. But she’s thinner, and she’ll make sure you know that.

      • V4Real says:

        No Amy is not a beauty but I also don’t think Adele is a great beauty either. She does look better since the weight lossbut she’s no stunner. Ashley on the other hand is gorgeous.

      • Locke Lamora says:

        I think all 3 are pretty ( I really like Amy’s face), but Adele is the most beautiful, if we’re just looking the face.

      • LeAnn Stinks says:

        Adele is gorgeous, and I have no idea how Schumer is being mistaken for her, other than they both share similar coloring. Their shaped faces, and their facial features, look nothing alike. In my opinion, Schumer has a very pointy chin, and Adele’s is squared off, with a beautiful cleft.

        A CB poster once wrote, that Schumer looks like a cabbage patch doll, and now that is all I can see-LOL!

    • embertine says:

      That’s true, but she is a model – I don’t think we are ever going to get away from the idea that models should be beautiful and well-proportioned people; that would contradict the very basis of the industry. To me, the idea that people of different sizes/races/etc. can be models doesn’t serve to deconstruct the concept of beauty (because that’s never going to happen), but shows that beauty itself is diverse.

      • kok says:

        @embertine

        This comment is SO well said. You articulated what I was thinking perfectly.

    • LAK says:

      It’s completely ignorant to say women ‘should’ look like any particular way.

      Models are chosen from only one or two body types, but that doesn’t mean other body types or sizes don’t exist or that models and othose other types are what women ‘should’ look like.

      Ashley here, despite her size, is the same shape as thin models.

      There are 4 basic body shapes and sub-sets inbetween.

      To say women ‘should’ look like only one body type of the variety present in reality simply because a bigger version of the same body type that is always used has been put on the cover of a magazine is wrong.

      It’s as wrong as putting only skinny women on the cover and saying that’s the size all women ‘should’ be.

      Saying women ‘should’ look like Ashley’s rectangle figure only immediately says that if you are curvy aka hourglass, or pear shaped, or inverted triangle then you aren’t presenting real womanhood when the reality is women come in all those shapes, including Ashley’s shape and their weight distributes accordingly such that, as an example, a pear shaped women will be bottom/hips heavy no matter their size vs an inverted triangle shaped woman who will always be broad shouldered and no hips no matter their size!!!!

      And they are ALL real women.

      • HH says:

        “Ashley’s rectangle figure only immediately says that if you are curvy aka hourglass” >>>> Is Ashley not hourglass/curvy? From the photos I’ve seen, I’d say so. But they’ve all been professional photos, so it’s maybe a combo of photoshop and seeing the right angles.

        Also, I do like that people now associate hourglass/curvy as the same. When I was younger, magazines used curvy as a euphemism for plus-sized, so any fashion advice didn’t apply to me. I had a curvy hour/glass shape, but wasn’t a bigger girl. Despite it being a nice sentiment, it was frustrating.

      • Jen43 says:

        Ashley is not what most women look like, regardless of size. No model represents the average woman. They are the fashion/beauty ideals. Women shouldn’t/can’t aspire to look like them. It’s an unrealistic expectation. However, I think Ashley is trying hard to make size a nonissue, and I applaud her for that.

      • LAK says:

        HH: She is not an hourglass shape.

        The shape of your body is determined by the ratio of shoulders to waist to hips.

        Hourglasses are like the number 8 <- shoulders and waist same width, very tiny defined waist. The sort of thing the Kadashians pretend to have using waist trainers. Women with that type of figure will have a small, tiny waist compared to their hips and shoulders, no matter their weight. Eg look at this pic of MM, even though she is extending her hip bone, you can see her very clearly tiny waist in relation to her hips and shoulders.

        https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=hourglass+figure&client=tablet-android-samsung&prmd=ivsn&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwih1MfXiOTNAhWBIsAKHYg-DVsQ_AUIBygB&biw=768&bih=1024#imgrc=D91LogBMv-b61M%3A

        MM’s body measurements when that pic was taken aka the ratio of shoulders vs waist vs hips was 35: 22: 35. Ie her shoilders and hips were 35inches and her waist was 22inches. Aka hourglass or 8.

        Ashley above doesn't have the tiny defined waist to hip/shoulder ratio that would make her an hourglass. She is visibly a rectangle from that frontal bikini pic.

        Every single pic i’ve seen of Ashley is usually at an angle or she’s dressed in a way that implies a small waist. An illusion that her bikini pics do not support.

        Her size is confusing the issue because we aren't used to bigger models. Yet her figure is exactly the same as her skinny counterparts because models tend to be picked from this body type or from inverted triangle shape.

        The curves of hourglass and pear body types are rarely served by designers, and rarely picked to model.

        Btw: in science, curvy as it pertains to body types was always used to denote an hourglass figure.

        Googling the science on this topic still throws up the same usage.

        Some advertising clever clogs in the late 90s/early 00s decided to use it for a very clever marketing campaign to describe big boobs or bigger girls with no reference to it’s original usage, and we are now stuck with the marketing usage.

        It’s the same with ‘athletic’ bodytypes which do not exist, but have become a way to describe toned/muscled women. The implication is that their bodies resemble those of professional athletes.

      • Locke Lamora says:

        So to have an hourglass figure you don’t need big boobs? I might be an hourglass then, but I’m not sure, there are 10 different descriptions around. My hips and shoulders are pretty much the same width, with a smaller waist, but I don’t have boobs. And my waist is pretty high. But when I gain weight I gain it everywhere, especially in the stomach area, but my waist is still smaller than my hips/shoulders. However, when I read descriptions about hourglass figures, they always mention big boobs and no weight gain in the midscetion.

        The whole what shape you are is stupid anyway, but whenever you read those articles about which clothing suits your bodytype, I can never asses which bodytype is mine because I don’t seem to fit into anything.

      • JenniferJustice says:

        She is helping to make change. Baby steps people…baby steps.

      • Jen43 says:

        I think there are actually 12 body types. I’ve always thought I was a pear, but evidently I am a skittle (bowling pin) because while I am bottom heavy, I don’t have a big a$$.

        https://carsonspost.wordpress.com/2007/10/19/12-female-body-types-which-are-you-which-do-you-want/

      • INeedANap says:

        Call me when we get model under 5’10″. I can’t change my height and I want to wear cute clothes too.

      • Locke Lamora says:

        I’m pretty sure you can find cute clothes even if youre under 5’11.

      • Jae says:

        …I am pretty sure that it’s easier to find cute clothes at under 5’11 than at mine 6’1. Lke, the waist is never where it is supposed to be and neither are boob darts, high-rise pants guarantee camel toe, one-pieces try to bisect you, sleeves, pants and non-tunic type tops are too short… and culottes and crop-tops triggef teenage trauma of things refusing to fit…
        I like being tall, but I have nowhere near the clothes options of someone who is, say, 5’5.

        Say what you will, but I personally am SO grateful for the tall models. My grandmother was 5’8 at her tallest, my mom is 5’10, and both of them have spent their lives actively embarassed about being way too tall, up to getting back problems ’cause of constant slouching. Me? I came of age in th age of Amazon supermodels, they were my body postive, erm, models: yes, you can still be beautiful despite being the tallest person in most of the rooms you walk in. And yes, you can wear those heels. They are bad for you, but not because they make you a horrifying giant. And so on.
        I don’t think I will ever be ready for the models to become shorter. Everybody is short, at least leave me these girls!

      • LAK says:

        There are 4 main/basic types. The rest are subsets because there are varieties within the main categories. Using an analogy to clarify my point, we all understand that there are 7 basic colours, but there different shades within a colour depending on other elements. The different shades do not negate the fact that ultimately they are all the basic primary colour.

        The subsets within bodytypes are often quoted without an understanding of the primary shapes eg someone who is described as being a barrell is basically a rectangle, except that their waist is wider than their hips or shoulders. Shoulders and hips being the same width. The opposite of an hourglass.

        Locke Lamore: Boobs, bottom, weight and height have no bearing on the basic body types. They do not affect the width of your shoulders or height because they are measuring your skeletor structure.

        Jen43: i’ve just looked at your link and entire chart is wrong. Visibly wrong even if you know nothing about body types. Clearly they are trying to sell clothes and have made up names for the same body type several times to make it seem as though they all exist.

        Going by that chart, the ladies labelled vase, lollipop are all rectangles. Their hips, shoulders and waists are the same width. There is barely any definition as you travel from shoulder to hips.

        The ladies labelled apple, bell and column are pears aka triangle. Their shoulders are much smaller than their waists and their hips. They essentially get wider as you travel fro shoulder to hips.

        The ladies labelled hourglass, skittle and cello are hourglasses aka curvy. You can see a clear definition of their waist relative to their shoulders and hips. As you travel from shoulder to hips, the waist is smaller and clearly defined relative to them.

        Finally, the ladies labelled cornet and goblet are clearly inverted triangles. Their shoulders are wider than their waists which is wider than their hips. As you travel from shoulders to hips they become more narrow.

        Here is a page that demonstrates the correct information in the simplest terms.

        https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=body+types+women&oq=body+typez&aqs=chrome.2.69i57j0l3.4082j0j4&client=tablet-android-samsung&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

        Ditto the wikipage on body types.

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_body_shape

      • LAK says:

        Locke Lamore: Body types are important if you want to understand how best to dress them to best effect.

        Body types are also important for weight distribution. An hourglass always gains weight all over whilst keeping a tiny waist even if overall size becomes bigger.

        Pears ( and to a certain extent hourglasses) tend to bigger bottom half and bigger legs. Pears will always gain weight on their lower half before their upper body.

        Rectangles and inverted triangles tend to slim limbs. Rectangles gain all over evenly whilst inverted triangles tend to gain in their upper torso before their lower half. If they are also barrels, they tend to gain weight in their waist before any other area.

        If you want to lose weight, you need to know your body type so that you can understand which areas to target and or how changes in weight will affect your type.

        And that’s before you’ve determined your body frame aka are you large or small framed because that also determines how much weight is best to gain or lose.

        For shopping according to body types, there are lots of helpful charts on google eg

        http://www.sheknows.com/beauty-and-style/articles/826747/dressing-for-your-body-type

      • Vox says:

        @HH
        Same with me. I was always very skinny growing up but also happened to be an hourglass shape and curvy as a euphemism for plus size = hourglass is silly. Even now I’m an hourglass and not plus sized.

        Look at people like Dita Von Teese. She’s an hourglass and very petite.

      • Veronica says:

        It’s not totally surprising that she’s a rectangle in overall build because most women are – hourglass is the one that’s rather rare. Oddly enough, while LAK is right about pears rarely having clothes made for them, they make up the second most common body type. It’s something like rectangles > pears > apples > hourglass in terms of statistical occurrence.

        Personally, I don’t find the idea of four basic shapes particularly problematic. Men have similar categories – we just don’t make male beauty the focal point of dialogue surrounding men so they’re less well known. They serve as a starting point for learning how to dress your body – obviously, many of us don’t perfectly fit into those categories when our overall shape is taken into consideration. I’m technically a pear based on measurements, but I have a long torso with a larger bust and a smaller waist measurement, so I’m often mistaken for an hourglass (pfft, in my dreams).

        LAK also makes a very good point about weight, and it can make a surprising difference in a person’s health. One of my friends recently gained a lot of weight due to some very serious health issues. Her weight gain would have been far more problematic for her if she wasn’t an hourglass frame because her build allowed much of the weight to settle on her hips. My sister, on the other hand, is an apple. When she inevitably gained weight after being disabled in a car accident, it caused her more back pain because the weight settled in her stomach region over her slimmer hips. Weight loss for her is more of a pressing issue simply because of her build.

    • Whitney says:

      I love her too!!! She comes off very well in her interviews. I love that she is getting covers on SI and Cosmo. Completely agree that the way her body is proportioned fits a beauty standard. She has a very defined jawline and no shoulder or back fat (I’m aware jawline/double chins are also genetic, but not always). But yass!! This is a start.

    • Ashley is a gorgeous woman. But I agree that she doesn’t have a big tummy, even if she’s sucking it in, that’s not a big tummy. I think big tummies are probably a no no in modelling.

  2. roxane says:

    That’s a very pleasing interview.

  3. Yolanda says:

    Ashley’s face is so beautiful. She’s a gorgeous woman.

  4. Jegede says:

    I actually never noticed the Mendea resemblance till now.
    Graham used to remind me of a more wholesome Gia Carangi.

    Nice interview. Even her clapbacks are classy.

  5. Sunnydaze says:

    Love her, love the pictures……but to me, she’s extremely lucky that she can carry weight so beautifully distributed. In my experience, this is definitely not the norm.

    • tracking says:

      True. She’s a successful model because she has a gorgeous face and great proportions. But, as others have said, it’s a start, important for young girls to see different body types other than skinny considered beautiful.

    • Wren says:

      No but it exists. I have a similar figure, minus the boobs. I really do love (finally!) seeing a woman who looks a whole lot like me, or the gorgeous model version of me, in mainstream media like she’s a perfectly normal human and not some monstrosity.

      • megs283 says:

        Yeah, I will NEVER have the body of a “typical” model – I’m not built that way. Seeing a typical model does not inspire me. Ashley Graham is totally inspiring!

        I might buy this issue of Cosmo, just to cheer on treating her as a normal human, and not a disembodied pretty face.

  6. Sparkles says:

    She’s absolutely gorgeous. She has a beautiful shape. I’d love to look like her.

  7. Louise177 says:

    It might be the photo but this is the first time I thought that Ashley looked like Eva. Most will disagree but I can understand Amy being upset being called plus-sized. She’s not a zero but she’s not that big. She’s much smaller than the other women being covered – Ashley, Adele, Melissa McCartney, etc. She wasn’t specifically called plus-sized but that was heavily implied.

    • littlemissnaughty says:

      It was implied that she doesn’t fit the Hollywood standard, which is true. But more importantly, she herself bases a lot of her comedy on that fact. I’m not considered Hollywood attractive, how f*cked up is that? Then a magazine picks that up and suddenly she doesn’t belong in that group because … she’s skinnier? It’s why I don’t like her. I don’t believe her act for a second because she doesn’t actually believe she’s not Hollywood attractive.

      • JH82DC says:

        ^ yes! + 1 “I don’t believe her act for a second because she doesn’t actually believe she’s not Hollywood attractive.” Hit the nail on the head!

      • Denise says:

        I think you’re right about her actually thinking that she is Hollywood attractive. Her reactions to things like the Glamour supplement pretty much confirm it. Her routines are based on indignance then, rather than exposing the industry biases and promoting healthier views.

    • Schnee says:

      Yes, I think me and you actually understand what Schumer meant. Being an 8 Schumer is not plus size. Acting as if Schumer is an overweight plus size woman normalizes seeing 0-2 being the only ‘correct’ and accepted size for women.

      The more picture-based media push the goalposts down towards XXXS as the ‘new regular’ female size the more normal-weight young women between 6 and 12 will think they are overweight and unhealthy!

      Schumer is Hollywood plus size but not weight-based plus size! It’s a very important distinction and important for Schumer to point out.

    • Goldie says:

      I can certainly understand why Amy wouldn’t want to be called plus-size, but my understanding is that the magazine never used the term “pus size”. They were celebrating women who were bigger than the hollywood average. On the cover they stated that they were offering tips for women size 12 and up. Amy claims to be an 8/10. I guess I don’t think it’s *that* big of a deal if a size 10 woman is grouped in with women size 12 and up. Especially when Amy herself is always talking about how big she is.

      • DSW says:

        I have the magazine. They only reprinted an interview with Amy as one of their “women who inspire us”. The magazine didn’t mention her body size at all. They chose her for body positive message, not because they regarded her as plus-sized. Amy chose to interpret it that way on her own.

    • Annetommy says:

      If Amy is going to bring comparisons into it, she should be aware that Ashley, Adele and Melissa are all much prettier than she is. Not being nasty, but I’d rather have the extra weight and look like one of those three.

  8. minx says:

    She’s so beautiful.

  9. Al says:

    Amy schemer talks about being called big, plus, curvy and whatever other euphemism the media has come up with for fat. It’s so strange to me that some people interpret someone saying “don’t call me fat, I’m not fat” as having said “I’m full figured and proud”. I can’t understand where that disconnect is. Is it willful ignorance?

    • Ali says:

      I know exactly what you mean. I am no fan of Amy Schumer. In fact, her face makes me physically recoil, so punchable…there’s just a lot about her that truly bugs me.

      But Schumer’s point seems to be that she is NOT plus sized, but Hollywood continues to perceive her that way. I saw ‘Trainwreck’. She is smaller than the vast majority of women I see on a daily basis. She is not in the double digits and that is not plus sized so why would she want to be grouped into women on a PLUS SIZED cover? I would be insulted too. Not because larger women are not sexy or beautiful, but because it perpetuates that being a size 6 or 8 is plus sized.

      • Jen43 says:

        I get what Amy is saying, also. She is an 8/10 with a pear shape. That is heavy by Hollywood standards but normal/average sized for the general population. Ashley is considered plus size because she is bigger than Amy and some people would consider her overweight. Actually, I hate even bringing Ashley into the conversation because she is in a category by herself. She is a bombshell.

      • LAK says:

        Jen43: Amy shumer is definitely not a pear shape. Her hips are not wider than her shoulders.

        JLO is pear shaped. Amy Shumer doesn’t have the same body type as JLO.

        Based upon her bikini pics, Schumer looks like the barrel sub-set of a rectangle ie hips and shoulders look the same, waist is bigger than both.

      • Robin says:

        Schumer is not a 6, 8, or 10. More a 12 or 14. She’d have far more credibility if she’d stop lying about her size.

      • Jen43 says:

        @LAK
        some people say there are 12 body types. I posted a link above or you can google it. Do you think this is more accurate?

      • LAK says:

        Jen43: i’ve had a look at your link above, and it is not correct. They’ve clearly labelled body types wrong and or given several seemingly different descriptions to the same body type to expand it to make up 12 different ones. I guess someone had an article to write and they needed to come up with words.

        I made a more detailed response to your link above, but here is a shorter explanation.

        https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=body+types+women&oq=body&aqs=chrome.1.69i59l2j69i57j69i60l3.2683j0j4&client=tablet-android-samsung&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_body_shape

    • Dani says:

      The problem everyone has is that Amy makes bank on ‘being bigger’ than the average girl, and not looking like a ‘stick thin model’ etc. It’s all part of her shtick. She likes to call herself fat, plus sized, ‘I weigh 160 but I have no trouble getting laid’, and so on, but refuses to be grouped in to the plus sized category. She uses weight to her advantage, but only when it benefits her. And that’s the problem right there. Don’t use something that women fought so hard to be accepted for then shoot it down when it doesn’t fit into your gimmick. And honestly, even if Amy was 100 lbs, she’s still hideous inside, so…

      • Amide says:

        @Dani – Everything you said.
        And that why Schumer was called out in that earlier post

      • The Eternal Side-Eye says:

        That was beautifully explained.

        Amy wants it both ways and in ways that only benefit her. All the filling, none of the actual struggle.

      • Wren says:

        Exactly. It’s the hypocrisy that bothers people. If Amy didn’t base her comedy career in being a “bigger girl” and ostensibly being perfectly happy about it, none of this would matter. Because what comes across is, “ha ha I’m totally fat in Hollywood how silly is that OMG don’t you dare lump me in with actual fat people how awful wtf that’s not funny!” It really is a mixed message. So is it okay to be a bit bigger than the “ideal” or isn’t it? So you spend your time declaring yourself a “big girl” but nobody else is allowed to even suggest an association between you and other slightly bigger girls? Okaaaaay, should’ve just let this one go, if she hadn’t made a fus I doubt very much anyone would’ve thought twice about it.

    • Sarah says:

      Okay I simply do not know what drugs people are on. I am going to blame the different sizing scales in different countries. Amy Schumer absolutely does not wear a USA size 12 or 14. That’s literal insanity.

      A USA 8 is an AUS 12, a UK 40
      Size 8/12/40 is a ‘regular woman’ [not Hwood thin] size and is BELOW average size in all 3 of those countries. She is smaller than the average woman.

      Watch her in the cheerleading part of Trainwreck – she looks TOPS two sizes bigger than the cheerleaders, and cheerleaders are famously teeny women.

      Her body shape makes it seem as though her size is bigger than she is. Look at her next to JLaw, who is most likely a size 2/4. Amy probably gets some stomach bloat but the rest of her is relatively thinner – slender arms and legs, mid size boobs. She is not plus size by any stretch of the imagination. Using pap photos of her in a bikini is a cruel exercise – those cameras are higher def than anything the rest of us have been photographed with and show every flaw.

      Jeez, I wonder what size people would call me, an actual size 12!!!

  10. Carol says:

    I really enjoyed her interview. She comes off as a very sensible person. And I do appreciate her talking openly about coming to terms about being afforded certain unearned privileges just because she is white. It’s I think hard for white folks to really get that. Just talking to my friends who are African American, I found myself to be ignorant about their experiences and learned that I don’t have to worry about things they do, such as proving to a hotel worker at an upscale hotel they were indeed hotel guests and had a right to be at a pool with their kids. I’m glad Ashley talks about the need for white folks, or any race actually, to learn about other people’s experiences. It’s one way to eradicate fear and misconceptions.

  11. Patricia says:

    I also have been in an abusive relationship where there was no direct hitting so I made excuses. He would flip furniture and punch walls and throw things, I would be shaking from head to toe, dizzy with fear. I would lock myself in the bathroom and he would cry about how sorry he was until I came out.
    He was also isolating, emotionally manipulative, disparaging about my body, financially abusive. I was young and it was my first real relationship and I loved him. I thought abuse meant you were getting hit. I wish I could get those years back and not live like that, but all I can do is learn from it and tell others I guess.

    Thanks for talking about this on this site. It’s important to share, once we have moved away from those relationships, so women who are in them can see that it’s not OK and even if you’re not getting hit you can still be abused.

    I’m happily married to a wonderful man now and our partnership is equal, I never shake in fear and I never lock myself in the bathroom.

    • Esmom says:

      Thanks for sharing your story, it’s good to hear that you are now in a happy and healthy place. I was in a relationship that was emotionally abusive — disparaging remarks, infidelity, etc — and I put up with it for years because I think I felt I was unworthy of anything better. When I finally woke up and dumped the guy, a friend commented on how I’d “wasted” so many years with him. I tried not to look at it as a waste, but rather as a learning experience. Life is too short for regrets.

  12. nicegirl says:

    She is so pretty and comes across as very self aware.

  13. TeamAwesome says:

    “I was an insecure woman in a terrible relationship who did not know herself.” This.

    I’ve never been in a physically abusive relationship, but I have been in ones where I felt I had to accept so much less than I deserved, where everything was one big mind game and I was panning for gold in a river of crap and super excited if I found one shiny speck. Growing up with “You have such a pretty face if only you could lose that weight.”, I thought if a guy showed me a little interest then I could look past the other stuff because it wasn’t like I could do any better anyway.
    Having people like Ashley on magazine covers would have done absolute wonders for my teens and 20′s!!

  14. Flowerchild says:

    I like how self aware she is. To all those people in the Goop post last week who said it couldn’t be done or she would be doing the interviewers job. This is how a celebrity answer a question while acknowledging their privilege, see this is how it’s done.

    • Jwoolman says:

      The interviewer was asking her about her black husband and her experiences with that. Her remarks flowed naturally from that discussion. She didn’t suddenly decide to say it out of the blue.

      Goop was never asked questions that would have led to what you wanted to hear. She was simply thinking in terms of her relationship with her father in a certain way, it was indeed the interviewer’s job to draw her out more. I’ve done interviews as both the interviewer and the interviewee. As the interviewee, I needed to respect the interviewer’s vision. If I pushed to talk about everything of concern to me, we would have been there for days…. and very little of it would have ended up in the printed interview anyway. You have to pick and choose according to the moment or else nothing gets communicated.

      And how often do people have to repeat such things, anyway? Every interview? A lot of stuff is edited out of interviews, print and video, so there is never any guarantee that something wasn’t said. But at some point we need to acknowledge that all important things don’t have to be discussed every single time a person is interviewed and that the interviewer’s questions do guide the discussion.

  15. Melody says:

    I’m starting to see why plus sized lingerie spreads are banned more often than your average VS model stuff: there is something so much more sexual about this. My husband could look at VS stuff all day without a problem, but this would seriously distract him. It’s powerful.

    • Wren says:

      If one is banned then the other should be too….. but anyway whenever the VS catalog shows up at our house my husband wrinkles his nose and declares the models far too skinny and fake looking. Women like AG however, he finds much more attractive. Which is good, because I look a lot more like her than a VS model.

    • The Eternal Side-Eye says:

      I’m not saying real vs. fake bodies or etc. but in some ways VS has become sexual disinfectant. Every inch of it is pushing this image of sexuality and hotness and yet I feel nothing. Looking at Ashley I could totally see me grabbing those hips and tugging her in close. There is something appealing, maybe because society keeps telling me it shouldn’t be, about a woman with some meat on her bones. We keep being told her body is wrong but it’s beautiful to look at.

      • Wren says:

        Weird, isn’t it? Sterilized is a good word for it. Some of the spreads look like porn with the poses, facial expressions and lightning, but it’s all very…….. cold and unappealing.

      • Melody says:

        YES! It conveys the sense that “touching this would feel gooooood.” VS model pics do not convey that. They look gorgeous, but not like something you’d want to touch or interact with. Like something in a museum.

      • minx says:

        She is very curvy and sexy.

      • RuddyZooKeeper says:

        Maybe also because she’s smiling like an actual warm-bodied human being. Forget about her body, size, whatever — she actually looks dimensional, real. VS hasn’t looked populated by humans for years.

  16. Georgia says:

    She is intelligent and gorgeous…love her!

  17. Pandy says:

    I understand that Amy likely has body issues and therefore “resents” being lumped in to plus size categories … But I’m not convinced she’s a size 8/10. I think she does fit the size 12 “requirement”. As a size 12 myself I understand it. I’m too small to actually shop at plus size stores but the size labels me a plus. I’ve given up being irritated about it. If it’s cute and it fits I don’t really care what store I buy it from. I’m a size 8 bottom and a 12 on top. And if it’s poorly made I’m a size 14. Whatever.

  18. Tash says:

    I went to google her husband…a good looking man. She is gorgeous and smart – he hit a jackpot!

  19. rudy says:

    Great article!!!

    Go Ashley! You rock girl.

    Women With Curves Unite!

  20. jc126 says:

    Maybe Amy Schumer just doesn’t like other people discussing her body?

    • Kate says:

      Then she should find other topics of discussion.

      Some of her stand-up sets have her referencing her size every few minutes, forcing it into jokes where it’s not relevant. You can’t make something a huge part of your persona then expect no one else to ever reference it.

      • Toxic Shock Avenger says:

        Consider, for a moment please, her options: she’s a woman in the public eye, which unfortunately makes her body and appearance fair game for anyone to discuss. As a woman, her body isn’t just her body – it’s a Social Issue, a Trending Topic, an Important Conversation. You know…. everybody’s business. So, not only does she face typical trolling, chauvinist garbage, and mean-girling, she can also look forward to being put on blast by earnest, self-congratulatory think-piecers, who see NO wrong in discussing the details of her body like a science exhibit, to make their point.

        Her body is a part of her act whether she makes it one or not, because that’s how we roll. Maybe she IS narcissistic and preoccupied with her appearance… and maybe she just figures if someone’s going to talk about her body, might as well be her.

      • jc126 says:

        You think because she discusses her body in her act – self-deprecating humor – that therefore it’s fair game for the rest of the world to discuss her body? Male comedians often talk about their wives and kids, I don’t see people talking about those subjects as fair game, though.
        Like other women’s bodies aren’t discussed endlessly, women who don’t make jokes about themselves.

      • Toxic Shock Avenger says:

        jc126 – I definitely do NOT think it’s fair game; the point I was making is that it’s become so commonplace and accepted to discuss female celebrities’ appearance that we’ve MADE it fair game. No one expects to get in trouble for talking about a woman’s body – despite it being wholly irrelevant to her work or even the stated aim of the article – and if they’re “respectful” or complimentary, they may even expect gratitude. It should not be okay… but what we tolerate determines what’s acceptable, and for the most part, we’ve tolerated this.

  21. Lambda says:

    I just read Amy’s tweet reaction to Ashley. Pretty classy. I think of Amy as funny and smart, but definitely not classy. I was wrong.

  22. Permanent Side-eye says:

    I’m just so tired of all these women posing in various states of undress. Doesn’t anyone keep their clothes on anymore? I know, nudity sells but it’s being done to death.

  23. Kate says:

    I love anyone who knocks Amy Schumer’s ego down a few pegs. Also, this lady seems really cool and genuine. I love people like that.

  24. Toxic Shock Avenger says:

    I understand why Amy did not want to be featured in a plus-size supplemental. However much progress we may be making in pushing and celebrating the idea that size alone does not determine beauty or sex appeal, the truth is that “plus-size” still separates women into groups: there is fashion, and then there’s plus-size fashion. There’s beauty, and then there’s plus-size beauty. And everyone knows which one is “the norm” – it’s the one that didn’t need a modifier in front of it. Saying someone is a beautiful plus-sized woman is basically saying, “you’re pretty, for a big girl.” And being labeled plus – either directly or through implication – is a slap, if you don’t think of your body that way.

    This is where Lane Bryant and Glamour got it wrong, IMHO, and where the well-meaning plus-size fashion coverage continually gets it wrong – we’re still separating and classifying women and arguing over what’s “real” and what IS beautiful and what ISN’T…..and we completely miss the point that a woman’s worth, intelligence, talent, integrity and authenticity HAVE NOT ONE GODDAMN THING TO DO WITH HER APPEARANCE. For all the covers and column inches, nothing has really changed: we’re still obsessed with women’s bodies, we’re still pitting women against each other, and the only progress we’ve made is to form a “separate but equal” class where – safe from comparison to thin women – we can snark about Amy Schumer vs. Adele vs. Ashley Graham. Welcome to the Beauty Special Olympics.

    Stop fighting over the tiara, and set the f***** on fire already.

  25. Amanda G says:

    I realize those are flattering poses, but this woman is not plus sized. She has a beautiful figure. You want plus sized? Put Tess on the cover.