Well, I sent this in to the local paper tonight. Let's see if they print it...
An Open Letter to Local Grocery Stores:
Let me start by saying that I’m 8 ½ months pregnant, which means that like many women in this stage in their pregnancy, I bear a strong resemblance to a July watermelon.
Sunday evening I stopped by Dan’s Supermarket in Arrowhead shopping center to pick up a few things for dinner. As I waited in line to pay for my groceries, I passed the time by scanning the magazine covers stacked next to the gum and chocolate bars. That’s when I saw the cover of In Touch Weekly magazine. This particular magazine featured a photo of a pregnant Kim Kardashian, dressed in a tank top and unzipped jacket. There was a blown up detail of her armpit. To be more specific, there was a blown up detail of a skin fold in her semi-exposed armpit, labeled with a supposed quote from Kim herself: ‘even my armpits are fat!’ The cover’s main text reads: “I’ll never be sexy again. Desperate after gaining 6 lbs in a week, pregnant Kim eyes an extreme liquid diet & resorts to even more drastic measures. PLUS her obsession with her teen sister’s body.”
Well now. There’s an unexpected punch in the gut for a pregnant lady.
Here are the messages anyone could take away just from that magazine cover alone, without even looking at the story inside: Looks always trump health. It’s ok to scrutinize and criticize women’s bodies, no matter what their circumstances may be. Gaining weight during pregnancy is not acceptable. Fat, or even enlarged breast tissue in the armpit area is not ok when the body is preparing to lactate. Liquid diets are something a pregnant woman could reasonably consider in order to avoid gaining weight, never mind the effect on her growing child. Pregnant adult women should want to resemble teenage girls. Bottom line: Pregnant women should be ashamed of their changing bodies.
One could argue that the magazine is taking more of a ‘look at this wacky celebrity’s approach to pregnancy’ but even so, those negative messages are still there, blaring out from the newsstand.
Of course, this is just a symptom of the wider problem: the media’s treatment of women’s bodies, pregnant or not. We are to look a certain way, and our health and happiness is secondary to our looks. We are disgusting if we don’t fit the media’s mold, even when our bodies are nourishing a baby.
Here’s what I have to ask the grocery stores in Bismarck: why on earth do you stock offensive and damaging material in almost every checkout aisle? By displaying materials like this week’s issue of In Touch Weekly, your businesses are actively helping to distort the general public’s view of women, women’s view of themselves, and little girls’ expectations of their future looks. Let’s not forget pubescent and teenage girls, with their constant self-scrutiny. Is it kind to push these messages on them when all they came in for is a bag of oranges? At the very least, surely encouraging body dysmorphia and the eating disorders that come with it are bad for the food business.
Wouldn’t a special checkout counter with these magazines be more appropriate? Just like the cigarette counter, people who want to expose themselves to such nincompoopery could go out of their way to do so, leaving the rest of us to peacefully contemplate what kind of gum we want.
Even better, why not stop participating completely? Why not refuse to stock magazines that feature such ridiculous covers? If not for me (after all, I'm perfectly happy with my current watermelon shape), then for the legions of little girls who go home from the grocery store check-out line questioning the value of their own round little bodies.
