no context

Damn, people really like to rug-pull and bait-and-switch.

For all the times I hear about "unrealistic beauty standards in the film and advertising industry," and now all of a sudden you want to suggest that I'm being sexist for calling out an obviously fake picture of supposedly a "woman" with grotesque proportions?

If it's AI and she looks like a barbie, I'm not body shaming anyone. Hell, even if it's someone who has had heavy plastic surgery done, critiquing their uncanny valley look isn't body shaming, cause it's not a woman's body if it's just silicon attached to a woman's body.

And honestly, the cosmetic surgery industry preys on women's insecurities, telling them they're not good enough and that they need treatments to meet unrealistic standards (which don't even look good, by the way). So shit like that absolutely should not be normalized by society, and you're not liberating women by saying we should tolerate it.

For instance, there's nothing sexist about shaming mar-a-lago face. I'll shame RFK jr.'s leathery face and the orange menace's makeup too, so don't pretend I'm only applying this argument to women.

As for the anorexia, if this woman is real and she really looks like that, she needs help. Maybe someone pointing out that she looks anorexic will be the push she needs to go to rehab and get better. But coddling her by saying "No girl, you look great, it's totally healthy to have the proportions of a barbie doll. Keep it up!" Is far more harmful than saying "This shit doesn't even look real."

Maybe breaking the illusion if unrealistic beauty standards isn't supposed to be comfortable? But I don't see why that means I should pretend that it's actually totally okay and normal and healthy.