Hey look, it's Kate Winslet on the November cover of Vogue!! Er ... I think it's Kate Winslet? Or maybe it's a wax model of Kate Winslet. Okay, fine, it really is Kate Winslet -- but the aggressively airbrushed Mario Testino shot is wax model-y enough to be getting folks all riled up. With good reason: Vogue has gone above and beyond the standard digital crow's feet-deletion with this one. The 38-year-old actress doesn't merely look like a younger version of herself, she looks like a plastic-faced cyborg version of herself, and the question is ... why? Why go to this extreme to obscure any female celeb's age, of course, but why go to this extreme to obscure Kate Winslet's age, particularly -- when the actress has already spoken out against unrealistic retouching?
As you may or may not remember, Winslet publicly expressed her dismay 10 years ago when GQ digitally altered her thighs to make them appear as stick thin as a 15-year-old runway model's, saying:
"I'm completely physically comfortable with who I am and I have no particular issues any more and I don't feel I have to run around waving my flag about the female body any more."
Granted, the GQ controversy was about weight, not age, but I think it's safe to assume that Winslet's sensibilities are in line with the REAL beauty movement. And I think it's also safe to say that the majority of women over the age of 30 who read Vogue would be thrilled to see a cover photo of Kate Winslet looking gorgeous -- because she is, even without retouching or a stitch of makeup -- FOR HER AGE. Which, by the way -- 38?? IS NOT OLD. (Says the soon-to-be 37 blogger without a trace of defensiveness.)
The point is ... what's the point of all this plastic perfection? It's not doing Kate Winslet, her fans, or women (or men!) in general any favors. It's just perpetuating a lie with no purpose.
Do you think Kate Winslet looks overly airbrushed on the cover of Vogue?
Image via Vogue