We're on about a topic that has seen some significant attention in my tiny blog circle. Buck's got a post going that I think he really didn't want me to run away with, but I am selfish to the last, and I also think it produced the seeds of a pretty good discussion. And the question is this:
Does the media shape and define for us what we find attractive, or does our ever-changing definition of attractive shape what the media gives us?
My position is basic economics. They find out what we want, they provide it in massive quantities with the blaring of horns and flashing of lights. It's how they make money. How we come to deciding what we are attracted to is another thing entirely - I am simply saying that if we collectively indicated (via our wallets, as ever) that we preferred fuller-figured girls, that is exactly what would be all over the magazines and TV. The shift would be damn near instant. It's all money.
The other side says that the fashion industry and the media and advertisers choose what they want us to be attracted to, dish it out egregiously, and ultimately tell us what they think we should want. Being fairly easy to persuade as a collective (which I will not deny), we take the bait.
Any takers? And remember, this isn't about whether you personally prefer one type over another. Let's put that aside for this one. I just want to know what you think the media's role is in this: Are they responding to our desires, or are we responding to their influence?