Martha Stewart & Sports Illustrated: Body Positive Icon or A Backwards Step?

When I heard the announcement that Martha Stewart was going to be on the cover of Sports Illustrated, I had a mixed reaction. ⁠ ⁠

One the one hand, it is something to be celebrated that a magazine that pushes a very narrow view of beauty and women's body ideals was celebrating a woman in her 80's. ⁠ ⁠

But - on the other hand... it made me angry. ⁠ ⁠ "I was motivated by showing people that a woman my age can still look good, feel good, be good, blah, blah, blah" - this is what Martha said in a video on the SI website. ⁠ ⁠ "Be good." ⁠ ⁠ It made me angry. As I scrolled through the photo gallery, I continued to feel mad. ⁠

⁠ The amount of obvious photoshop, heavily applied makeup, strategic and sexually suggestive poses, and plastic surgery. ⁠ ⁠ Is this what is required for a woman to "be good"? ⁠ ⁠ That's a hard NO from me. ⁠

⁠ These photos are not representative of what most bodies look like as we age.
This is NOT the standard of what it means to "look good" or "be good". ⁠ ⁠

So - in case you needed a reminder today: it is okay to celebrate your body as it ages. ⁠

⁠ If it sags, if it wrinkles. If it has spots. If it has more hair (or less hair). If it bulges, rolls, lumps or bumps. ⁠ ⁠ Your body is good. ⁠ Aging is good. ⁠

Don't compare your real body to one that has been photoshopped. ⁠ ⁠

What are your thoughts? Let me know in the comments below.