Through magazine advertising, girls are being introduced and exposed to “dominant cultural representations of beauty” (Deliovsky 56), which lack portrayals of teens, such as African American girls, who are racially marginalized. A magazine I enjoyed reading when I was a teen was “Seventeen”, whose readers are teen girls as young as 13 years old. Seventeen rarely featured girls who looked like me on the cover or in the articles and advertisements within its issues. Since its first issue debuted in 1944, Seventeen has printed arguably only 24 covers featuring black women of the 819 issues available on archive.com (Seventeen 1944-2012), with the first African American, Joyce Walker-Joseph, appearing on the cover in the November 1972 issue, approximately eight months after the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972 was signed by President Richard Nixon preventing employment discrimination against minorities. The presence of primarily white females on the covers and inside the magazine is an example of the cultural discourse referred to as “normative white femininity”, which is “the white capitalist patriarchal compulsion to adopt styles and attitudes consistent with an imposed white feminine aesthetic” (Deliovsky 50). Additionally, the magazine has utilized Photoshop to sell the idea of physical flawlessness to its readers, which is not only unattainable, but also provokes self-hatred and self-doubt (Deliovsky 52-53). However, these photoshopped images caught the attention of its readers and the media. Our voices are louder than we might think, and even at age 14, one can make a difference.

The last printed Prom Issue of Seventeen Magazine contained minimal representations of non-white races. Caucasian females were represented most prominently throughout the issue with 77% visibility, while African American girls are shown in 20% of the issue, with Asian girls represented less than 2% in articles and advertisements. 1% accounts for the one full figured model in the entire 150 page issue, who is shown with two other girls with slim figures. The lack of full figured dress options subscribes to the culturally constructed norm of physical beauty, contributes to a young woman’s insecurities through body regulation, and “constitutes the ‘primal denial’ of subjectivity under capitalism: ‘there’s nothing here for you to spend your money on’” (Queering Fat Embodiment 10). There are no overweight African American, Asian, or Latino girls, none appear physically handicapped, and no other combinations considered a complex identity are represented, which lends to the concept of intersectionality.

While many of the dresses advertised were modest and did not reveal excessive cleavage, midriffs, or lower backs, there were some dresses that were obviously designed to invite male gaze and were modeled in a seductive or otherwise objectifying manner, as well as advertisements that cater to a more mature and sexually active consumer; not a young teen. One advertisement in particular featured a thin young lady in a red dress baring her back, while a young man stood with one of his hands resting on her lower back, gazing at her. This scenario is demonstrative of John Berger’s idea of “male gaze” and Jack Wykes’ comment, “only slender bodies are presented as legitimate objects of heterosexual desire” (Queering Fat Embodiment 1).

The Ms. Magazine website, which features a wide range of articles that celebrate, explore, and educate on feminist movements and ideas, contains an article by Rebecca Nelson titled, “Teen Girl Wins Photoshop Fight Against Seventeen Magazine.” In this article, we learn how 14 year old Julia Bluhm used Change.org to petition Seventeen “to include one unaltered, Photoshop-free spread every issue” (Nelson). The petition, which was a success with 85,125 signatures, got the attention of Seventeen Magazine’s editorial staff, who all signed the pledge (The Huffington Post).

While this was a step in the right direction, nearly four years later Seventeen’s cover featured a heavily photoshopped image of singer, Meghan Trainor. The singer, who is outspoken about authentic portrayal of her physical image in media, is depicted as having a disproportionate head and hands, obviously photoshopped, that appear too large for her body. This is ironic considering the lyrics to her song “All About That Bass,” literally state: “I see the magazines working that Photoshop, we know that shit ain’t real, come on now, make it stop” (MeghanTrainorVEVO 00:30; qtd. in Kiefer).

Although Seventeen ceased printing its magazine in 2019, online issues, advertisements, and articles remain accessible. It is difficult to say whether the magazine has remained true to its promise regarding advertising to teenage girls. The articles on Seventeen’s website contrast starkly to that of the Ms. Magazine website. Seventeen uses celebrities to promote trendy hairstyles and fashion, as well as explore health and beauty topics that promote products and brands of its paid advertisers. The website is filled with articles that give girls resources to work on themselves, as if their bodies were arts & crafts projects. In the documentary “Killing Us Softly”, Jean Kilbourne asserts, “advertisements will never voluntarily change because it is profitable for them when we feel terrible about ourselves” (Jhally & Kilbourne, 43:55). However, as many fashion publications are now online, we can obtain information from alternate resources that provide more intellectual and healthy advertising, and articles such as Ms. Magazine.

Our voices can be heard globally protesting over the mouse clicks of graphic artists editing young girls’ photos in Photoshop. The first known legislation in Europe has already been implemented, where the French National Assembly passed a law that “requires all Photoshop retouching that is performed on models be clearly labeled” (Smith). In the U.S., the “Truth in Advertising Act of 2014 – H.R.4341” has continued to be a topic of controversy since its introduction into Congress in 2014, where its primary goal was to “regulate to what extent advertisers could digitally alter images” (Navamanikkam). However, the First Amendment continues to create debate in regards to H.R.4341 preventing the bill from progressing. But we can continue to make a difference by keeping the conversation alive, and by following the example of Julia Bluhm, by speaking out against digitally altered images of women.