What Not to Wear Needed to End
On Wednesday, TLC announced that after ten years and 325 makeovers, the fashion makeover show "What Not to Wear" hosted by style gurus Stacy London and Clinton Kelly is ending. Beginning in July, the final episodes will air on Friday nights. While some in the fashion community are mourning its demise, we say good riddance.
The premise of the show is this: A friend or family member nominates a so-called fashion victim to appear on the show, often described by producers as a "sloppy soccer mom" or "unsightly." London and Clinton execute a spontaneous ambush of said victim, surprising her at home or work (nothing disruptive about that), sometimes informing her that they've been "secretly videotaping her for weeks" (nothing illegal about that). The fashionistas then offer her a $5,000 makeover.
The only rule? She must allow London and Clinton to sift through her wardrobe and trash anything they deem ugly in the spirit of exposing her to the fashion world (as dictated by London and Clinton) and ditching the wardrobe that's obviously been ruining her life. The victim models clothing she would normally wear in front of London and Clinton while they quip, "What are you thinking with outfit?" and "If you wanted to make your butt look like a pancake, those pants are genus!" while the subject awkwardly smiles through the humiliation. After receiving a frenzied makeover, she slinks away having gained a $5,000 shopping spree. Her dignity? She checked that at the dressing room door.
It's hardly news that reality television is so popular because people get off on watching others squirm in extreme situations. But "What Not To Wear" with its mean girls philosophy aiming to humiliate women for their looks is part of a dying breed of unscripted drama that frankly, we're better off without. Unlike shows such as "Jersey Shore" where criticism is courted via drunken nights and one-night stands, programs based in knocking women for their appearance don't have long-lasting prospects. The 2003 short-lived ABC show "Are You Hot?" featured a panel of "beauty experts" such as model Rachel Hunter and C-list actor Lorenzo Lamas who would judge contestants on their physically attractiveness and say things like, "What's your breast size, because it's hard to see your breasts in that dress.'' Unsurprisingly, it was canceled not long after it aired for being "in bad taste." The 2004 makeover reality show "The Swan" voted on which woman was the ugliest and the winner was "awarded" head-to-toe plastic surgery. They'd emerge physically beautiful but undoubtedly leave feeling uglier on the inside.
But "What Not To Wear" was uniquely offensive. For starters, the subjects were literally forced into their makeover; one they didn't ask for or even know about it. Sure, they could have turned down the opportunity, but try that when you're in a public space surrounded by a large camera crew and an excited family member who signed you up. Then there's the shame factor: Women already have to contend with daily media messages chastising them for what they eat and wear and many play out a mental version of "What Not to Wear" in front of the mirror each morning. Did they really need to have their insecurities exploited on national television, especially by a woman with her own body issues? In 2012 we learned that London had secretly battled anorexia and compulsive eating for most of her life, an admission she made in her book, "The Truth About Style" (October 2012). As someone who struggled with her own physical insecurities, London could have taken the more sensitive route when dispensing advice. And lastly, the show violated a basic fashion philosophy that dictates clothing is meant to express the personality of the wearer. Remove that and you're basically stripping someone of their individuality.
R.I.P., "What Not to Wear" and here's to body-positive television!
Related:
What Not the Wear on a Date
Mean Girls: Harder on You Than Your Teen?
