Roberta Seid Too Close To The Bone Analysis

In the modern US, the topic of women’s beauty standards is an ever-evolving one that has left many with questions. What effect do these standards have on women? Is the “ideal woman” healthy? How does a truly healthy weight compare with society’s ideal? In her article “Too ‘Close to the Bone’: The Historical Context for Women’s Obsession with Slenderness,” University of Southern California lecturer Roberta Seid explored some of these questions. In the first two sections of this article, she explains that the American standard for beauty has become impossibly and dangerously thin. While Seid’s argument argument about America’s standards may appear compelling, the oversimplification of that argument becomes clear when one strips away her loaded diction and realizes how one-sided her beliefs really are.
Seid begins her argument by discussing the evolutions of beauty

standards over time. She cites multiple historical examples to show that in the past, thinness was considered a sign of frailty, weakness, and poverty, and she explains that no society has ever placed as much emphasis on slenderness as modern America (Seid 297). While all of these statements may be true, it is a logical fallacy to assume that because this was a practice is the past, it must still be correct. In fact, there are many historical practices that would never be acceptable today such as using leeches and bloodletting as medical treatments, both of which were popular techniques until the early 20th century.
In addition to this, Seid’s argument fails to take into account that when plumpness was favored over thinness, it was before modern diets that are rich in fat, sugar, sodium, and processed foods. Thus, plump women typically were more healthy than thin women, who were more likely to be malnourished. However, in modern America, the reverse is true which is why thinness is favored over plumpness. While this is not always the case, it is typical for thin people to be more healthy than heavy people.
Father into the piece, Seid expresses the severity of current body ideals by using loaded diction.

She describes the problems with the ideals by saying that they have caused a national “obsession with exercise” and dieting (Seid 299). She feels that they have caused all weight loss techniques to be viewed as “life-prolonging in and of themselves” among the general population (Seid 299). Her decision to use words with strong emotional connotations such as “obsession” and “life-prolonging” contributes to the perceived severity and concern surrounding the issue. Additionally, this word choice implies that society’s beauty standard is creating a health problem more severe than the one it is trying to solve because an obsession with exercise and dieting is a sign of anorexia. However when one looks at this section without the use of loaded diction, it becomes clear that Seid’s argument has little substance other than the emotional appeals created by her word choice. One might argue that the lack of sources other than historical context reveals that her views on the subject are extreme and

oversimplified.
Later on, she sarcastically states that “modern science seems to have temporarily forgotten” that people are meant to be different sizes (Seid 300). The specific wording of this statement, coupled with its sarcasm, acts as a jab towards professionals that promote thinness as an ideal to strive for and a sign of good health. It works to bolster her argument by acknowledging the counter argument and explaining its faults. Despite this, the lack of depth in this statement reveals the degree of one-sidedness in Said’s claim. While she was willing to acknowledge the counterclaim, she only gave it one sentence, treating it as more of an offhand remark than a necessary topic of discussion.
Throughout Seid’s piece, she does make a successful argument for changing America’s ideas about the ideal for women’s bodies, however her argument becomes oversimplified and lacks depth in certain areas.