Victoria's Secret protest is misdirected

Hypothetically, an average-sized girl walks into a store to buy shorts during the summer. Now, this store is not one that uses any kind of unique sizing system, so technically, picking out a pair based on waist or hip measurements should be a fairly straightforward process, right?

Unfortunately, even though said shopper has known her size for years, the size that should fit like a glove is too large by about three inches.

This is not an anomaly these days, but a continuing trend as society continues to state that a certain size defines how healthy a person is.

While anorexia and other eating disorders are certainly nothing to be promoted, the drastic swing in trends from the supermodels and heroin-chic of the 80's and 90's, to the common term 'real girl' used to describe an ideal form today is disturbing.

A March 2009 article in The Los Angeles Times by Emili Vesalind cites the average American woman's size as 14, and 62 percent of the population overweight.

Yet, even with this clear movement away from pursuing a 'supermodel's body', magazines are filled with this idea that a certain body type determines how healthy one is, although still condemning the hard-to-achieve pinnacle of fitness that a Victoria's Secret model would represent.

But what is wrong with that pinnacle? After all, if health should be about fitness and a comfort with one's body, what is so wrong about extremely fit, curvaceous, sexy women representing an image to aspire to?

We as a society do not criticize professional athletes such as Jeannie Finch or Misty May-Treanor for their bodies, or point our fingers towards them with accusations of being unrealistic or promoting eating disorders.

Nor do we carry pitchforks to the doors of athletic companies such as Mizuno, Nike or Asics whose sizes tend to run even smaller than highly criticized brands such as the Abercrombie and Fitch conglomerate, Calvin Klein - the pioneer of the nineties waif trend - or even Victoria's Secret, who has recently added a collegiate collection that does not extend past their regular VS Pink range of sizes, which are marketed towards more athletically inclined bodies.

We need to look beyond what these women look like on the surface. Yes, they are beautiful, and in shape, and yes, most of us would kill to look like them. But what makes them most attractive is how comfortable they are with themselves.

It takes a lot of courage to essentially put yourself on display for the world to criticize every day. No one should be condemning either these women's bodies or their lives unless they have faced the same challenges.

And while we all feel that burning frustration that comes with not finding anything to wear while shopping, or looking at ourselves in the mirror and wondering what could be better, it is certainly not the model's fault that we are too insecure to accept ourselves, or that little by little the cuts of the clothing lines are being changed to conform to the trend of obesity overtaking the nation.

So why is the presence of VS Pink on campus suddenly an attack on the average college student's body or self esteem? Where are the signs saying that any of us are going to be forced to stop by and support it?

If you have a problem with cute clothing that just happens to be marketed by some of the most beautiful women in the world, don't buy the clothing.

But don't turn the tables on those of us, like the hypothetical shopper, who look to brands like VS Pink in order to find clothes that fit.

Find a way to be at peace with yourself. Find your own definition of healthy, and leave it at that. Health is not a certain size or shape, and just because this society is taking a stand against an underweight standard, it does not make its idea of health any better.

Accepting your own body type is great, but imposing the needs of your body type upon others is just too hypocritical.