SOAM in the Daily Mail

Looky! The Daily Mail did an article on SOAM! I love the UK. I think they’ve featured SOAM more than any other country, including my own.

I do want to mention, though, that in the article they say: “Bonnie Crowder says she wants to fight back against the pressure from celebrity mothers…” And I feel like that’s not really true, and certainly not something I’ve ever said. To have such an attitude keeps us, as women, still divided from each other. In reality I assume that celebrities struggle just as much as we do with body image – perhaps more so because they are constantly picked apart by everyone. SOAM is for all moms. Celebrities and not. We are all women and we need to stand together. It may be true that celebrity moms have more resources to make their bodies fit into something that is sometimes called “conventionally beautiful,” but I imagine that, emotionally, we all struggle with the same issues. I would have preferred it if those putting the article together had said, “Bonnie Crowder wants to fight back against the pressure from society.”

I sense that the UK has a sensitivity to the friction between celeb moms and those who aren’t famous. It seems to me (as an American) that they talk about the subject more than we do here. Which is good in a lot of ways. I think American media is one step behind in even noticing that there’s an issue. (That’s probably also why the UK has done more with SOAM than the US has.) Also, this article was put together pretty fast – I only was contacted about it this afternoon – so they may have made some assumptions that seemed reasonable to them. While I want them to take the next step and stop dividing us from other women (in this case celebs vs. not), I am glad they talk about the issue.

Thanks to those who made the article happen over at the Daily Mail. And thanks to those moms whose pictures appear in it and who responded so quickly to me this afternoon. You all totally made my day!

7 thoughts on “SOAM in the Daily Mail

  • Friday, April 20, 2012 at 7:25 pm

    I saw your article and i never heard of your site. It is a beautiful think you have done! I was so ashamed of my body after i gave birth to my son almost 6 years ago.. bc i was 125 lbs and i gained a lot with my son. And it never seem to go away! And i hear all the time from my family about how they wish they could have their bodies back as fast as Celebs do. But is not that easy to do when you are a first time or 4th time mother! I will recommend your site to all the mothers that i know! Thank you so much for this site! I know you have done good by many mothers and mothers to be!

  • Saturday, April 21, 2012 at 2:53 am

    I am so enjoying this website – I am still struggling with my post pregnancy shape and this is helping enormously. The Daily Mail is a newspaper well known here in the UK for both missing the point spectacularly and setting women against one another, but I think that when people visit the website it will be more than clear that to attack celebs is not your intention. So it’s a case of no publicity is bad publicity here, despite whatever agenda the Daily Mail has.

  • Saturday, April 21, 2012 at 9:50 am

    I came here after reading the mail article. Twenty years after giving birth to my twin sons my stomach looks the same as it did the day after I had them. I often think it looks like a deflated balloon left up after the Christmas holidays are long over lol. I have always loathed it and yet today after looking through your website I dont feel so awful about it.
    Bravo on your website, I think its fantastic. Love from London UK x

  • Saturday, April 21, 2012 at 12:00 pm

    I love the site — idea and execution — but you could use some cynicism towards the Daily Mail. This publication specializes in mocking appearances and bodies (celebrities’ and otherwise), obsessively and humiliatingly analyzing real people’s pregnancy and postpartum weight changes, and picking women apart in all sorts of creative ways — not least, the frequent, pseudo-“self-affirming” features showing ordinary women in their underwear talking about what they love and hate about themselves and inviting comments from its psychopathic, misogynistic readership. Yes, the DM is ready to applaud efforts like yours, on the face of it — but it is an absolutely shameless applause, since this paper/website does as much as any publication, and more than most, to generate the profound insecurities you are trying to address.

  • Sunday, April 22, 2012 at 3:47 am

    Just heard about this website…guess..via Daily Mail.
    I love it so much,gives me so much confidence,as it was as low as 0 since having my boys in 2001 and 2002.Now big and handsome boys,but my skin did not change,despite trying and using most available products on the market.For the last couple of years I’ve just stick with Johnson’s Baby Oil(Aloe Vera or Lavender,love them…..)
    I felt a bit better when I’ve put on weight (from 8st to 11st).My breast look much better,full and round,not like saggy,half empty bags of God only knows what…But my belly was another story,Already overstreched and hanging,with a bit of extra fat became 5-6 mts “pregnant” belly..It was a bit upsetting,but the fynny bit was when I was offerred a sit in a subway or in a bus…..I so,hey girls it is worrying and upsetting that our midrifs are not 100% perfect,but one look at my boys and coupe of funny situations in public and it is more bearable…Plus now when I found ths funtastic site,I know I WILL SURVIVE…..thx

  • Sunday, April 22, 2012 at 7:43 pm

    Dear The shape of a mother,

    Your blog is wonderful!
    I wanted to introduce my work to you, I am an underwater portrait photographer who specializes in mommy’s to be.
    I would love to submit my photographs for consideration to your blog!

    Thank you so much for your time,

    Sincerely yours,

    Erena Shimoda

  • Thursday, May 3, 2012 at 7:40 pm

    The Daily Mail has good and bad points like most newspapers. Although I sometimes buy it, I’m not used to defending it, but I feel LMB’s remarks are (to put it mildly), over the top in claiming that it has a “psychopathic, mysogynistic readership”. This is insulting to a readership that’s known to include a relatively high proportion of women. If it really was that bad, would she be reading it regularly enough to have such an insight into the content? One of the things that I’d give it credit for is features that (e.g.) express serious concern with regard to way that many within the fashion industry insist on using painfully thin and unhealthy-looking models that are terrible role models. If you radiated the cynicism that she advocates, the article would probably not have appeared and you would have lost a valuable opportunity to spread the word to thousands of receptive people!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *