The magazine and modeling world exist to sell products and ideas. Last week, they sold plenty of people on the idea of full-frontal Kim Kardashian. Hopefully by now, most mere mortals are aware that those stunning images of amazingly human beings are often less than real. The one that gets me is “thigh gap.”
For the uninitiated, the illusion of thigh gap, prevalent in oh so many ads geared toward tweens, teens and young adults, dictates that the inner thighs of a female must not touch. Perhaps this exists on a few people naturally, but in most cases, thigh gap is created through the magic of Photoshop. One classic bad example comes from a Target ad.
I propose a new definition of Thigh Gap. The idea came to me while walking the kids to the bus stop this morning. They were appropriately dressed for the zero degree temps in snow pants and coats. I was not. Sure I had my coat, and layered long socks under my jeans, but I neglected the snow pants for the five-minute trip. Only one layer of cloth protected two inches of my thighs from the elements and, let me tell you, wind whips through jeans.
I hereby suggest Thigh Gap be redefined as the awkward distance between ones under and outer layers. Although this type of thigh gap will be harder to Photoshop, but should be avoided.
What do you think? How would you redefine Thigh Gap?