| Reading a bit too literally and presuming the worst intent behind the statement. It leads to better discussions when people assume the best possible intent unless the person later clarifies their intent. I don't think they meant "model" as in "attractive fashion model". "Standard model" is a thing among products. For example, they give out 3D glasses at the movie theater I visit. One-size-fits-all is the "standard model" but they have two sizes of booster seats. They have the "children model" and the "adult model". So let's throw the complete statement that you removed back in: >but what does this look like with ten fat disney tourists? So the standard model ("little girl" [sic] sized) works great. How does the "jumbo model" work for an obese population? I'll agree with the implicit sexism and infantilization behind the use of "little girl". Though I also refuse to ascribe sexist intent behind the word choice and I'm someone who cares about intent and not interpretation. One can always interpret the worst possible intent and find evil in everyone and every statement. Also yes, I'm aware that bad deeds can sometimes have good intentions. They were highlighting a physical trait (smallness). "Small woman" and "little woman" are awkward to say and imply dwarfism. "Woman" as a standalone fails to highlight the smallness. I'd personally use "petite woman" but that becomes awkward in conversation because I'm seemingly the only person who uses the word "petite" in adult context without referring to porn actresses or nude models. TL;DR: It works fine for the 105 lb~ model. How about the 350~ lb model? |