On Wednesday, April 6, a Gucci ad was deemed to be “irresponsible,” and the model was perceived as “unhealthily thin” by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) in the United Kingdom. The ASA regulates advertisements across the media in the UK. Following the assessment, the advertisement can not appear within media in the UK.

The ad shows a girl leaned against a mural of a forest with stick-thin trees — mocking, in a sense. And through the straps of the bright, red purse that laid across her diminutive shoulder is a non-existent backside, almost as if it was photoshopped away. The dark makeup around her eyes portrayed malnourishment, as the ASA specifically claimed that the makeup “made her face look gaunt.”

The body shape mimics the "Barbie" shape: a thin waist, long legs and a tall frame. Essentially a brittle look — the look that is desired among many young girls and women.

Gucci claimed the advertisement, that was originally displayed in a video of a dance party, was “aimed at an older, sophisticated audience.”

“Older, sophisticated audience.”

Gucci continued to say that it was “subjective” as to whether or not a model is considered unhealthily thin, in which the company did not believe the model was considered as so because no “bones” were evident, the makeup was “natural rather than heavy,” lighting was “uniform and warm” and the clothing was not “revealing.”

The talk regarding what is considered acceptable or not, or in this sense healthy or not, could be considered “subjective,” sure. Individuals have different portrayals of what is considered an ideal body type. But what calls us upon deciding on what is acceptable and what is not?

The Gucci advertisements. The Vogue cover. The Victoria's Secret commercial. Every magazine stand that is displayed when you are purchasing your groceries. Staring at you, mocking you, telling you what “subjective” should be.

There are numerous body shapes. Yes, being 300 pounds and five foot, three inches is not healthy. Being 80 pounds and five foot, three inches is not healthy. Some body types can’t control their weights, but health should portray the desirable size, not obesity or emaciation.

If you browse the Internet, you will easily be able to find websites that are “pro-ana” just by typing in Google “pro-ana.” Who is Ana? Why are individuals “pro-ana?”

Pro-ana is the promotion of anorexia nervosa, and many of these websites are riddled throughout the Internet in the form of blogs, forums and communities. These websites are filled with “inspirational quotes,” pictures of skinny and frail girls to even the “ana religion and lifestyle” guide.

What’s worst? Many of the members and followers of these websites and blogs are young girls.

“I’m 22.”
“I’m 19.”
“I’m 17.”
“I’m 15.”
“I’m 12.”

Twelve years old.

“My boyfriend dumped me because I’m fat.”
“Hey, does anyone want to be my Ana coach?”
“I’m dying to be thin…”

“Dying to be thin…”

It’s heart wrenching. No individual, neither man nor woman, should feel the need to starve themselves for the sake of beauty. Because beauty, after all, is “subjective.” In our eyes, beauty is healthy. Eating well, being active, living a fulfilled life for yourself.

And this isn’t the first the UK has stopped an advertisement due to the unhealthy size of a model. The ASA turned down an advertisement from Yves Saint Laurent due a “unhealthy underweight” model recently.

Why is it that the United States doesn’t follow suit in taking a stand against things like this? Just yesterday we were looking at wedding dresses online. The photoshopping was illusory. The girl in the image below is just one of many images that we see. This one in particular had a completely normal arm on the front view of the dress, but on the back view, her arm is miraculously almost nonexistent.

The models in many of the dresses were of “modelesque” height, but almost all had the body type of a 12-year-old child. Yet even though they were more than likely thin to begin with, the photoshopping was still drastic and heavily noticeable. One model's arm was only as big around the leg of a dining room chair. The massive cupcake-like wedding dress they had on only exacerbated their thinness and the excessive photoshopping.

This issue is so much bigger than the current generation. Even though you might think it doesn’t affect you (if you’re someone who thinks that they’re not susceptible to media messages), it may in the future. You should consider how this will affect your children. Their peers being influenced by these images could make your child more likely to look up to these images, to possibly pursue the look.

Why are these the kind of images that we show women, especially impressionable young children? Why have these things become the norm for America? Why are we, as a whole, not more concerned with how these images are not only affecting women but how men view them? And vice-versa? These are questions that need we all should be concerned with answering.

No human being should be "dying to be thin."

Change the "subjective" view of beauty to the importance of health and well-balance.