You ask if standards will ever move from the extremes? In a word, no. Beauty standards are all about what is rare and unattainable in a particular society. In our society, with abundant and cheap food, being thin is in. White skin used to be fashionable because it meant you didn't have to work outside like a commoner. Now, with legions of pasty office drones, being tanned is in. In Mauritania, as well as medieval Europe, food was scarce, and fat was a sign of wealth and status - thus fat is in. Just think of Reuben's paintings.

You ask why beauty standards can't adhere to the mean? What would be the social logic in that? If everyone has a thing, why should it be desirable? I'm afraid we're stuck with extremes for the foreseeable future.

...could I find a writer making a veiled moral equivocation between those women in the US who voluntarily diet to meet an arbitrary standard of beauty versus young girls being beaten into gaining weight in Mauritania.

Bringing up these totally unrelated issues together is just a PC sop so that Joan Walsh doesn't blow out an eardrum reading criticism of a non-White, non-Christian culture at Salon (the Mauritanians follow the 'Religion of Peace' so tread lightly Ms. Price).

Besides being underwieght my not be optimal, but is better than obesity in studies I've seen. I do honestly believe women choose to be objectified in the US. If a woman in this day and age dispite her educational, economic and political opportunities fritters away her health and commonsense on diets pills, breast implants and the like, well....

That's a harsh pill for lefists to swallow because nothing upset their political agenda like a victim group responsible for their own troubles.

I am so moving there. Where is it?

When will liberals own up to the fact that there are real genetic differences between African, European, Asian and Arab lineage? And that these underly some cultural practices? Africa is as a whole brutal to its women. As is Arabia. Europe and America much less so. Genetics are an explanation.

...in America and most of the civilized world is just fine. You are sadly mistaken if you think that there is any connection between the fashion world and what average men find desirable or acceptable. I would say the standard of beauty in regards to weight or waist size is much closer to, say, Carmen Electra than it is to Callista Flockhart. On the other hand, no matter how much the 'plus-size' women may bemoan it, over 150 pounds or so will never be considered attractive here either, and rightfully so. Honestly, it's not that hard to maintain a reasonable figure without starving yourself.

On the other hand, no matter how much the 'plus-size' women may bemoan it, over 150 pounds or so will never be considered attractive here either, and rightfully so.

I love how some people both elect themselves the ultimate arbiters of what is attractive and forget that a woman may be taller than 5'2".