You have to be perfect, nothing less. Not sure what exactly “perfect” is? Don’t worry, excessively digitally altered magazine covers and advertisements are here to show you just how inhuman you have to be to be considered attractive.

Bear in mind that the use of programs like Photoshop is not wrong when it is used correctly. There is nothing wrong with altering a photo by adding a filter or adjusting the color contrast. What is wrong, however, is blatantly disfiguring the subject of the photo. The person editing the photo is claiming that the subject is not naturally good looking enough to be anywhere else but behind the camera without the aid of Photoshop.

Some may argue that using programs like Photoshop to enhance a picture is harmless and that these programs can be used however the user or the subject of the picture chooses. While the latter is true, making pictures “flawless” is far from harmless.

One of the worst offences of an extreme photo editor is that he or she sees a flaw in the subject of the photo. If the photo editor is not the subject, excessive retouching is evidence of low morals since he or she is claiming that the subject isn’t beautiful. It is simply not the job of one or two people to set the standard of beauty for anyone else and then alter a picture of someone to fit their ridiculous standards.

If he or she is the subject of the photo, it is simply evidence of low self-esteem, which is perhaps even more tragic. The fact that some people feel compelled to “fix” what isn’t broken is disturbing.

What’s worse is that some choose to not see the correlation between excessively retouched photos in the media and self-esteem problems which can lead to eating disorders.

The National Eating Disorders Association states on its website that “numerous correlational and experimental studies have linked exposure to the thin ideal in mass media to body dissatisfaction, internalization of the thin ideal and disordered eating.”

Excessive photo editor in the media doesn’t just impact women. Images of men are also excessively edited.

The National Eating Disorder Association claims on its website that portrayal of extremely muscular men is largely “related to body dissatisfaction among men.”

Retouching photos isn’t even an necessary measure to have a successful business. Aerie, a successful intimate apparel line, announced Jan. 17 that it would no longer use retouched photos from now on as a part of its “aerie Real” campaign. More companies should be taking stands like this.

If “exposure to the thin ideal in mass media” leads to self-esteem and body image issues, should we really consider it ethical to make thin models appear inhuman and underweight? Is it right to encourage body image issues just so that a magazine editor can portray what they believe is “perfect”? Is it ethical to encourage what causes body image issues which then lead to dangerous eating disorders?

The answer is no.

No single person should be allowed to set the beauty standard for anyone and everyone else; no single person should be allowed to stretch  a models arms, legs or neck so that the model can be considered “flawless”; no single person should be allowed to digitally alter someone else’s size; no single person should be allowed to contribute to the development of deadly eating disorders; no single person should be allowed to tell another that they are not beautiful.