<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Who Should Model in Catalogs?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.acurvydiva.com/2007/10/15/skinny-women-in-plus-size-catalogs/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.acurvydiva.com/2007/10/15/skinny-women-in-plus-size-catalogs/</link>
	<description>Women With Curves Unite</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 03:41:10 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: allena</title>
		<link>http://www.acurvydiva.com/2007/10/15/skinny-women-in-plus-size-catalogs/#comment-5</link>
		<dc:creator>allena</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Oct 2007 22:16:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.acurvydiva.com/2007/10/15/skinny-women-in-plus-size-catalogs/#comment-5</guid>
		<description>I'm going to agree. But that would be an awful lot of different models, huh? To save that kind of time, money and tree-killing catalogs, how about we go with AVERAGE models. I say all models are now size 6-size 12 and then everyones happy? Right?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m going to agree. But that would be an awful lot of different models, huh? To save that kind of time, money and tree-killing catalogs, how about we go with AVERAGE models. I say all models are now size 6-size 12 and then everyones happy? Right?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
