My Virtual Model™ is the online shopping equivalent of a Wii Mii. An electronic doppelganger, customizable to a remarkable degree (the face actually surprised me). A software twin, built with my height and weight and haircut (sort of) and features. 

Her purpose, ostensibly, is to allow me to virtually try on outfits I might like to purchase. And it's really a very good idea, isn't it? To attempt to mock up how an outfit offered through an online retailer will look on you?

Except I have never purchased an outfit she's tried on.

Mostly because honestly, despite the fact that we're supposed to be twins, the bitch just plain wears clothes a lot better than I do.

Ok, guys. I first logged on with one of these things back when you were in beta and had no actual retailer relationships. I'm kind of surprised to see that Land's End has stuck with you through thick and thin--I mean, geez, it must be 8 years already. I like what you've done with the face and hair upgrades and the ability to turn the model.

But.

Really, My Virtual Model™ is still, despite your best efforts, useless to me. All these years of coding, and still no option to input my actual measurements? What's the point? You're showing me how somebody with an idealized, built-for-clothes body of my height and weight will look in these pristine, wrinkle-free clothes. Trust me when I tell you, if I ever were to hit "Purchase This Look," upon receiving the package and donning the outfit, I would not resemble My Virtual Model™.

Exhibit A: The Breast Problem. The only two options for the size of a lady's rack are "small-medium" and "medium-large." Sorry, MVM designers: Titty Fail! 

To accurately represent my body, My Virtual Model™ needs a third choice: a straightforward "Very Large" would do, although it might be more fun if you got playful and labeled that option "Awfully Huge" or "Downright Unweildy."

I'm sure there are ladies at the other end of the spectrum who would also like an option that doesn't munge together Small and Medium, which, last I checked, are in fact two very different sizes/proportions (except at Starbuck's, where they're Tall and Grande, but nobody has Tall tits. So never mind).

Because of your artificially limited choices (doubtless based on clothing manufacturers' artificially limited manufacturing specs), all tops look charming and attractive on My Virtual Model™.

She can wear blouses! With buttons in front! (The last time I tried that in my non-Virtual life, the girls' escape plan worked, and I threw away the two or three remaining tops in my wardrobe that were not made of stretch-knit).

I deeply envy My Virtual Model™'s proportional rack.

Exhibit B: The Waist Problem

Users are offered a choice between a "defined" waist and a "less defined" waist. That's great, as far as it goes. And I've already selected an hourglass as my basic working shape--so, why is My Virtual Model™ still so comparatively thick in the middle?

She doesn't begin to resemble my real-life hourglass shape. I have an 8-inch difference between chest and waist, and a 9-inch difference between waist and hips. (Yes, I get compliments on my generous behind from Sir Mix-A-Lot fans, thank you very much.) Your designer's notion of a "defined" waist appears to top out at a 4-inch difference.

Because of this, My Virtual Model™'s pants always fit her perfectly, with no giant gaps in the waist. She will always be able to pull jeans right off the rack and wear them beautifully. (The bitch.) She will never need to take each new purchase to a tailor in order to have a few inches of waistband chopped out.

I could go on, but this post is really a call to my OS peeps.

YOU show me YOURS.

Go make your My Virtual Model™ and offer up your own opinions about whether it's actually shaped enough like you to be useful.

(Lonnie Lazar's participation is mandatory, and he must dress his double in only a thong. The color is his only choice.)

^{(OK. Maybe the black-and-purple dress...oh, but wait. Those twins aren't going to hoist themselves, and there's no place for proper bra straps...)}