Katy Perry’s famous curves: everyone is hypnotised by them. Men and women, it doesn’t matter – it’s hard not to get distracted when she’s shooting whipped cream out of her boobs in the California Gurls video, or squeezing herself into a 50’s style one-sie.

Well, not Rolling Stone, apparently. Katy appears on the cover of their latest issue photo-shopped to within an inch of her life. The boobs are still there (of course), but her arms are now pencil thin and rakish.

We would expect this from fashion labels (nice work Ralph Lauren) and women’s magazines (who are only trying to make the women “look her best”) but isn’t Rolling Stone, y’know, a music magazine?

Men’s mags like Esquire don’t seem to have problem with Katy’s body, so what’s up with Rolling Stone?

I guess we’ll just put it down to society’s unfair expectations on women’s bodies, the sexualisation of women in music etc, etc, etc.

The sad thing is that although the media might describe her as “curvy” and “voluptuous”, if you stood Katy next to a “normal” woman you’d probably find that she was absolutely tiny. At least that’s been my experience meeting female celebrities.

The Daily Mail claim that they’ve contacted Rolling Stone for comment and are waiting to hear back.