It's about sadomasochism and three-way sex.

[Nuzzolese]

You know, the average person is a lot funnier than the designation of "average person" implies credit for. In response to the new risque Victoria's Secret store window displays in a Virginia mall, shoppers are quoted saying;

"It feels like evil, feels like I have to cross the evil to get to the light"

"I'm anxious to see for myself what the buzz is all about, and if it is really true that Victoria no longer has any secrets . . . maybe your intent is to provide consumers in Northern Virginia with our first erotic boutique."

"I come to the mall with my daughter. It's disgusting. And I'm from Europe!"

"Little Shop of Whores"

"I like the dark side of Vicky's. Every woman has a little bit of the dark side in her. They can do this. The mannequins aren't real. I have a husband, and I know he would love this. This is what keeps you happily married."

(the last one mainly because of the phrase "the dark side of Vicky's" which sounds like a reference to Darth Vader, and the way she has a nikname for the store, like they're old chums.)


In case you haven't heard the news, because it's hardly newsworthy, Victoria's Secret launched a new window display they call "Backstage Sexy" with plastic mannequins made to look like their models, posed in suggestive poses, against poles, on their hands and knees, hinting at lesbian sex, group sex, and S&M in dark cases with ropes and such, and the mannequins are pretty realistic with visible nipples and asscracks.

The stripclub of your dreams: without the scent of crotch and desperation of course. Shiny black walls with recessed glass boxes holding scantily clad women in quesionable poses. Inside the store people move in waves like they do in crowded museums or amusement parks. Mannequinns posed on tables stare into space ominously as another plastic body, frozen in time, is ready to crawl over her. Frosted windows with peeking body parts, the adults only section partially roped off, and the buttcracks. Now this may be what you're thinking, "Manneuins have nipples, why shouldn't they have buttcracks too?"

Here are links to articles about it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/04/AR2005100401413.html

http://www.detnews.com/2005/nation/0510/09/nat-341371.htm

[TAL]

Now this may be what you're thinking, "Mannequins have nipples, why shouldn't they have buttcracks too?"
About the nipples thing. I never understood why they have to have them.

[Nuzzolese]

Crack (http://www.frozentears.net/cheese/delias07.JPG)

[IDIOTSVILLE]

You know, the average person is a lot funnier than the designation of "average person" implies credit for. In response to the new risque Victoria's Secret store window displays in a Virginia mall, shoppers are quoted saying;

"It feels like evil, feels like I have to cross the evil to get to the light"

"I'm anxious to see for myself what the buzz is all about, and if it is really true that Victoria no longer has any secrets . . . maybe your intent is to provide consumers in Northern Virginia with our first erotic boutique."

"I come to the mall with my daughter. It's disgusting. And I'm from Europe!"

"Little Shop of Whores"

"I like the dark side of Vicky's. Every woman has a little bit of the dark side in her. They can do this. The mannequins aren't real. I have a husband, and I know he would love this. This is what keeps you happily married."

(the last one mainly because of the phrase "the dark side of Vicky's" which sounds like a reference to Darth Vader, and the way she has a nikname for the store, like they're old chums.)


In case you haven't heard the news, because it's hardly newsworthy, Victoria's Secret launched a new window display they call "Backstage Sexy" with plastic mannequins made to look like their models, posed in suggestive poses, against poles, on their hands and knees, hinting at lesbian sex, group sex, and S&M in dark cases with ropes and such, and the mannequins are pretty realistic with visible nipples and asscracks.

The stripclub of your dreams: without the scent of crotch and desperation of course. Shiny black walls with recessed glass boxes holding scantily clad women in quesionable poses. Inside the store people move in waves like they do in crowded museums or amusement parks. Mannequinns posed on tables stare into space ominously as another plastic body, frozen in time, is ready to crawl over her. Frosted windows with peeking body parts, the adults only section partially roped off, and the buttcracks. Now this may be what you're thinking, "Manneuins have nipples, why shouldn't they have buttcracks too?"

Here are links to articles about it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/04/AR2005100401413.html

http://www.detnews.com/2005/nation/0510/09/nat-341371.htm

you have the longest fucking posts ever Nuzzolese

[Nuzzolese]

About the nipples thing. I never understood why they have to have them.

Maybe to demonstrate the thickness of the fabric, like a "CAUTION Garment necessitates bra" warning? I dunno.

[Nuzzolese]

you have the longest fucking posts ever Nuzzolese

Fuck off cuntstick and go back to your alphabet blocks

[mickill]

you have the longest fucking posts ever Nuzzolese
Yet you feel the need to quote the entire thing 3 posts into the thread.

[beastieangel01]

ha! interesting.

For some reason, I like it more because it is causing people to complain.

[ToucanSpam]

If people want to wear it, they are going to wear it. Does it need to be on display for kids? I don't think so.

I can imagine that boys aged 12-18 probably hover near the visual range of the displays to get a glimpse. Nothing wrong with being curious. But, what about girls? Do they need to see these images the store is trying to sell? Youth today are pretty damn impressionable and girls today are going to see these skinny plastic models and say 'I want to be that, it's cool,' or 'Hey, my body doesn't look like that, there must be something wrong with me,'. Not cool. I think there's a time and place for that type of attire, and that time isn't your teenage years.

[IDIOTSVILLE]

Fuck off cuntstick and go back to your alphabet blocks
i cant someone took them :(

[beastieangel01]

^haha

[monkey]

they may have nipples and asscracks, but can they pee and shave their legs?

mine can.

[zippo]

Fuck off cuntstick and go back to your alphabet blocks

hmm...yea, why the hell not

[Rock]

"It feels like evil, feels like I have to cross the evil to get to the light," she said, comparing the dark-toned storefront display to the more traditional display and lighting inside.

that was great.

[Nuzzolese]

they may have nipples and asscracks, but can they pee and shave their legs?

mine can.

Your what can?

[Nuzzolese]

hmm...yea, why the hell not

okay, so not my best moment, big whoopie

[Monsieur Decuts]

it'd be funny if they put coin slots in the change rooms and you had to pay a quarter to get in...

sex just won't stop selling stuff will it..that smart fucker

[Hiebz]

it's funny, because when I first visitted Europe one of the differences I noticed is that the mannequins had nipples ...

NUZZ - Maybe to demonstrate the thickness of the fabric, like a "CAUTION Garment necessitates bra" warning? I dunno.

^ that seems to make sense to me, I wouldn't have thought it

[g-mile7]

marketing at it's finest

[ms.peachy]

If people want to wear it, they are going to wear it. Does it need to be on display for kids? I don't think so.

I can imagine that boys aged 12-18 probably hover near the visual range of the displays to get a glimpse. Nothing wrong with being curious. But, what about girls? Do they need to see these images the store is trying to sell? Youth today are pretty damn impressionable and girls today are going to see these skinny plastic models and say 'I want to be that, it's cool,' or 'Hey, my body doesn't look like that, there must be something wrong with me,'. Not cool. I think there's a time and place for that type of attire, and that time isn't your teenage years.
You know it's a lacy underpants store we're talking about here, right?

[ToucanSpam]

You know it's a lacy underpants store we're talking about here, right?
Sure do.


Have anything to add?

[ms.peachy]

Sure do.


Have anything to add?
Well it just seems a bit... pointless to complain about how it will damage girls' self esteem to see sexy lingerie items in a store that a)isn't for girls, it's for women and b)it's not like VD hasn't been selling their skimpy underwear using thin models for about a million years now, no?

[ToucanSpam]

Well it just seems a bit... pointless to complain about how it will damage girls' self esteem to see sexy lingerie items in a store that a)isn't for girls, it's for women and b)it's not like VD hasn't been selling their skimpy underwear using thin models for about a million years now, no?

I understand what you're saying, but the lingerie has never been on display like this before. I'm not really a prude, I totally get that there's people who wear this stuff and it's cool. However, with this types of images on display to the general public, girls are going to see this and some of them are going to think what I said they'd think in my previous post.

We get mad at Paris Hilton and Lindsey Lohan and other actresses/models for presenting these terrible images, how is this display any better? How can we get mad at them and not get mad at this display?

[synch]

You can see more skin, asscracks and nipples on mtv.

Don't people that are shocked and insulted by anything sexual own a television set?

[ToucanSpam]

You can't change the channel on a display case.

[synch]

You can walk on.

Walk oooooooooon....

With hoooooooooooope... in your heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeart...

[ms.peachy]

I'm sorry maybe I'm missing your point ToF, but I just don't see how this particular type of display is any more 'damaging' to girls than any other underwear modeling-type display. Again, we're talking about a shop whose target market is specifically grown women, not teenage girls.

[ToucanSpam]

I'm sorry maybe I'm missing your point ToF, but I just don't see how this particular type of display is any more 'damaging' to girls than any other underwear modeling-type display. Again, we're talking about a shop whose target market is specifically grown women, not teenage girls.
ToF? :confused: :(


The displays are there for EVERYONE to see, including the impressionable young teenage girls. My point is that these girls WILL see these models and think they are supposed to act/look like that, which is not so cool. Yes we all realize that you can't go anywhere these days without seeing negative stereotypes of women, but this is just another place to see it, that really isn't necessary. THAT is my point. These are clothes for women as someone said already, so they should be on display for women to see, not girls or kids.

I think a half decent solution would be for the display to be within the store, which eliminates a fair amount of the problem with kids. If they still want to buy them, go ahead, More power to you. Just don't stuff more of these images down young kids' throats. It's not cool.

[mickill]

I think a half decent solution would be for the display to be within the store, which eliminates a fair amount of the problem with kids. If they still want to buy them, go ahead, More power to you. Just don't stuff more of these images down young kids' throats. It's not cool.
Ok, Mother Teresa. Why don't you just write Victoria's Secret and tell them that you're not going to tolerate this hedonism any longer? Since you're obviously losing sleep over this.

[Bob]

and while we're at it, i don't like all the mannequins in the window of the gap, they're perpetuating a stereotype. why are there no fat mannequins, or short, stocky ones? it's a really bad image for everyone who walks by, they should be taken down, or melted, or something

[zippo]

okay, so not my best moment, big whoopie

nono, i liked it

[ToucanSpam]

Ok, Mother Teresa. Why don't you just write Victoria's Secret and tell them that you're not going to tolerate this hedonism any longer? Since you're obviously losing sleep over this.
:rolleyes:


I'm trying to present what a possible interpretation of the display case, not start a crusade against VS.

[zippo]

These are clothes for women as someone said already, so they should be on display for women to see, not girls or kids.

Just don't stuff more of these images down young kids' throats.

youre making my brain cells bounce from one wall of my head to the other, soon there´ll be sparks and my head will turn on fire

I think you, Toucan, should have yourself an afternoon stroll by your neighborhood Victorias Secret, look at the lingerie, observe the people, maybe pop the cap off a Pear Glace, run your fingers through the linings of a push-up...and in your notebook, jot down the number of kids you think you see. These kids you see, jot them down when you see them.

I think I might know whats going on, a couple of years ago at this rave in the woods, i couldve swore i saw little green elves walk right past me. to this day, i dont know if they said "meet me by the lake" or "geet me by the pape".

[ToucanSpam]

youre making my brain cells bounce from one wall of my head to the other, soon there´ll be sparks and my head will turn on fire

I think you, Toucan, should have yourself an afternoon stroll by your neighborhood Victorias Secret, look at the lingerie, observe the people, maybe pop the cap off a Pear Glace, run your fingers through the linings of a push-up...and in your notebook, jot down the number of kids you think you see. These kids you see, jot them down when you see them.

I think I might know whats going on, a couple of years ago at this rave in the woods, i couldve swore i saw little green elves walk right past me. to this day, i dont know if they said "meet me by the lake" or "geet me by the pape".

Personal attacks don't really make you sound smarter, you just kind of come off as an asshole. Since you didn't discuss anything I said without resorting to QDrop tactics, I will dismiss what you say completely and continue on trying to present a point of veiw which is not necessarily my own.

[BionicEye]

Personal attacks don't really make you sound smarter, you just kind of come off as an asshole. Since you didn't discuss anything I said without resorting to QDrop tactics, I will dismiss what you say completely and continue on trying to present a point of veiw which is not necessarily my own.


me gusta zippo!

[zippo]

Personal attacks don't really make you sound smarter, you just kind of come off as an asshole. Since you didn't discuss anything I said without resorting to QDrop tactics, I will dismiss what you say completely and continue on trying to present a point of veiw which is not necessarily my own.

aw cmon, i was just kidding around, it was meant to make you laugh not get offended

and i didnt answer seriously cuz i dont understand where you get that kids shop there, its not a place for kids. VS, a lingerie store for women, has no responsibility upon little girls whatsoever, and youre making it sound like they do.

[BionicEye]

young girls shop there a lot in the US

[zippo]

young girls shop there a lot in the US


young girls like 16, 17 or young girls like 12, 13? still though, if they do, the responsibility is not up to VS and its marketing themes whatsoever.

[ToucanSpam]

aw cmon, i was just kidding around, it was meant to make you laugh not get offended

and i didnt answer seriously cuz i dont understand where you get that kids shop there, its not a place for kids. VS, a lingerie store for women, has no responsibility upon little girls whatsoever, and youre making it sound like they do.
I know kids dont shop there, but kids can see the display. SEE IT. I think that's the part that people aren't getting.

[zippo]

I know kids dont shop there, but kids can see the display. SEE IT. I think that's the part that people aren't getting.

i dont know, yea, they can see them, but, inside a mall, theres different types of stores for different kinds of customers. you cant take away the right of a store to market their products the way that best benefits them. theyre in their right. its sort of utopian to expect a lingerie store to start worrying about the children before their sales.

[ToucanSpam]

i dont know, yea, they can see them, but, inside a mall, theres different types of stores for different kinds of customers. you cant take away the right of a store to market their products the way that best benefits them. theyre in their right. its sort of utopian to expect a lingerie store to start worrying about the children before their sales.
Well, this is true. It is their right.

I don't think I've ever posted any kind of comment this conservative before....it feels wierd. (referring to my argument in previous posts)

[dancin2beasties]

and while we're at it, i don't like all the mannequins in the window of the gap, they're perpetuating a stereotype. why are there no fat mannequins, or short, stocky ones? it's a really bad image for everyone who walks by, they should be taken down, or melted, or something
they have mannequins in wheelchairs at kohls. they have more disabled mannequins than normal ones!

[ms.peachy]

Here's my point: VS window displays, as well as in-store displays, have ALWAYS had mannequins dressed in bras and panties. So I what I gather is that now, instead of these bras and panties being in a romantic floral pattern with cream lace trim, they are now in shiny red PVC with black rubber trim, or something. So what? How are today's mannequins somehow more likely than last years to create 'body image' issues for girls?

[BangkokB]

Didn't Read a Thing


3 way sex is fanfuckintastic as long as your ass doesn't hurt the next morning

Seriously, 3 way sex is way underrated~the 2 girl 1 guy style that is

If there's any conversavation~I don't have to be involved

[zorra_chiflada]

ho hum, a company using sex to sell products to women, and probably girls too. i prefer target underwear, thankyou.

[Documad]

with plastic mannequins made to look like their models, posed in suggestive poses, against poles, on their hands and knees, hinting at lesbian sex, group sex, and S&M in dark cases with ropes and such, and the mannequins are pretty realistic with visible nipples and asscracks.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/04/AR2005100401413.html
There is a photo with the article and it's of female mannequins sitting and standing in black lace bras and panties. Where are the poles, the group sex, the ropes and such?

Call me crazy, but I think that mannequin sexuality should be toned down when the mannequins live in a place where tiny tots go by in strollers.


P.S. I disliked the prior VS campaign. I just hate angels. But I was puzzled that there was no outcry over that one. I would have thought the religious right would have been pissed off by scantily clad women sporting wings and halos.

Also, is anyone flashing back on the Seinfeld episode where there's a mannequin that looks like Elaine? :p

[synch]

You see people stroll through the red light district with their kids (tourists that is) and they encounter things (both live and in pictures) that I'd want to shield my kids from at a young age.

I think a parent should be aware of what his or her kid encounters and judge whether a kid is ready to see it or not. Scandily clad manequins would be the least of my worries though. People should be more responsible about television, magazines and videogames.

I like how parents have tried to sue game companies because their child got violent after playing grand theft auto or some other game. I think some government agency should investigate why a twelve year old kid is playing a game rated M. Where were the parents at the time?

Sorry, off-topic, read a few articles today on an asshole attorney that is trying to cash in on the gaming industry.

[ToucanSpam]

I like how parents have tried to sue game companies because their child got violent after playing grand theft auto or some other game. I think some government agency should investigate why a twelve year old kid is playing a game rated M. Where were the parents at the time?

Everyone in the gaming industry and those associated, including hardcore gamers such as I are collectively laughing at Jack Thompson's jackassery right now. (y)

[synch]

That's the one. I doubt I'll bother to remember his name though.

I think that with this and with many other things it comes to responsability for your own actions and for your kids' wellbeing. People moan about government intervention but when a television program, movie, magazine, newspaper etc contains something they don't like it should be banned and the people responsible should be crucified (irony intended).

Teach your kids proper values instead of shielding them from every single negative aspect of the world and they'll grow up to make educated decisions and won't freak out at the sight of an overgrown barbie doll wearing underwear. Oh, TC, if you are worried about giving little girls a wrong, depressing view about their body that could lead to self-destructive behaviour you should lobby for the creation of Malibu Barbie's sister Cellulitis Cindy.

[ToucanSpam]

Teach your kids proper values instead of shielding them from the world and they'll grow up to make educated decisions and won't freak out at the sight of an overgrown barbie doll wearing underwear. Oh, TC, if you are worried about giving little girls a wrong, depressing view about their body that could lead to self-destructive behaviour you should lobby for the creation of Malibu Barbie's sister Cellulitis Cindy.

Look, I don't pretend to know what's best for the general public. I don't necessarily even agree with everything I said, I'm simply trying to throw that kind of opinion out there, because there are people who see this the way I stated. I will say that I think that there's this awful standard image girls are being forced to copy. Is is directly VC's fault? Naw, you can't blame the problems in society on one display case when 10 or 20 years previous to that the same thing was going on. There seems to have been a moral mudslide in North America, some of which is a step in the right direction, others I tend not to agree with. Should the display stay up? Yes it should, because a company has a right to advertise what they are selling, just like the ads on at 2-3am in the morning about phone sex. I don't think we need to 'shelter' our kids from this relatively new wave of advertisements, but I do think it should be regulated. I'm kind of conflicted, I think....

[synch]

I'm kind of conflicted, I think....
I think so too :D

[ToucanSpam]

I don't think I'm too far gone, but my gut says it's not cool. When I think about it though, Europe and Asia seem pretty down with this kind of advertising....

[Medellia]

ho hum, a company using sex to sell products to women, and probably girls too. i prefer target underwear, thankyou.
I love their stuff, but it's soooo expensive. I always stock up when they have their semi-annual sale. (y)

[ms.peachy]

ho hum, a company using sex to sell products to women
Yeah! How dare a company that makes sexy underwear for women market them to women with the suggestion that wearing sexy underwear might make them feel more sexy! Well, we can see right through that, and we're not gonna fall for it, are we!

[synch]

Drat!

How about if we use puppies to sell sexy underwear to you, would you fall for that one?

[ms.peachy]

How about if we use puppies to sell sexy underwear to you, would you fall for that one?
Puppies have been oppressed for far to long, and your proposed exploitation of puppies sickens me.

[BangkokB]

Did someone say puppies?*pants self while thinking about said puppies

And the sexy underwear post is useless w/o pictures


PS My experience with the 3 way only works if everyones a stranger

[synch]

Puppies have been oppressed for far to long, and your proposed exploitation of puppies sickens me.
How about if we only use puppies from the pound that would get killed if we didn't use them for the campaign?

They would be free so it would work out just fine.

[zorra_chiflada]

Yeah! How dare a company that makes sexy underwear for women market them to women with the suggestion that wearing sexy underwear might make them feel more sexy! Well, we can see right through that, and we're not gonna fall for it, are we!

uh yeah. that wasn't what i was saying. sexy underwear doesn't make me feel sexy. it makes me feel uncomfortable and pissed off that that much money was spent on something so small and unnecessary.
a lot of advertising towards women uses sex. it's not "wear this and you'll feel sexy" it's "haha! you'll never look like this!" as long as women are fixated on losing weight and looking the right way, they'll never do anything productive.
i just think it's boring. it's a shame that smart women seem to buy into this bullshit as well.

[Documad]

Back to Nuzz's original comments -- people are hilarious. Sometimes when I'm out in public, they amuse me and I smile without thinking. :)

People where I live don't like to talk to strangers, so it's fun to compliment them. They don't know what to do with themselves.

[ms.peachy]

uh yeah. that wasn't what i was saying. sexy underwear doesn't make me feel sexy. it makes me feel uncomfortable and pissed off that that much money was spent on something so small and unnecessary.
a lot of advertising towards women uses sex. it's not "wear this and you'll feel sexy" it's "haha! you'll never look like this!" as long as women are fixated on losing weight and looking the right way, they'll never do anything productive.
i just think it's boring. it's a shame that smart women seem to buy into this bullshit as well.
But zorra, isn't the whole point of this particular store, and thusly its advertising, and by default then also this thread, about using sex to sell underwear, quite specifically?

In other words, you're taking a general complaint you have - whose legitimacy I'm not disputing - and applying it in entirely the wrong situation. Because if there's ever a time when it IS, in fact, appropriate to use sex to sell something to women, it would seem to me that sexy underwear for women pretty much ticks all the boxes. (Regardless of whether or not you personally like to wear it.)

A woman seeing a mannequin wearing a bra and panty set (or a nightie, or merry widow, or garter belt, or whatever) looks at it and thinks, "Oooh that's a cute but a bit naughty looking, I like it, let's try one on" is good advertising, no? Just because it's not the same thing that you might think when you look at it doesn't make it "bullshit" that women are "buying into". Some women rather like nice undies, like knowing they've got a sexy bit of kit on underneath that no one knows about but them, and I can tell you they're not all size 6's either.

[mickill]

A woman seeing a mannequin wearing a bra and panty set (or a nightie, or merry widow, or garter belt, or whatever) looks at it and thinks, "Oooh that's a cute but a bit naughty looking, I like it, let's try one on"

This happens to me whenever I walk past the display window at Sears with the mannequins seated on Harleys, wearing Dickies and Carhartt, holding various power tools and smoking cigars.

[Kid Presentable]

I seen a mannequin in a dumpster once. (y)

[ToucanSpam]

Did it wave hello?

[Kid Presentable]

Did it wave hello?

I looked at its groin.

[ToucanSpam]

:D

[Kid Presentable]

:D

Yeah, I was making that face, too.

[mickill]

Toucan woulda took it home and drilled a hole in it's groin.

[Nuzzolese]

Documad how'm I supposed to know where the pictures of the poles and the lesbos are? The article said one part was roped off, and they also said they toned down the display after so many complaints.

It's better when the mannequins have no heads, then people don't notice them as much. I went into VS last night and they did have mannequins just standing there. They creep me out.

Synch I think you mean Cellulite Cindy. That's the dimpled fat on thighs. Cellulitis is an inflammation of the deep skin or muscle, usually caused by infection or injury. But I guess a Barbie like that could make girls feel secure too.


On the subject of female body image and advertising, I also read an article in a magazine about the public reaction to the DOVE FIRMING LOTION ads that feature plus size and otherwise generally curvy models in their underwear. Some people complained about it saying they could see girls like that anywhere, and that they want advertising to show them the fantasy. I think those people missed the point of the ad, which was aimed at soft women who think a lotion will make them look firm. Nobody cares about body image or morals when it comes to ads, that's obvious. They just want to sell it. Make women feel secure if that's what it takes to sell the lotion, make them insecure if that's what it takes to sell the underwear.

[ToucanSpam]

Toucan woulda took it home and drilled a hole in it's groin.
theres not a drill bit small enough......

[Knuckles]

On the subject of female body image and advertising, I also read an article in a magazine about the public reaction to the DOVE FIRMING LOTION ads that feature plus size and otherwise generally curvy models in their underwear.

I thought that was a great idea.

Most of those ladies were quite lovely (y)

[ms.peachy]

They just want to sell it. Make women feel secure if that's what it takes to sell the lotion, make them insecure if that's what it takes to sell the underwear.
All advertising exists to make all people feel inadequate or incomplete to some extent. If you weren't made to feel your life was missing something, then how could anyone sell anything to you?

This is not news, btw.

[mickill]

Documad how'm I supposed to know where the pictures of the poles and the lesbos are? The article said one part was roped off, and they also said they toned down the display after so many complaints.

Just get it done! Don't half-ass it like this. You come to the forum with a thread like this? Incomplete? Are you out of your mind? Just do your job. We want those pictures. Today!

[Nuzzolese]

All advertising exists to make all people feel inadequate or incomplete to some extent. If you weren't made to feel your life was missing something, then how could anyone sell anything to you?

This is not news, btw.

You're right because women would look at the ads and say "I have that same shape and I still don't look that good in my underwear. Maybe I'm just a bottle of lotion away from that!"

[Kid Presentable]

You're right because women would look at the ads and say "I have that same shape and I still don't look that good in my underwear. Maybe I'm just a bottle of lotion away from that!"

I felt bad about my body when I saw male models all buff and shit. But then I worked out that would be the gayest thing I could do, so I stopped caring.

I'm hung though, so it matters not.

[Lex Diamonds]

b)it's not like VD hasn't been selling their skimpy underwear using thin models for about a million years now, no?
Good ol' VD. (y)

[Nuzzolese]

National news. I'd say this campaign was an outstanding success just for getting so much attention.

Just get it done! Don't half-ass it like this. You come to the forum with a thread like this? Incomplete? Are you out of your mind? Just do your job. We want those pictures. Today!

You were just like Louis Gossett Jr. in this post. I loved Enemy Mine, and that Richard Gere motorcycle movie.

This article has a slide show with the alleged provocative poses and some ropes which look like stage curtain pulleys. A Burlesque show, perhaps? Lady Marmalade?
http://www.nbc4.com/news/5057640/detail.html

"We are pleased to report that the window displays at the Victoria's Secret store in the new expansion at our center have been changed," said Kathy Hannon, the senior property manager at the mall, in a statement released Thursday.
On Monday there were two female mannequins lounging on a bed. There was just one mannequin on that bed Tuesday.

[Kid Presentable]

The Victoria's Secret website is fucking lame, btw.

[Nuzzolese]

The Victoria's Secret website is fucking lame, btw.

No it isn't. It's an extensive list of all the things they have available to sell, all the sizes and everything, you can see pictures and the alternate colors available. It's a good online catalog. You can even browse just by size.

[Nuzzolese]

Then again, I'm only trying to use it for what it's intended to be.

[Kid Presentable]

Then again, I'm only trying to use it for what it's intended to be.

Yeah whatever. Don't get all preachy on me.

[Echewta]

Oh! That site is for shopping. Now it makes sense.

[Nuzzolese]

Yeah whatever. Don't get all preachy on me.

All I'm saying is it's stupid to complain about the salad bar not having any steak.

[Kid Presentable]

All I'm saying is it's stupid to complain about the salad bar not having any steak.

That salad bar didn't even have salt and pepper yo.

[mickill]

You were just like Louis Gossett Jr. in this post. I loved Enemy Mine, and that Richard Gere motorcycle movie.


You just needed a little push.

I get the Lou Gossett thing a lot. By the way, An Officer And A Gentleman rocks!

[Documad]

Nuzz, I wasn't criticizing your thread. But thanks ever so for the cool slide show -- that's more like it! (Now if you could find me a new job, that would be awesome!)

My male friend reported seeing the VS display that involved a mannequin with her leg wrapped around a pole a la g-string divas.

My female friend thinks that Abercrombie and Fitch shouldn't have photos of naked people laying on top of each other.

[zorra_chiflada]

But zorra, isn't the whole point of this particular store, and thusly its advertising, and by default then also this thread, about using sex to sell underwear, quite specifically?

In other words, you're taking a general complaint you have - whose legitimacy I'm not disputing - and applying it in entirely the wrong situation. Because if there's ever a time when it IS, in fact, appropriate to use sex to sell something to women, it would seem to me that sexy underwear for women pretty much ticks all the boxes. (Regardless of whether or not you personally like to wear it.)

A woman seeing a mannequin wearing a bra and panty set (or a nightie, or merry widow, or garter belt, or whatever) looks at it and thinks, "Oooh that's a cute but a bit naughty looking, I like it, let's try one on" is good advertising, no? Just because it's not the same thing that you might think when you look at it doesn't make it "bullshit" that women are "buying into". Some women rather like nice undies, like knowing they've got a sexy bit of kit on underneath that no one knows about but them, and I can tell you they're not all size 6's either.

all i'm saying is that from a designer's point of view, using sex to sell any product, for anyone is weak. i don't even think it can be justified for lingerie. it's the easy way out, often used by designers who have not done much research or thought about the product (1/3-1/2 of designing a product is research). a good designer would be able to sell a product without using sex at all.
for example, humour is a much better method to sell a product, and i would be more inclined to investigate the product.

[little j]

1. my little sister (14) has been wearing victoria's secret unnies for the past 2-3 years. they make regular full bottom cotton junks too man.
2. is it bad that i refer to victorias secret as "vicky's" cause i do. but i worked there, so i kinda have a relationship/addiction.
3. nothing is wrong with sex and if you dont like the shop or the display then walk past it and dont look at it. dont shop there, trust me you aren't going to hurt the income. the ligerie from vicky's (see?) is quality lingerie, the bras last forever (most of them if properly cared for) and the hosiery is way better than Leggs. and if you have kids then take them to the discovery store instead of victorias secret. trust me they'll be distracted enough in there they will forget all about the nipples.
4. what other kind of marketing should a lingerie store use besides sex? seriously? and its not like the maneajkaqins or however were giving eachother oral or sucking on said nipples. stupid. its a panty store that sells panties and sexy lacy stuff that you wear for the express purpose of having sex. geez!

[zorra_chiflada]

3. nothing is wrong with sex and if you dont like the shop or the display then walk past it and dont look at it. dont shop there, trust me you aren't going to hurt the income.

so if i'm unhappy about the government, i'm not allowed to complain?
if i'm unhappy about service at a store, i'm not allowed to complain?
i do not subscribe to that "if you don't like it, then leave" ideology.


4. what other kind of marketing should a lingerie store use besides sex? seriously? and its not like the maneajkaqins or however were giving eachother oral or sucking on said nipples. stupid. its a panty store that sells panties and sexy lacy stuff that you wear for the express purpose of having sex. geez!

yeah, that's what designers automatically think. "why try anything else? it's a store for lingerie" good designers would think of other ways. seriously, it doesn't matter what product you're selling, using female sexuality to endore is pathetic.

[little j]

so if i'm unhappy about the government, i'm not allowed to complain?
if i'm unhappy about service at a store, i'm not allowed to complain?
i do not subscribe to that "if you don't like it, then leave" ideology..

you can complain, because its important that the company knows that it has offended you. but at the same time if it really offends you then dont bother going there. I really dont like the washington times so i dont read that newspaper. if i dont like a painting i see i dont write the artist to complain. if i watch a commercial on tv and i dont particularly care for it for one reason or another i dont write the corporation selling the product and complain, i change the channel, i walk past the store, i dont read the paper. have control over yourself, not everyone else.


yeah, that's what designers automatically think. "why try anything else? it's a store for lingerie" good designers would think of other ways. seriously, it doesn't matter what product you're selling, using female sexuality to endore is pathetic.

they must be pushing the glamour line and victoria's secret sexy for the holidays. just last season they had girls with camis and cotton boyshorts playing with the pink dog because they were promoting the "pink" line which is more geared toward teens.
its not pathetic to use female sexuality to endorse female sexual products.
its common sense. just like using a guy in hunting gear with a beard to promote hunting products.

bottom line is lingerie makes some women feel sexy. not for anyone but themselves and looking at the slides (thanks nuzz?) i didnt' see anything very wrong or provacative about the manne(stillcantspellit)kins. they were advertising what the store sells in a tasteful sexy manner.

[Freebasser]

Using sex to sell chocolate/cars/pet food is a cop-out, but using sex to sell ladies garments is a-ok with me.

Laughing makes my mojo disappear, so I know if I were a woman and a company were trying to use humour to sell me knickers it would just make me laugh and forget about the sexual implications that product could have, and then I'd be laughing too much in bed when it came to using that product to actually get horny.

Or something.

[zorra_chiflada]

why does it make women feel sexy? because we are told by companies like victoria's secret that wearing lacy expensive underwear is sexy. we automatically accept it. why isn't wearing plain cotton underwear sexy? because it is cheap.
do you see what i'm getting at here. it's sexy because we're told it is, and it is the only way these companies can push off their expensive products.

[ToucanSpam]

Using sex to sell chocolate/cars/pet food is a cop-out, but using sex to sell ladies garments is a-ok with me.

Laughing makes my mojo disappear, so I know if I were a woman and a company were trying to use humour to sell me knickers it would just make me laugh and forget about the sexual implications that product could have, and then I'd be laughing too much in bed when it came to using that product to actually get horny.

Or something.
*insert witty attempt to befuddle Freebasser*

[zorra_chiflada]

Using sex to sell chocolate/cars/pet food is a cop-out, but using sex to sell ladies garments is a-ok with me.

Laughing makes my mojo disappear, so I know if I were a woman and a company were trying to use humour to sell me knickers it would just make me laugh and forget about the sexual implications that product could have, and then I'd be laughing too much in bed when it came to using that product to actually get horny.

Or something.


maybe it's just because i'm conservative and believe that sex is a private thing, but i'm often a bit disgusted to see that kind of advertising in this day in age.
i will also not let an underwear company tell me what sexy is.

[little j]

why does it make women feel sexy? because we are told by companies like victoria's secret that wearing lacy expensive underwear is sexy. we automatically accept it. why isn't wearing plain cotton underwear sexy? because it is cheap.
do you see what i'm getting at here. it's sexy because we're told it is, and it is the only way these companies can push off their expensive products.

its sexy cause it feels sexy. physically satin/silk, lace feels sexy on. have you ever worn it? its lovely. just lovely.
and plain cotton underwear is sexy and its also sold at victorias secret.

[Freebasser]

why does it make women feel sexy? because we are told by companies like victoria's secret that wearing lacy expensive underwear is sexy. we automatically accept it. why isn't wearing plain cotton underwear sexy? because it is cheap.
do you see what i'm getting at here. it's sexy because we're told it is, and it is the only way these companies can push off their expensive products.

In truth, I couldn't give a shit about the underwear, because it's usually on the floor within 5 seconds of revealing itself anyway.

[zorra_chiflada]

its sexy cause it feels sexy. physically satin/silk, lace feels sexy on. have you ever worn it? its lovely. just lovely.
and plain cotton underwear is sexy and its also sold at victorias secret.


my aunt sent some to me once. it made me feel fat. it made me feel like i had to go on a diet to look good on it.

[ToucanSpam]

In truth, I couldn't give a shit about the underwear, because it's usually on the floor within 5 seconds of revealing itself anyway.
(y) safe (y)

[little j]

i have always believed that lingerie is more for the woman than for the man. maybe its because i've never been with someone who really liked lingerie. i love it i think its beautiful it has a way of showing skin and hiding it and looking gorgeous. i wear lace thongs and jeans because it makes me feel good. i wear cotton bikinis and short skirts because 1. its cute as hell and 2. if a guy looks up my skirt he wont see much. if you feel sexy you are sexy if you are sexy you feel sexy its a wonderful cycle. there is nothing wrong with being conservative, but at the same time there is nothing wrong with feeling sexy.

[Documad]

Nothing feels better than quality undergarments. I love silk, but I prefer really good cotton. Some of the stuff with a little spandex feels amazing.

I also love quality bubble bath -- the smell, the feel.

[ms.peachy]

my aunt sent some to me once. it made me feel fat. it made me feel like i had to go on a diet to look good on it.
Zorra, do you get that that's about you, and not about the underwear?

Essentially what you seem to be saying is that satiny, lacy underpants aren't sexy for any woman, because they don't feel sexy to you personally, and that any woman who feels sexy wearing lacy satiny underpants is just a brainwashed tool of patriarchal capitalist oppression, because you don't like happen to like them.

There are plenty of women who are not exactly of model proportions who wer these things and feel quite alright about themselves. Your own body issues seem to be preventing you from being objective about this.

[zippo]

why does it make women feel sexy? because we are told by companies like victoria's secret that wearing lacy expensive underwear is sexy. we automatically accept it. why isn't wearing plain cotton underwear sexy? because it is cheap.
do you see what i'm getting at here. it's sexy because we're told it is, and it is the only way these companies can push off their expensive products.

i dont understand how you can say that stores like VS are the ones that impose this on us,the idea that lingerie is sexy. the only imposing i see here, is you trying to convince us that it isnt (btw, im not saying that in a pissed off, insulting tone, im just continuing the discussion).

[Sarky Devotchka]

ho hum, a company using sex to sell products to women, and probably girls too. i prefer target underwear, thankyou.


hey! me too! my fancy victoria's secret bras are uncomfortable and my target bras are fantastic.

as for the displays...I dunno, those mannequins don't even look like real people. I think the commercials on t.v. with the real girls are more sexual. I'm probably just desensitized because my friends used to live in boys town where there are sex shops with very explicit window displays up and down the main drag (no pun intended).

bleh, I don't care about lingerie much. I have a cute nighty thing that shows my boobs, but anytime I've worn it, it gets taken off in two seconds.

[Nuzzolese]

bleh, I don't care about lingerie much. I have a cute nighty thing that shows my boobs, but anytime I've worn it, it gets taken off in two seconds.

Men don't seem to care about underwear. We should conduct a study. We will repeat the same romantic evening, in the same clothes, mulitple times, with a sampling of men, changing our underwear style for each date. We'll do the study with men of certain age brackets and ethnicity and income and all those other sociological pigeonholes, guage their reactions, and in the end present what we've learned about their reactions....Or we could get whores to do it...or we could just do a poll. That's already been done. Scratch this idea, let's wear what we want. Meet me at Target.

[zippo]

Men don't seem to care about underwear. We should conduct a study. We will repeat the same romantic evening, in the same clothes, mulitple times, with a sampling of men, changing our underwear style for each date. We'll do the study with men of certain age brackets and ethnicity and income and all those other sociological pigeonholes, guage their reactions, and in the end present what we've learned about their reactions....Or we could get whores to do it...or we could just do a poll. That's already been done. Scratch this idea, let's wear what we want. Meet me at Target.

haha, idola

this reminds me of the bipolar thinking we soemtimes have when were travelling in a car in the middle of a weekday afternoon, getting lost in the blur of the trees and gas stations and going off into those wonderful moments of stream of consciousness. and then you laugh and shake your head at yourself. but then sometimes you dont. i treasure those "sometimes you dont".

[zorra_chiflada]

Zorra, do you get that that's about you, and not about the underwear?

Essentially what you seem to be saying is that satiny, lacy underpants aren't sexy for any woman, because they don't feel sexy to you personally, and that any woman who feels sexy wearing lacy satiny underpants is just a brainwashed tool of patriarchal capitalist oppression, because you don't like happen to like them.

There are plenty of women who are not exactly of model proportions who wer these things and feel quite alright about themselves. Your own body issues seem to be preventing you from being objective about this.


yes, that's right, it's something wrong with me. keep on saying that. :rolleyes:
i would have expected a real argument from you rather than "it's something wrong with your body issues"

[ms.peachy]

yes, that's right, it's something wrong with me. keep on saying that. :rolleyes:
i would have expected a real argument from you rather than "it's something wrong with your body issues"
You can dismiss my point if you like, but I believe it is 'a real argument'. You are not making any effort to view the situation objectively, only allowing your personal experience to make judgements about how other people should feel.