I'm no fan of Victoria's Secret, there is in fact a lot I don't like about it.
Same and same about following it but I think what draws me to it is purely a morbid tendency, the same one that has me watching a Versace collection when god knows I've always found all of that a bit toxic..
I have so much to say but all over the place
, but I think the bottom line is that the product itself is for the most part undesirable. They sent reminded people that they're not a department store... therefore not for everyone?, and I think that's somewhat valid.. people need to reflect some more on these democratic demands where every single version of a human being has to be represented on a runway. Yes, fashion sank to rock bottom in that area circa 2009-2012 where every runway looked like a traditional parade in rural Netherlands. A change was needed, an update that perhaps embodied the energy and looks of any metropolis in this century. It is still a runway, of an industry that survives on unattainability, exclusivity, the aspirational, everything that is not mundanity or resembling the daily life. Humans have worn clothes since the moment we had a need to cover ourselves, fashion is unfortunately not clothes, nobody
needs fashion and while it does bear responsibility on what is marketed and enforced on pop culture as "ideal", it is not a democratic outlet or the right place to seek for a pure interpretation of tolerance and understanding. I really don't know whether to think there is a disconnect, ignorance, convenient stubbornness just to appear "woke" or denial of what fashion is founded on. It is not founded on morality, it's founded on the gross concept of status.
And because I know we live in a very
'with us or against us'/'so if it's not black, does that mean it's white?!' era of fallacies, I know someone will say 'so you're saying no to diversity?!'.. nope, just that a roll-call on which marginalized group is ~finally~ being represented by which model and feeling outraged to find little results in a lingerie parade is perhaps looking at the wrong place for equality. Also seeking for validation "happy I can see her stretch marks, no I feel better about myself" does not say much about the brand to me, mostly it makes me worried that we're living in a culture so dependable of entertainment in order to accept ourselves and so narcissistic that it stopped being a bad thing and seeing
yourself (especially if it's the real
you- aka. that model that's boycotting because she was not casted but claimed it's all for a cause bigger than herself lol) has to mean progress in society. Not necessarily.
Back to the department store point though, he may defend aesthetics based on that but the problem is that the actual product IS very Sears. There is a difference between underwear and lingerie as far as I am concerned. What they show, and there's a post somewhere in this thread with the full collection where it's one tartan padded bra after the other, is the stuff you would buy at 40% off and because you really need bras to go and pick up groceries or to go to work, daily activities, not necessarily when you
know you will have sex with someone new and exciting and want him (or her) to be like :eek:. There are plenty of small brands that are doing that and as for the Vanessa Friedman claim that lace or being under the gaze of a man (or she forgot: a woman, whoever you desire sexually) is on its way out because no respectable women would care for that, I beg to differ.. I thought freedom included the freedom to express sexuality with all it entails and all of its complexity (standard animal ways of mating, human ceremonies, courtship, flirting, etc,
might be the opposite order 
)...
Anyway, no wonder their CEO stepped down yesterday, this company is a hot mess, you don't just
add to please the masses, you also must let some things go in order to make progress. And it's still 2008 at Victoria's Secret: same orange tans, tacky sorority curls, too girl-next-door aesthetic (sorry but no, I don't want to see Martha Hunt when she can just greet me as I walk into ANY juice bar). I also thought they had finally moved on from models like Behati Prinsloo, who I associate with the demise of the brand: the "average cute" college campus looks, cheesy giggly s*it, forgettable/non-aspirational body, the cringey runway walk like "
THANK YOU GUYS!, unbelievable right? a dream come true", add to that the injected upper lip and her newly adopted/grating LA girl accent and EW. Stay Bond, people!. They need to do a major purge and go back to the girls that look like no one you have met or will ever meet lol, the Tyras, Laetitias, Aleks, Anouck (proving not everyone was a bombshell back then, just.. special), Gisele. There are many girls that look like that these days.. even on their own show, but treated as fillers.
To be frank, I really don't know just how risky it is to move away from college demographics and back to more adult customers. I could also say more (yup
) about their stores but what's the point of having a nice-looking store when the way it's marketed is so silly.. they could start with the creepy security guards maybe.. and then eradicate the Miss Universe tears
"walking in embellished panties- all I ever dreamed of is, it's just too much and I'm so emotional", I probably find that more insulting as a woman than their product or casting combined.. what the hell is that..
Leomie HANDerson!
