Victoria’s Secret, a company that sells lingerie, is under attack by people who are offended by the company’s ads – not because the ads are too sexy, but because the ads are “aimed at making them [women] feel insecure about their bodies,” are “harmful,” and can “promote thin ideal internalization and lead to disordered eating.”
More than 3000 people have signed a petition at Change.org to have this company pull it’s advertising.
This Change.org petition is as stupid as it is belittling
Where to begin?
A) This ad is not promoting the perfect female figure – or one perceived perfect figure – but a line of women’s undergarments called the “Body by Victoria” collection. I own several of the items in this collection because they all have the desired effect of being practically invisible under clothing. In fact, the first bra I purchased from this collection was the culmination of me going to Victoria’s Secret and asking the sales associates for a bra that would not show up what so ever under a white shirt – whether by color or by being ill-fitting. I’ve since bought about six of these bras. They’re awesome.
This ad is a play on word, the perfect “body” being the perfect “Body by Victoria” undie for you.
B) The word body is in quotations. Punctuation matters, people. And this time, it’s used correctly.
C) The company’s intention is to sell this line of undergarments. They do that by having pretty ladies wear them. And considering they have bra sizes that range from 30A – 40DDD, I’m pretty sure they recognize and cater to most, if not all sizes of women.
D) Change.org boasts that they have more than 80 million signatures on petitions. Their petitions range from actually important such as “Help Save Pakistan Mother Sentenced to Death for Blasphemy” to the utterly inane like the one they have asking a lingerie company to pull their advertising.
I’m all for using your voice for positive outcomes. I’m fine signing petitions. What I have a problem with is things that actually matter being treated with equal weight as things that don’t. Clearly looking at the stats that 152 petitioners make a “victory” while millions don’t make a victory, an intelligent person can see that just because a petition is on Change.org doesn’t make it actually important.
And for every nonsense, “my feelings are hurt so everyone has to jump on the outrage bandwagon with me” petition that’s out there, this devalues efforts to solve actual problems through the same means.
E) I’m willing to go out on a limb and say that people who are morally offended by this are offended because of their own personal issues – not because this ad is actually offensive. And in this topsy-turvy society, if you’re offended by something, that automatically means someone else is wrong. Discourse is not a good idea. Anyone who’s wrong needs to be silenced. That’s American, after all. (These last three sentences are dripping with sarcasm, if you couldn’t tell.)
Let me give you a different, personal example: Nancy Pelosi. Everything that comes out of that woman’s mouth makes me want to pull my hair out in it’s illogical, morally bankrupt stupidity. But you don’t see me having a petition put up on Change.org called “Pelosi: Shut that Harpy Up.”
And another example: Russell Brand is a comedian who likes to share his political opinions like he likes to share his very likely STDs – a lot. But his political opinions are literally not founded on any kind of actual understanding of how the world actually works, but rather on what his formerly cocaine addicted mind thinks about the world. I still find him funny and entertaining to listen to – even though I think he’s wrong and a person of questionable morality. But I don’t think he needs to cease and desist his opinions.
I’m not saying that people who are offended by this ad don’t have their reasons, and that those reasons aren’t valid – to them – I’m just saying that this is America, and just because you don’t like what someone puts out there, doesn’t mean it’s cool for you to try and force them to stop.
F) Petitions are largely a waste of time. If you want to stop a company from doing something, the far more efficient means to do that, is to not purchase what they’re selling.
G) For arguments’ sake, let’s say that seeing images of skinny, airbrushed models in their underwear does have negative emotional-whatever impacts on women – ignoring the reality that the individual women in question have within their own power to not be effected by this if they choose – Is it still worth people’s time to get so lathered up about it? Especially when, again, there are other things that have even worse, as in, you know, tangible negative impacts on women like Obamacare. (Examples one, two and three as to why Obamacare is way worse for women than a Victoria’s Secrets’ ad.) Pick your battles people.
Does This Victoria’s Secret Ad Matter?
It shouldn’t but because we live in a world where “if it offends you, you can ban it” it does.
So in light of that, I’m changing my answer.
No. No this does not matter. Pipe down. Maybe find an actually productive and legitimate issue to talk/do something about.
You do you, Victoria’s Secret. Looking forward to the Christmas catalog this year.