Victoria's Secret wants your daughters to know what a "perfect body" looks like

I don't expect much from fashion advertising. I know that they're selling an idealized self-image, making people think that you can magically transform into an airbrushed beauty if you just buy their brand. It's a fantasy, like vacation advertising. I get it.

But this mall poster, at the new Victoria's Secret boutique in Ottawa's Rideau Centre, still irked me.

The Rideau Centre, at the nexus of Ottawa's bus routes and downtown business, shopping and tourism streets, is the favoured hangout of teens from across Canada's National Capital Region. This display faces the main escalators that hundreds of young people ride every day. And its implicit message, beneath the pun on the product name, is clear.

More than ever before, today's young women see the female body exposed, critiqued, and brutally shamed in the public and private media to which they are addicted. And the young men grow up in a time when viewing and judging women's bodies is a national pastime.

I'm not a prude. I think that nudity and healthy sexual interest are completely harmless. But setting up impossible visual standards for women (at least, those who don't spend four hours a day in the gym before being digitally smoothed and contoured) and emblazoning the words "the perfect body" over them is bound to cause insecurity in girls and impossible "standards" for the boys who will date them.

Add to this that the Ottawa VS includes the "Pink" sub brand — aimed at 15-to-22 year olds — and this gets even more creepy.

Do better, Victoria's Secret. We know you can.

Is this any way to change the perception of women in tech?

An specialized underwear company called "Dear Kate" had a cheeky idea to promote its wares while also celebrating diverse women who are crashing the technology industry "boys' club": get a bunch of female CEOs of tech companies to pose in their skivvies for the online catalogue.

Dear Kate is not an ordinary lingerie company. Its products were originally designed as a less-Dependsish for women suffering from incontinence, and has since branched out into promoting leakproof "period panties."

The Drum reports that the Ada Collection is named after Ada Lovelace, the woman who created the first algorithm intended to be carried out by a machine. And despite criticism, the women participating felt they were doing the right thing:

Adda Birnir, founder of SkillCrush [seen below] admitted to Time that she did have doubts: “I run a company and you’re trying to have gravitas when you’re a CEO. I was a little bit like, ‘Is it a bad idea to participate in an underwear modelling shoot?'” 

“But it’s a feminist company…and I think it’s so important to support companies that are doing work like that. That overshadowed any of my concerns.”

These women are clearly not just models, but willing participants in whatever this is trying to say.

Adrants quotes Dear Kate CEO, Julie Sygiel: "I think a lot of traditional lingerie photo shoots depict women as simply standing there looking sexy. They're not always in a position of power and control. In our photo shoots it's important to portray women who are active and ambitious. They're not just standing around waiting for things to happen."

However the blog's author, Steve Hall, counters:

Hey, I'm all for women wearing underwear and lingerie as often as possible but when so many are doing so much to battle stigmas and stereotypes relating to the perception of women in the workplace -- and the world at large, this just smacks the face of logic.

I'm not so sure, though. While this could have come off like the European Union's appalling "Science: It's a Girl Thing" video, it just doesn't feel the same. The photos are contrived, sure, and even a little silly. But SOMEONE has to make and model underwear for women. Why not use the opportunity to also demonstrate and inspire female leadership in business and technology?

All images via Dear Kate

It's not really up to me to decide if this is good or bad for women overall, because I'm not a woman. In my opinion, this campaign doesn't feel degrading or objectifying. But I urge women readers to weigh in.

Now, THIS is a bold lingerie ad

Photo from Forever Yours "Bra School". H/T ABC

Elly Mayday is a Canadian model who, at the age of 25, is living with a rare form of ovarian cancer. A year ago, she was the star model for Forever Yours Lingerie of Vancouver. However, since her diagnosis last summer, her treatment has changed her appearance considerably and now she is... still the star model for Forever Yours Lingerie of Vancouver.

Via Forever Yours

Sonya Perkins, co-founder of Forever Yours Lingerie, told ABC news that she first hired Ms. Mayday for a Valentine's Day shoot in 2013. "At the time, she was a size 14 and had a nice bust and a small waist and big, full hips and behind," she said. "We wanted to represent that look." 

While Ms. Perkins was initially uneasy with Ms. Mayday's determination to keep working in front of the camera, she stood by her model. And now it is paying off.

"In the lingerie industry, it's not something you do," Elly Mayday explained. "It's all about long hair and big breasts and arched backs. But it's important to show what real women look like underneath their clothes. Most people have some issue they are dealing with."

Now, both model and brand are making headlines around the world. And the Elly Mayday fanpage on Facebook has almost 84,000 followers.

On posting the Forever Yours online ad on her page, Ms. Mayday was effusive in her appreciation of the support she's receiving from the lingerie brand and its customers:

It's a wonderful thing to have such caring people to work with. They have supported me through thick and thin — literally— sickness and health and are still with me today.  

As you can see this photo represents more than just a sports bra. Its represent the acceptance we all need to have for one another as well as ourselves. Thank you Sonya & Brian. Getting to know both of you has been a true blessing and you will always have a place in my heart for what you have done for me.  

Over 7,000 dollars was given to me to help me pay for unexpected costs, like my needles this week that cost $1000 not covered by provincial health care. I bought a new juicer and have been able to afford to eat organically as well. just to list a few things.. 

$2 from every pair of underwear sold as well as in-store and online donations. What an incredible gift. I am so blessed♥

I can never thank you enough for the support.pun intended

So, while American Eagle is getting virtual hugs and high fives for its commitment to not photoshopping its typical-looking models,  elsewhere there are brands and models who are willing to show us what it really takes to do something about the fashion industry's body image problem.

Update: Apologies to Sonja Perkins for initially calling her "Jenkins." It was an error compounded from the ABC article.

Is this really "redefining beauty"?

There's a quite a bit of backlash against excessive Photoshopping of models over the past few years. From snarky comments by subjects who don't recognize themselves post-PS and anti-Photoshop marketing campaigns to outright bans on excessive photo alteration, retouching has never been more in the public eye. In some cases, the backlash can even be accused of going too far.

Some magazines, like Seventeen have responded to public pressure by promising to stop airbrushing models to death. And of course some fashion brands are jumping onboard.

Which brings us to this:

The "all natural" approach by aerie, the lingerie brand associated with American Eagle, is understandably getting noticed. AdFreak's Roo Ciambriello calls them "Simple, Revolutionary Lingerie Ads." But as Adrants' ever-subtle Steve Hall points out, "Of course we're never going to see girls in these campaigns that aren't already naturally hot."

While it's laudable that the models don't have artificial thigh gaps or plasticized skin, they are not exactly ordinary people. Not that we should entirely expect them to be, I suppose. Models are hired based on their looks. But attempting to take the higher ground by saying the brand represents "the real you" can expose it to greater scrutiny as well.

Remember when a Dove "Real Beauty" casting call was leaked? It specified "BEAUTIFUL ARMS AND LEGS AND FACE WILL BE SHOWN! MUST HAVE FLAWLESS SKIN, NO TATTOOS OR SCARS! Well groomed and clean...Nice Bodies..NATURALLY, FIT Not too Curvy Not too Athletic." (Caps theirs.)

Underwear models, like swimsuit models, tend to have pretty "flawless" appearance to begin with. I get it. Fashion is aspirational, and people want to believe that the clothes will make them seem sexy, or beautiful, or powerful, or cool, or whatever the brand promises. It always has, even long before Photoshop existed.

However, the question for me is whether a lingerie brand that features beautiful young women lounging around provocatively in underwear should be celebrated for not gilding the lily (so to speak) by altering them to remove their few "flaws."

Maybe just a little bit, but not too much. It's still feeding into female stereotypes of what acceptably sexy bodies look like, and how their sexuality is presented to the world.

Another brand makes "getting banned" part of its marketing strategy

If I was just in this for the money, I'd consider opening up an ad agency that specializes in things that offend people, like this:



Really, what's the point in bothering with things like research, strategy and creativity, when you can just put a half-dressed woman in an awkwardly-sexualized context and have men leer at her?

In this case, Innerware, an Australian lingerie retailer, managed to do it in a way that upset prudes and feminists alike.

Here are some sample complaints made to Australia's Advertising Standards Authority:

It disgusted me and it is degrading to women. I thought it was an ad for the sex industry when I first saw it.  

I feel the ad represents low level porn.  This ad offends me because the purpose is to advertise women's lingerie, not to objectify women and promote attention by strange men as the main goal of wearing lingerie. This is demeaning to a lot of women. The ad is more aimed at men than women, yet it is advertising a product made for women.

It objectifies women and makes them out to be a piece of meat. it doesn't actually sell the lingerie at all only the fact that men want to service you. It's filth!!! 

And here is the advertiser's response:

The concept is intended to be quirky and tongue in cheek. In no way was there any intention  to discriminate against, objectify, exploit or degrade women. Innerware is a retailer of ladies underwear and the actress was wearing their product.  

The woman is portrayed as being very confident and in control. In absolutely no way is she undermined by the males in the ad. Her attire, although revealing, is classy and covers all genitalia. There is no nudity in this ad. 

"All genitalia"? Are there new genital parts of which I was not aware?

The "she's in control" argument is an old one, but it never seems to go away. Nonetheless, this pointless ad did what it set out to do — get the brand talked about.

And interestingly, the ASA bought the advertiser's rationale and found the ad neither "objectification," "exploitative," nor "degrading":

The Board noted that the product advertised is lingerie and considered that whilst a depiction of a woman in lingerie is not of itself exploitative and/or degrading in the Board's view the depiction of a woman in her lingerie asking a tyre fitter if he can "fit" her is a purposeful use of her sexual appeal to attract the attention of the viewer to the product being advertised.  The Board noted that the woman deliberately dressed in a manner that will attract the attention of the employees of the workshop and that she appears to be enjoying the attention of the men who work there. The Board considered that although the advertisement does use sexual appeal, it is not portrayed in a manner that is exploitative and degrading to women. 

Instead, they banned the ad because of "sexualisation":

However the Board considered that the advertisement did have a strong sexual suggestion with the combination of the woman wearing lingerie, her sexualised strutting, the focus on her body and the sexualised conversation. In the Board‟s view the level of sexualisation was not sensitive even to an M [mature audiences only] classification.  Based on the above the Board considered that the advertisement depicted images which did not treat the issue of sex, sexuality and nudity with sensitivity to the relevant audience and determined that the advertisement did breach Section 2.4 of the Code. 

So sexism is just dandy on Australian TV, but there's something wrong with "bein' sexy".

This push-up bra gag has been done before

Ads of The World just posted this push-up bra ad from Thailand. No agency credits.



Seem familiar? You might be thinking of a similar Dutch campaign, starring Andrej Pejić, from a couple of years ago:

Nonetheless, this new manipulation of gender ideas will probably get some attention.

Sex as predation: Nothing new here

Via peepgame.net

It's a very old, and very tired, cliché. Women hunt men. Men hunt women:



And yet the ad industry keeps churning it up. The latest is from Baci lingerie:



Just goes to show that originality and creative storytelling are less valued in the ad world than good old tits and ass. (Or as Don Cornelius' character in Tapeheads called them, "Production Value")

Tip via Ads of The World

Bra campaign attempts to redefine "MILF"

What?

Online lingerie company True&Co is hoping to earn some buzz by branding their new custom-fitted bra campaign as "Mother I'd Like to Fit" or "MILF".

Of course, "Fit" is not the f-word used in the more commonly used acronym. And they launched it using photos submitted by fashion bloggers who for some reason wanted their children to be in these pictures.

Reactions on Facebook ranged from "LOL! Love this" to "Nothing funny about this Milf joke".

Now the company is running a Mother's Day contest:

I really don't mind if women want to jokingly self-identify as mothers someone would like to... umm.. fuck. I just find that including their kids in the picture is kind of icky.

Tip via Adrants

Is this Chinese lingerie campaign "criminally sexy"?

Here in the west, some of us worry about how sexualized ads will influence the attitudes of young people (and society in general) about women.

In China, however, this relatively-tame campaign featuring Taiwanese model/fashion designer Lin Chi-ling has been banned for fear it may "raise crime rates."

According to China News 24, though, the TV ad was actually banned for being "too sexy," while the posters were the ones thought to incite criminal activity.

Can anyone source those? I just have to know.

Tip via Adrants

In the Eurozone, even economic collapse is sexy

You've got to hand it to the Europeans. With economic crisis now a way of life, and unemployment and suicides on the rise, there's always time for sex in advertising.

This in part of Blush lingerie's "Invest in Love" campaign by Glow, Germany. Appropriate? Fashion has always been about fantasy. I guess the escapism of this campaign could distract some people from their woes. But it seems a little insensitive.

See the whole campaign at Ads of The World.

2 Girls, 2 Hop Balls advertise insurance in Romanian

This bizarre ad (from 2010) is for Asirom, a Romanian Insurance company. I don't speak the language, but the context and Latinate nouns are easy enough to figure out. If you're into that kind of thing.



If you're still confused, Marketing Paradise explains (loosely translated from the French): This advertisement explains what to do in case of a (sexy) car crash if one (sexy) driver has no insurance. In this case, it is necessary to involve the (sexy) police.

Tip via Illegal Advertising

Bra ads on coffee cups make terrible pun

Reminds me of this:

Actually it's... it's quite, you know... typical behaviour when you have this kind of dysfunctional group dynamic. You know, this kind of co-dependent, emotionally stunted, sitting in your stupid coffee house with your stupid big cups which, I'm sorry, might as well have nipples on them, and you're all, like, "Oh, define me! Define me! Love me, I need love!" - Friends Episode 1.13 ("The One With The Boobies")

Well, there you go.

Ads by  glow, Germany, for Blush Lingerie. Via Ads of The World.

F'd Ad Fridays: Boyfriend forgot Valentines? Sexually assault him!

This video by the always-classy Agent Provocateur manages to insult man and women alike. I guess that's sort-of equal opportunity.




That said, imagine the scene with the roles reversed.

F'd Ad Fridays: Christm-ass outfit

Via Yandy. Classy.

F'd Ad Fridays: Scarlett and... Reet?

Perhaps it works if you say his name in a German accent.

Frankly, I don't give a damn.

Agency: Glow, Berlin

via I Believe in Advertising

F'd Ad Fridays: Bondage, torture, humiliation and suicide are what it takes to sell underwear these days?

I skipped through parts of this video. Not because of the disturbing content, but because it was just so goddamned pretentious.  (Note to self: beware of ads with credits that start "A Film By...")



Either I, or the makers of this video, completely misunderstand what people find "sexy".

I thought it was an awful, more than occasionally offensive, waste of time. What do you think?

Via Animal New York

F'd Ad Fridays: Lingerie of comic proportions

Comic books are notorious for exaggerating human morphology, with impossibly muscled men and women with extreme hip/waist/boob ratios.

Now Lingerie brand Spencer's offers flesh-and-blood women the opportunity to show off comic proportions in the bedroom with superhero jammies:

She-Hulk (centre) seems inspired by fan art.

Captain America appears to have wet herself.

What's next, an adult version of this for the guys?