Friday, April 23, 2010

ABC & FOX Don't Like Curves

The wonderful people over at Lane Bryant wanted to run an ad featuring their new line of lingerie. They wanted specifically to do this during Dancing With The Stars and American Idol. ABC gave them a big fat no, and FOX made them cut the ad three times and then restricted them to the final ten minutes of the show. Lane Bryant does a great job explaining the double standard and you can read what they say here.


Patty said...

That add is much tamer than anything the Victoria Secret puts on TV.

Syd said...

That might be the hottest commercial I've ever seen. Whew!

Jingle Belle said...

That is one gorgeous woman in that ad. I don't really see what is wrong with it.

Sue Ellen Mishkey said...

I think I read on Dlisted yesterday, that ABC released a statement saying this was a pack of lies. Who knows.

Audrey said...

Her cleavage is amazing! Perhaps subliminally we all know that women with curves are sexier than the skinny counterparts. Or perhaps men are afraid of REAL women.

Kingrey said...

Ditto Jingle Belle! She reminds me of a Venezuelan model and actress. She's gorgeous. Curvy women are best, but I'm Cuban. We like them like that. I guess it's just a matter of culture and taste.

KellyLynn said...

I figure the guys who pulled the ad just got too hot and bothered by it, when they didn't get that reaction watching the ads showing skinny chicks.

jax said...


KellyLynn said...

Linda Holmes over at NPR put together a nice little blog post highlighting some of the "wholesome" DWTS outfits (including - surprise! - a woman dancing around in a black bra and panties). ABC certainly has some explaining to do.

Boriqua said...

I'd rather see beautiful, healthy women like this on TV than the stick figures Victoria's Secret forces on us.

Harriet Hellfire said...

It's not news that media prefers "sexy" child-like models with flat chests and riBs poking out. Often sucking on a finger and looking up into the camera with eyes that say "I AM A HELPLESS VICTIM, YOU CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT WITH ME".

Seeing a grown woman who obviously loves her curvy, fully grown body and flaunts it in a way that seems liberated and independant, really scares people. Sad but true. It is a fucking witch hunt, even in 2010.

Merlin D. Bear said...

Ok... I'm gay, so that probably goes a long way towards explaining my personal reaction towards the commercial... that being what in the hell is the controversy about?
The model is stunning - correction, she's FREAKING ROCK YOUR WORLD STUNNING.
Maybe it's because she's such a refreshing change from the sticks and silicone models everyone else uses?
Can I *please* get a heterosexual male to explain to me just what the problem is? Because I sure don't see one.

Mina said...

I find it so damn ridiculous to read all the time that women 'with curves' are 'real women' and 'healthy women' compared to the 'stick figures'.
Well, guess what, there are 'stick figures' who don't have to starve themselves or stick their fingers down their throats to be thin and just because they have tiny boobs it doesn't make them less of a woman. And you can also be curvy and thin. There's something called hip bones. Some have wide hips and some don't.

Also, it is US who are doing that witch hunt.
It's certainly not helping to make women feel fat and ugly all the time but it's also not helping to refer to women who are naturally skinny or -what I prefer calling them - petite as not being real women or unhealthy women.
There are unhealthy types on both sides.
It's unhealthy to starve yourself but it's also unhealthy to stuff yourself with everything that's not nailed down.

Merlin D. Bear said...

This is an addendum to my previous comment -
I just grabbed a heterosexual male coworker, and without telling him why, requested that he watch the commercial.
After he saw it, I asked him directly, just what was wrong with either the commercial or the model.
His reaction? "Absolutely nothing".
Although he did get a big laugh when I said that as a gay man, I saw the model as "rock your world stunning"... but he did agree with my assessment.
So again, I have to ask... *what* is the controversy?

redhotpepper said...

Um, yeah, they regularly wear less than that on DWTS.

Harriet Hellfire said...

Mina - I see what you're saying and I don't think the shape of your body is what defines your beauty. But I wasn't talking about "petite" women. I was talking about emaciated, waif-like models.

ChasingHeaven said...

This breaks my heart. This commercial is stunning, it's a shame so many aren't able to see it.

Sylvia said...


TFLive said...

I see the reason for the banning...the networks have a "stick figure only" policy. That commercial showed a hot woman that didn't have her ribcage, chest bone, and neck veins bulging out and that is just a no-no for them.

Who is the model btw? Because wow she great eye candy. Want to add that one to my keep an eye on list.

Merlin D. Bear said...

I'm serious...for the bloody life of me I cannot see WHAT the issue is. It can't be the whole "knickers on TV thing", can it? I mean Victoria's Secret does a whole show every year with their products ... So, is it a straight thing?
I mean, after all, one straight coworker does not a scientific study make.
And I for one am dying to figure out what I'm not understanding.
So please, please please...if you understand what the controversy is about, can you please explain it to me? You don't even have to use small words or crayons.
Just tell me.

MCH said...

Heard about this yesterday and was infuriated. Of course its a double standard! The model is GORGEOUS! ABC and FOX are FULL OF YOU KNOW WHAT. I just saw on Inside Edition (don't judge me) that ABC said Lane Bryant was doing this for publicity? Really???? And yes, the girls on DWTS wear FAR less than that.

Mooshki said...

Merlin, I think the controversy is because big women are not supposed to be sexually confident. They are supposed to hide in shame. If you want to understand it better, read Kate Harding's 'Shapely Prose' blog. I discovered it a few months ago, and it really opened my eyes about fat hate.

Robin the Mad Photographer said...

Merlin--what Mooshki said. Fat women, or even women who aren't freakishly thin (no offense intended towards the naturally thin; I'm thinking of the current beauty stereotype, not real live women in the real world) aren't supposed to be confident, or sexy, or in charge of their lives! There's a HUGE industry built up around making sure that women feel awful about themselves, because that way they'll do anything and spend oodles of money to chase after a (usually) unobtainable beauty standard. (I could go on about how too many men are not-so-secretly terrified of strong, confident women, and only seem to be able to relate to women if they're smaller and weaker, not to mention the infantilization of grown women, but I'll spare you the feminist rant.) What a lot of it really comes down to in the end is "FAT WOMEN! EWWWWWW!" and what qualifies as "fat" is getting skinnier & skinnier all the time.

(One of my all-time favorite examples of that last bit: Remember the beaded red dress that Kate Winslet wore in Titantic when she first meets Leo while threatening to jump overboard? Remember how James Cameron was always giving her shit for supposedly being fat? Want to know what size the dress in question was? A 4...Yep, the supposedly fat girl was all of a size 4. Mull that over for a while, will you?)

Alas, I can't watch the video due to my poor little iMac not being able to handle YouTube, but even in the still I can tell she's seriously hot... ;-)

Gretchen said...

Okay, here's my problem with this ad:

That woman is not overweight. She probably couldn't even wear any of Lane Bryant's clothes, which start at size 14. (I know, cuz I wear a size 16 and just bought jeans there yesterday.) I'd put her at a big fat size 10, if even.

Plus she has a perfectly flat stomach. Come ON. Show an actual plus-sized woman and then we can talk.

Harriet Hellfire said...

Yes Gretchen, although she's nice and curvy, it might have been nice if something jiggled a little!

Robin - YES.

libby said...

Robin, I am genetically skinny and now have Crohn's. I have always been described as skinny and have never had a problem looking great in clothes.
I agree w/ you 100% tho. I despise how everything about EVERY woman (including our beautiful and educated FLOTUS) is about her body. Women will always be second-class until we STOP attacking each other. If women spent as much energy AGAINST such judgments and stereotypes, we might just rule the world.

(the commercial is SUPER hot. Loved it, and the model is amazing. I especially love the little breast-jiggle toward the end. WOW!)

selenakyle said...

All I know is Fox News apparently only wants totally whorish women in their employ.

Ever checked out Fox News in the morning? Whenever they have the panel of three "medical experts" there are usually two stiff, buttoned-up men and one totally hot, tan, usually blond, gorgeous, HDTV-ready chick who in NO WAY resembles what or who I want to see on TV commentating as any kind of expert other than on looks or fashion.

And why the living HELL must every "news" lady on Fox News wear a sleeveless sheath dress in the dead cold of winter? With "fuck-me-now" earrings?


selenakyle said...

And I'm with Gretchen. Whether she is a plus-size model or not, NO woman I know who is that voluptuous has a perfectly FLAT belly area.

Please, this model is just like all other models--freaks of nature.

Sorry--she is stunningly gorgeous, don;t get me wrong. But like it or not, she does NOT epitomize the normal, plain woman.


Merlin D. Bear said...

@Mooshki & Robin - Thank you for helping me to understand at least a little bit more.
You've also helped me to understand why I have an issue finding a problem with the ad in the first place.
First, I was raised a Southern Gentleman, plain and simple. I might be gay, however that does not mean I forget for a second the manners I was raised with, especially regarding women.
Mind you, I catch a shitload more grief than you'd expect just because of that. (And for the record, saying "ma'am" is NOT an insult. It means you're female or I have identified you as such, whether or not it's a biological state. Otherwise, I'd say "sir")
Second, I'm Wiccan. In its simplest terms, that means my spirituality is based on a matriarchial system.
All together, that essentially makes me an uber-feminist with a serious tendency to disregard physical attributes in evaluating a person.
Now I'm not by any means blind to external beauty, however it's certainly not a criteria I use in my social interactions.
I wholly agree with Libby, however I can add that based on my studies, this is yet another way that the Judeo-Christian Patriarchy denies women their rightful place and their inherent power.
(hooo-boy, I really didn't mean that to devolve into a philosophical discussion, so I'll now take down my soapbox and sit over here and quietly eat my popcorn)
Thank you one and all for aiding in my education and listening to my rant.
Blessed Be.

Ms.Leigh said...

kidding aside, this is quite possibly the best thing that could have happened for lane bryant. they wanted to make a statement that fuller figured women are every bit as feminine and sexy and sexual and glamorous as their lighter weight counterparts... and it's working. their ad might not be aired heavily, but people are talking about this everywhere and from what i've seen, almost everyone agrees that this commercial is insanely hot!!!

i wish this didn't come to a weight-issue or a discussion of 'you're not a real woman unless you weigh __'. it should be a statement that ALL women have the capability to be sexy and beautiful. it's a state of mind, not a number on the tag in your pants.


Popular Posts from the last 30 days