January 26, 200619 yr That was 3.5 minutes I'll never get back. But, seriously, where does he get the idea that "most women are offended" by Victoria's Secret? Maybe I hang out with more progressive women, but that statement doesn't fit with my observations.
January 27, 200619 yr His theory is surely applicable to all clothing and cosmetics brands, not just VS. I've never seen an ad with an ugly model or an "everywoman" type of person.
January 27, 200619 yr Well, that depends on your standard of beauty. I've seen models in ads that I thought were ugly.
January 28, 200619 yr I was just curious about what they had. Yeah.. that's what we all said when we were 13 and catched by our parents while searching for porn.. ''Mom.. I was just curious!''
January 28, 200619 yr His theory is surely applicable to all clothing and cosmetics brands, not just VS. I've never seen an ad with an ugly model or an "everywoman" type of person.so you've never seen any ads for Dove, have you ? lol
February 4, 200619 yr To me, commercials is entertainment.Not education.VS ads should remain as "poor man's Playboy", not some crappy feminist agenda that tell girls that they can look beautiful in all shapes and sizes.
February 5, 200619 yr Author That was 3.5 minutes I'll never get back. But, seriously, where does he get the idea that "most women are offended" by Victoria's Secret? Maybe I hang out with more progressive women, but that statement doesn't fit with my observations.You're probably right, but regardless, I agree with his overall conclusion; Victoria's Secret makes money on the promise of sex.I don't think it's a bad thing.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.