Okay, what is the big deal about this Lane Bryant lingerie ad...

[WCGreen]

For those of us who like a voluptuous women versus the waifs who look as if they would crack in half if confronted with a big comfy loving hug, this is an insult.

Guess who is crying out the loudest, ABC and Fox.

Disney who believes all girls should look like the interchangeable heroine with girls jammed into the minuscule waif waist and Fox, whose news network celebrates the thin railed women, ala Annie got her gun.

Well, to that I say bring on the real women, the women who care more about live than how they look to some fashion designer who must be held captive in Milan, Paris and New York in some kind of kiddie porn version of hell...

The "high" fashion world is the snarkiest snarkers of all, convincing everyone who doesn't conform to their size -1 perception of women is just not worth even their contempt...

I say bring on the real women and fuck your opinions of how a woman should look...

[Skittles]

1. they don't use stick figures

it ain't natural, ya know? Because, you know, only SKINNY gals can be sexy :thumbsdown:

[redqueen]

2. It must be pretty bad,,,

nobody says boo about those Victoria's Secret ads, so these must show an awful lot more.

[WCGreen]

5. There is a whole lot more of the woman in the show that five of those

six pac ab girls who sneer at people from their fashion pedestal.

http://news.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474978195768

[redqueen]

13. WTF?

That got banned?

I'm astounded. Was that Paris Hilton Hardee's commercial banned? Cause I seem to remember it being waaaay worse.

[WCGreen]

43. It is ridiculous isn't it...

[Pushed To The Left]

47. That's the ad that's creating controversy??! That doesn't make sense.

Doesn't seem any racier than most lingerie ads.

[Odin2005]

66. She's HAWT!

[gmoney]

3. link?

what is this of which you speak?

[Aristus]

4. Yeah, link please. I caught a brief glimpse of it on the news, and haven't seen it since.

It looked pretty hot. I loves me some curvy women... :evilgrin::wow:

[WCGreen]

6. here it is...

http://news.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474978195768

[TreasonousBastard]

8. Link you want? Man, this is so smokin hot...

I'll be in my bunk.

(For a week, maybe)

http://www.youtube.com/lanebryantcurves

[WCGreen]

10. A model with an innie....

Instead of an outie that looks like it could kick your ass...

[XemaSab]

19. She's SMOKIN' HOT

And she's hardly fat.

I should be so lucky as to have her figure.

[KamaAina]

67. Wowie zowie!

:loveya:

[Odin2005]

69. DITTO!

[TreasonousBastard]

9. See replies below

[caty]

7. I've seen a lot

of ads that make that one look tame. If this is being banned, then they have a problem.

[jmm]

11. Real women?

"High" fashion may have a tendency to expect people to conform to a narrow definition of beauty but all singling out some women as real does is tries to create a new narrow standard. Real women come in all shapes and sizes.

[redqueen]

14. Good point.

'Full-figured' seems to describe me well enough. My more slender sisters are no less real than I am. :)

[WCGreen]

15. But that definition of beauty is harmful too many impressionable people...

Notice I said people and not just women. There are a whole lot of men who view that unrealistic version of femininity as the most desirable and then belittle women who do not fit that strata of feminity...

In short, it's not realistic to hold up an ideal that is virtually unattainable unless your whole job is to look just like that...

But that is my humble opinion...

[Orrex]

17. It's still a belittling of women who happen to be naturally slender

To use the terms "real" or "actual" or "natural" or the like when describing full-figured women is to declare that women of other body types are somehow less "real" or "actual" or "natural" or whatever.

[Maine-ah]

61. thank you!!

[Odin2005]

70. Women who are naturally slender actually look attractive, not anorexic.

[jmm]

79. I've never dieted and I've been accused of having an eating disorder.

I never work out either.

If I'm eating a salad I need a cheeseburger. If I'm eating ice cream I have to be throwing it up afterwards. And of course since I weigh 125 people are entitled to make wild assumptions and ask me personal questions about how I can have curves and be slender. Many people think it's ok to comment and joke about my size as if my small waist line can't come from the fact that I'm a very active person.

Unless somebody is a person's doctor, therapist, or knows them very well they are in no position to judge if they have an eating disorder.

[Flaxbee]

73. thanks.

I feel pretty real and actual, as a *naturally* slim woman.

[Orrex]

80. Well, clearly you're artificial. You were probably made in a lab somewhere.

:evilgrin:

[jmm]

18. What's harmful is picking one standard of beauty and

spreading the idea that some women's bodies are not realistic and virtually unattainable unless their whole job is to look just like that. Some women struggle to lose weight. Some women struggle to gain it. To single out specific bodies types as more attractive than others is what leads to women being belittled.

[tango-tee]

23. That's true.

Many women struggle to lose weight, some women struggle to gain. When, all in all, there's someone out there who will love each of us just the way we are. But, and that's important, a woman needs to love and enjoy the body she has. We can tweak a bit here and there, but overall we need to simply accept the basic shape our bodies are.

[WCGreen]

44. Exactly what I meant...

Those who do not conform to the standards set by the fashion industry...

Well, to that I say bring on the real women, the women who care more about live than how they look to some fashion designer...

To be real is the standard I was pointing to...

[Forkboy]

12. If that's bannable ship me to a country where it isn't.

And is "bannable" a word?

[hippywife]

16. Shit!

I only wish I looked that good. I think it's an awesome ad. :hi:

[BuelahWitch]

21. LOL me too!

:hi:

[CaliforniaPeggy]

26. Me too, my dear hippywife!

However.......there is one thing I have that that woman has: Confidence!

If you like who you are and how you look, then you have confidence.

And that can (and often does) make the difference...;)

[tango-tee]

20. Being on the voluptuous side myself...

...I love that ad!

What's all the uproar about? She looks "womanly" in the best sense. And, in my experience, there are lots of men who love our shape.

[WCGreen]

22. Here is one...

[tango-tee]

24. Thanks!

I have boobs, I have butt. And all of it is here to stay.

[one_voice]

28. I have...

Boobs, butt, and hips. I think women that are larger on top need to carry a little more through the hips, and butt to balance them.

I don't have a flat tummy like the model. No matter how hard I try I can't get rid of the little "pooch" belly my kids left me. :-)

My sister is very petite and proportioned just right. My granny is top heavy, but very, very, petite, she always looks like she's going to fall over.

I'd also like to say, kudos to all the men who are speaking up in defense of fuller figured women. Nice to see that.

The model is gorgeous! It's a shame full figured models don't get more exposure. Their confidence would be an inspiration to a fuller figured young girl.

Size 16 model..

[tango-tee]

33. Oops. Forgot the hips.

Girl, I got those as well.

:hug:

[LeftyMom]

25. I love how you decry size discrimination with more blatant size discrimination.

Apparently in your view smaller women are not "real" and are "interchangable" and admiring them is "kiddie porn." Good to know.

[Schema Thing]

29. agree. that woman is hot.

and so is this one:


(personality aside anyway)

[WCGreen]

30. I was going to retort...

But why bother...

[Orrex]

31. Exactly

She pretty much utterly destroyed your post, so any retort about it would be pretty much useless.


Glad we're all on the same page.

[WCGreen]

34. Destruction is in the eyes of the beholder....

And I guess so is a sense of humor...

[Orrex]

35. So you find it funny to require women to achieve a standard that may be unnatural for them?

Sorry, I don't see the humor.

And if you can't see how LM destroyed your OP, then I don't know what to tell you.

[WCGreen]

37. Well, a lot of people did get what I was going for and did not

automatically take offense where none was intended.

I can't believe you think I intentionally set out to dis women.

And if you do, then I don't know what to tell you...

[Orrex]

39. The fact that you did it unthinkingly is the problem

It doesn't matter that you didn't "intentionally set out to dis women." From what you've posted, to be a "real woman" means that the woman can't be slender.

What would be the response if someone were to claim that "real women" can't be full-figured?


The point--which you seem not to be getting--is that phrases such as "real women" or "actual sized women" or "natural women" are used in a way that is explicitly belittling to women who are slight of frame.

My point--which you seem also to be missing--is that the phrases themselves should be abandoned.


If you agree that such phrases ("real women" et al) are insulting when used in that way, then please state this clearly, and don't try to act as though I've gone out of my way to be offended.

For the record, I'm not offended; I just don't know why you find it acceptable--and by your own assertion funny--to impose a standard of appearance upon women.

[tango-tee]

38. No, Orrex, I don't think the post was destroyed.

Look at all the positive responses. And so many of them from women.

Hey, we have smokin' hot ladies right here on DU.

Here's to you, sisters!

[tango-tee]

32. Dear LeftyMom, I really don't think the OP meant to belittle anyone.

When all is said and done, we women need to rid ourselves of a particular standard of beauty "someone out there" is trying to impose on us. I'm old enough to have gone through the whole "you gotta look like this" cookie-cutter routine, and have finally come out on the other end saying "Eff that. THIS is me. Take it or leave it."

Now, let's look at the men. There is ever much more pressure on them in the looks department. Youthful, strong, six-pack abs, wrinkle-free, what have you. Men have only recently started getting a taste of what it's like to attempt attaining a certain standard in their appearance - as dictated by marketing.

What's reassuring to me: Whether man or woman... we come in all shapes and sizes, bald and hairy, skin colors, from so many different cultures and traditions, have our particular senses of humor and triggers that will set us off.

And that's why there is someone out there for everyone. Someone who will look at us and say "Wow".

[one_voice]

36. Well said...

We need to get away from what we've been conditioned to think is beautiful or a perfect image. Men or women. We should learn to celebrate who we are, and not what someone(s) tells us we should be.

:toast:

[LeftyMom]

40. His post was perfectly clear.

Larger women are "real." Interest in smaller women is analogous to "kiddie porn."

[WCGreen]

42. I said bring on the real women..,

Not just the plus size models...

Real women who don't try to maim themselves to live up to the standards of beauty set by the fashion world...


"Well, to that I say bring on the real women, the women who care more about live than how they look to some fashion designer...'


That is exactly what I wrote and it was not prefaced by only Large women need apply...


You made that leap.

[Orrex]

45. Don't blame LM for your imprecise writing

For those of us who like a voluptuous women versus the waifs who look as if they would crack in half if confronted with a big comfy loving hug, this is an insult.

Guess who is crying out the loudest, ABC and Fox.

Disney who believes all girls should look like the interchangeable heroine with girls jammed into the minuscule waif waist and Fox, whose news network celebrates the thin railed women, ala Annie got her gun.

Well, to that I say bring on the real women, the women who care more about live than how they look to some fashion designer who must be held captive in Milan, Paris and New York in some kind of kiddie porn version of hell...

The "high" fashion world is the snarkiest snarkers of all, convincing everyone who doesn't conform to their size -1 perception of women is just not worth even their contempt...

I say bring on the real women and fuck your opinions of how a woman should look...

Well, let's see.

You made a point of specifically praising "voluptuous women," contrasting them with "the waifs," the "girls jammed into minuscule waif waist," and "the thin railed women," all of whom you attacked.

You then moved immediately to "bring on the real women." The only reasonable inference, based on what you wrote, is that "voluptuous women" are "real women," while thin women are not.

If you truly meant to refer to all women who don't obsessively cling to a misguided and anorexic ideal of beauty, then you should have stated this. Instead, you praised full-figured women, attacked slender women, and then complained when people called you on it.


What you're attempting now is known in political circles as a "clarification" of your earlier remarks.


Here's how you clarify your position: restate that position unambiguously and acknowledge that it was your imprecise writing that caused people to misconstrue your intent. Don't blame the reader for inferring something that you claim not to have implied; doing so only makes you look like you're trying to pin your imprecision on somebody else.

[WCGreen]

46. Only because the voluptuous woman was the focus of the banning....

And I did clearly state that moving from the specific to the general by stating...


Well, to that I say bring on the real women, the women who care more about live than how they look to some fashion designer...


I meant life and not live, for that I apologies, but clearly this takes the specific, voluptuous women, to the general, "the women who care more about about live(life) than who they look to some fashioh designer,' just as I meant it to be.

That's my point. That's what I meant. If you read more into it, well, then that's your problem, not mine.

[Orrex]

53. You cling to the phrase "real women" as if that phrase weren't the exact problem

If you'd ask them, I'm sure that even those "kiddie porn" "waifs" whom you decry would consider themselves real women. In every post in this thread, and with each clarification, you make a woman's "realness" contingent upon whether or not she adheres to some standard of appearance.

Regardless of your subsequent spin, the structure of your original post clearly identified "voluptuous women" with "the women who care more about life" while directly implying that the "anorexic" "waifs" don't care about life or are less "real."


I understand that you're now claiming that you didn't mean it like that, and I even understand that you truly might not think that way. Nevertheless, that's how you wrote it--you made a deliberate choice to use the common phrase "real women" to criticize women whom you contrasted with full-figured women. Your original post gave no indication that you were referring to women in general, and in the absence of that indication there was no reason to assume that that's what you meant.

That's my point. That's what I meant. If you read more into it, well, then that's your problem, not mine.

But I'm not "reading more into it." I'm reading exactly what you wrote and responding to it. You are now writing more into it by pretending that you made statements in your OP that you clearly did not. If you're clarifying your OP now, that's fine, but (again) don't blame the reader for reading what you wrote--that's your problem.

[WCGreen]

54. Quit parsing...

It makes you look silly...

And you are the one who is making an issue out of this...

[Orrex]

56. Quit posting. It makes *you* look silly.

I'm not making an issue out of it. It is an issue, in large measure because people like you make a woman's "realness" contingent upon your opinion of her size or appearance.

You can't around terms like "waif," "anorexic," and "kiddie porn" without taking some responsibility for your rhetoric. Instead, you blame the reader for responding to what you wrote rather than to your post hoc explanation of what you "meant."


Spin spin spin.

[MiddleFingerMom]

75. my my my my my -- did I take a wrong turn and end up in GD?

[redqueen]

83. *roffle*

[Lil Missy]

27. Saw the ad, and I WISH I looked like that!

[madrchsod]

41. wow.....all i can say is

(paraphrasing)


"...she`s a built for comfort

she ain`t a-built for speed

and she`s got ev`rything

that a good boy needs..."

:smoke:

[Pushed To The Left]

48. I've always been attracted to women of all shapes and sizes. Waifs, BBWs, etc

My girlfriend falls into the BBW category, and I have never been more attracted to anybody!

[BlooInBloo]

49. The girl in that ad is no Alyssa Milano, but she's pretty hot. Defo no good reason to ban the ad.

[MiddleFingerMom]

50. I'm a little hesitant to post on this...

.
...because I watch so LITTLE television.
.
I have never seen "Dancing with the Stars" or whatever the latest incarnation
of the dancing competition show is. I've watched some of "American Idol" ONLY
because it runs above the prevue channel when I'm trying to locate a watchable
movie. I watch 10 seconds of that Kardassian(?) show and move on (every time I
hear the name, I think it's one of the shady rivals on Star Trek). I have never
seen Kate or Jon on anything but some sad 30-second mention on the "news".
Back in the day, I watched a minute or two of that early MTV reality show (was
it "The Real Life") and recognized it as so much annoying drama. I've seen a
couple of minutes of a Survivor "vote".
.
I don't know just HOW "racy" ads on TV in general are now. I haven't noticed
any ads that are particularly racy during what I do watch, but I'm not a very
good monitor for public "decency" from the get-go. Hell, I can't even be sure
how people on this THREAD are defining "racy".
.
I do know this. People really SEEM to be presuming... assuming... interpreting...
reading (and perhaps reaching) between the lines for evidence that the networks
are reacting negatively to these ads because the model is "full-figured" (and she's
not VERY full-figured -- though admittedly larger than what has been the standard
for so long).
.
I'm reaching, also... reaching back to what stirred MY prurient interests when
I was MOST stirrable. Pamela Anderson in an uber-racy ballroom dancing dress
would not have stirred my efraction... I mean... would not have stirred me a
fraction as much as that woman in her UNDERWEAR would have. And not just
underwear... there were some quick highly erotic visual shots in that ad (one
of them made me laugh because it made me think of the very funny animated
online image of Vince Vaughn motorboating). They were NOT just images of a
woman getting dressed.
.
Often, I have to have sexual hints WHAP me in the face before I realize what's
going on. Oh, I'm VERY quick to pick up innuendo (he said "in you end, OH!!),
but I often miss the stories running just below the surface. THAT said, the
very OBVIOUS story line there was that the woman WAS on her way to have a
nooner (which is a nice way of saying that she was on her way to an encounter
where she and her partner were going to mutually fuck each others brains out).
Part of that CONTENT was that she was very obviously leaving the house with
nothing on under her COAT but some very hot lingerie.
.
I find it VERY hard to believe that a network would reject an ad because the
model was not a waif. THAT is in the realm of the ad agency or the client.
The network is going to take on revenue and is not considered "responsible"
just because they don't meet the arbitrary "standards" of the "ideal woman".
.
They ARE held responsible for showing what could very well be seen as very
objectionable CONTENT... and the fact that the model is going out in nothing
but her coat and underwear for a nooner would have stirred the prurient
interests of that young man I was... hell, it's pretty hot NOW.
.
I really think people may be projecting their OWN agendas onto the networks
in this case. I really think it has much more to do with content than body
image.
.
I also think that the question of body image is an eminently important issue
to discuss and debate and CHANGE -- there are far too many people whose
lives are greatly DIMINISHED due to the poor self-images they have because
of standards and values promoted by and FOR MERCHANDIZING PURPOSES.
THAT said... I don't think this is the right target for those concerns.
.
But, like I said... I watch so LITTLE television that maybe every other ad is
every BIT as sexually loaded as that one. I haven't noticed that in the little
bit of advertising that I do see (except for late late night ads about boner
pills and caricaturesque DECIDEDLY UNattractuve squealing gone-wild
boob-shakers).
.
Late late night ads.
.
Now... whether the CONTENT is objectionable is a valid point -- (personally...
NO WAY) -- but American culture is often ridiculously, and yes, sometimes
arbitrarily Puritanical in its perspectives.
.
Now, if you'll excuse me... I'd like to do some more research on that ad.
.
This may take a while.
.
("You WISH it would take a while"... ... ... she said all-too-well-knowingly.)
.

[tango-tee]

51. Tee-hee-hee.

:hi:

[madmom]

57. When they deem it perfectly acceptable to show a commercial where

the neighborhood ladies are wiggling with anticipation at sitting on santa bob's boner, the enzyte commercial, I think the nooner is very tame.

[redqueen]

58. Exactly. (nt)

[Orrex]

62. Do Fox and ABC run those Enzyte ads?

On their basic networks?


I wasn't aware of that. If so, that's a clear double standard.

[Mopar151]

52. I strongly suspect it was a size-0 that got that banned n/t

[Yavin4]

55. I Need More Information To Make A Judgment About That Ad

Perhaps a DVD worth of video with that model wearing various other Lane Bryant materials. Perhaps other models as well posing and wearing these materials.

This is all in the interest of science!

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

59. I haven't seen the ad,

but I have always been a little suspicious of men who like women who look like pre-pubescent boys.

[MorningGlow]

60. I read something about it online (entertainment news site--don't remember which one)

and the info implied that the Lane Bryant ad showed too much cleavage because of the big, voluptuous boobage. Sounded like a cheap excuse, unless they mean that real-boob cleavage is more titillating (yeah pun intended) than small-boob gap? Or is fake-boob cleavage different? :shrug: If so, is it a backhanded compliment...?

[keroro gunsou]

63. all this talk about a standard

of beauty.... here's mine. a decent personality.

it's more important to me that the lady i'm with is nice and forgiving of my... err... hobbies than how she looks.

eye candy is just that, candy. it helps if the lady in question has some substance beneath the sugar-coating.

just my opinion...

[seabeyond]

74. and refreshing for merely an opinion.

an obvious, so easily ignored today.

[keroro gunsou]

81. thanks

i'm used to being ignored by ladies in the real world. i don't consider the internet (much less DU) to be the real world. i'm not conforming to some male-standard of beauty, so by extension, my opinions are worth less in the real world.

don't mind me, i'm crabby.... :grr:

[seabeyond]

82. lol

i am sorry you are crabby today. hope tomorrow is better. though crabby serves well some times.

what is the obvious, is who the person is a lot to do with attractive. and who ignores that are the men on the net, not that they actually behave that way in real life. the refreshing, is you making the statement on the net, as opposed to joining in with the sophomoric males.

and i am sorry if the ladies ignore you. my son at times perceives that, and not always or even often true. he doesn't pick up on their subtle signs and he is a bet shy, just learning.

thanks for your post

[RagAss]

64. Have they've forgotten the 60's and true beauty like this ??....how sad.. ....

[Odin2005]

65. I like women that have some curves in them, not just skin and bones.

YAY FOR REAL WOMEN. I've tale a size 14 woman over a size 4 woman any day.

I have a friend who is an attractive, tall, very broad-framed woman and she is "Obese" by her BMI even though she doesn't look "fat" at all and she is very insecure about her appearance because she is technically "obese". It is fucking sad that perfectly attractive women are being labeled "fat".

[blueamy66]

78. And per the poster upstream,

us thin woman are labeled "pre-pubescent boys".

[lukasahero]

85. Guess we'll never be dating then

I like men with brains and heart, not ones that judge a woman by her dress size - in either direction.

I was a size 0 - 4 until I hit 45. Sorry to break it to you, but I was just small, not sick.

And oh yeah, last time I checked, I really was a woman.

[MrsBrady]

68. I just saw that ad...

there is much worse than that all over the tv...wtf is their problem?

Seems to me like they just don't like women having any kind of power, whether it be sexual, political, or otherwise.

I mean what if all of us curvy, sexy, size 14/16 women felt good about ourselves? OH NOES...we can't have that, now, can we? :sarcasm:
You mean I don't have to base my self worth on what a man or, f-ing heaven forbid, a CORPORATION, thinks about how I look? :sarcasm:
You mean I'm not bound to some kind of stereotype to keep me in bondage to an ideal so that I'm distracted by the fact that I have a mind? :sarcasm:

And even though its not the only thing on my mind...you mean us size 16 women want to look good, have some fun, and wear pretty things too?
How dare us larger girls want to feel sexy! How horrible!!!! :sarcasm:

you mean my husband, who actually DOES look like a runway model ( luck me :) ), might be attracted to a woman that is too short and according to the system, too big? :sarcasm:

[Odin2005]

71. This guy says +1,000,000,000,000

[Flaxbee]

72. wow... that's a great ad!

And NOTHING compared with Victoria's Secret ads, or at least nothing is exposed in the LB ads that isn't exposed in the VS ads (or a variety of other non-lingerie ads, I might add... )

She looks fantastic. I'd love to have some of her curves. Love that ad, I think it's funny and sexy and Fox and ABC are just freaks.

ABCFamily has asshats like Joel Osteen and freaking PAT ROBERTSON (700 Club) on in the evenings; they're just sanctimonious hypocritical turds. No wonder ABC nixed Boston Legal :D

[whistler162]

76. IMO... the text that the McRib is available again.is a problem

other than that no problem.

[guitar man]

77. Beautiful women come in all sizes

Thin, plump, short, tall, whatever, I can think of examples of beautiful women in every category.

But as for my personal preference, I like 'em on the big and bouncy side, so much that a married a beautiful big n bouncy woman :P

[Iggo]

84. delete -- not for this crowd.

:hide: