So they are saying sexy doesn't have a size. Again, I think the use of real women there is more of the average woman rather than the image of women that is shown in media that represents a very small minority of women (tall, thin, big breasted and plump butt or thin all around).
Lane Bryant isn't an innocent party because they have been criticized for using models that are too small to fit in their clothes. Most plus sized models fall in the size 8-12 range.
Should we say that thin models don't represent real women? No, not at all but we can call for more realistic representation in fashion of the average woman in various facets, not just size. I read not too long ago that one of the hottest high fashion models (for women's clothes) is actually a guy. He is tall and has the straight hips and straight chest that the designers have been going towards. Now kudos to him but should our ideal for women be someone who doesn't have the estrogen in their body depositing fat on their chests and hips?
I'm catching up with this thread after not checking 3FC so sorry if this was answered in the comments already, but..
Quote:
Originally Posted by bandit bear
Well, that would be kind of impossible and unrealistic (and impractical and expensive, hiring all of those women to model the same outfit) considering how many different body types there are out there. I see your point, but the best way to judge if something looks good on you is to go to the store and try it on, and don't even pay attention to how it looks on the model, because honestly, no matter what, it's still going to look different on her because of tucking, pinning, lighting, styling, etc.
I work at Macy's and I've noticed in the Eileen Fisher merchandising catalogue that we get that the clothes on the mannequins (headless and pretty much shapeless) look entirely different than what we get in shipment and how they look on people. Why? They pin back the clothes. One top in particular looked like it was cut pretty slim, a cute grey and white striped top, but in the store, it's boxy. it no way looks like it does in the catalogue and i thought it was a different top.
Actually, I know of two companies at least that do this. Both Polish companies (Ewa Michalak and BiuBiu) that hire at least two models (with very difference body shapes) to model on their same clothes/bras. One of them, BiuBiu, even set up a blog so women can submit pictures of themselves in their outfits and you can search by the size. I know modcloth allows shoppers to post pictures of themselves on their website so you can see the garment on different body types too. So totally possible.
As I've gotten older I've really worked towards putting my money where my mouth is. I try now to shop at stores where I agree with there clothing philosophy, like the sizes that they offer, listen to their customers etc. Both those companies do that well and get my business (and I recommend them to friends and on my blog because of it).
i think this links to the increased amount of 'skinny-shaming' that ive seen going around lately on the internet and in real life.
I agree with this.
I think what needs to be understood here is that the term "real" is being attached to women who shop at this store. The ads aren't targeting everyone, they are targeting their key demographic - larger women. Now, if they were a store that sold clothes for everyone regardless of their size, shape, height, etc. then no one would even comment. The term "real", in that case, would be applicable to everyone who is able to shop there - which would be anyone and everyone. What is important is who are they actually marketing to? Because these ads aren't made to apply directly to people outside that market, they have no reason to target them, they're out to make a profit, that's how businesses work. When you start a marketing campaign, you do your best to appeal to your target audience and what would appeal here? Elevating larger women to a higher status. As you said char, it's a trend. I visit another forum and they have a section for "curvy" women. I'd say well over half of its members are actually obese, some are even morbidly obese. They're nice women, I have no problem with them...but one day, someone posted a link to some vintage weight gain ads. The general reaction was, "See, men used to love women like us!" None of the women in these ads were overweight though. Not a one. Somewhere along the line, we went from shaming obesity (which was cruel) to supporting it (which is unhealthy).
And as I quoted in my last post...
Quote:
"We produced a stunning commercial that celebrated the beauty of curvy women and proved that sexy doesn't have a size," says Jay Dunn, Vice President of Marketing for Lane Bryant. "Lane Bryant was able to successfully give a voice to real women. In return, women everywhere threw the networks - and the world - a curve with their overwhelming reaction to our protest."
On that note, you know who I think is under-represented? We petite people.
I think one of the reasons so many of us don't see this as a serious problem of "unfair exclusion" is because of the multitude of far more serious examples that are overlooked or accepted in our society.
It's almost like being asked to get up in arms over insults being hurled - on the battlefield. Really? With all the bloodshed, torture, and mutilation whirling around us, we're supposed to get upset over a little petty insulting and face slapping?
I'm a big girl, in many senses of the word, and I can handle the name calling and the face slapping, just please refrain from plunging the dagger into my chest, thank you.
Of course I'm speaking metaphorically here, but even so - the "real women" idea isn't nice, but it's one of the more benign social stereotypes. Let's work on the really big issues before we start nit-picking.
There's so much to be offended about in our culture, that one can be enraged 24/7 - we need to do some triage here and identify the worst offenders and what we can do about it.
Lane Bryant is a very small fish in a very big pond. Far more damage is being done to far more women and their self- and body- images by much more ingrained aspects of our culture. The advertising/fashion/diet/personal hygeine product/entertainment/cosmetic and/cosmetic surgery industries as a whole do far worse.
Picking our battles isn't easy, especially when the problem is so pervasive. Take for example, the Axe cologne commercials that imply that in order to attract women, geeky looking guys have to drug them (and apparently only supermodels are apparently worth attracting).
Offensive? or Funny?
I find it offensive. I find many of the commercials and television shows offensive. For example a "pro-exercise" commercial in which a child asks her mother for a dollar and the mother sends the girl hunting all over the house for the mom's wallet (which is sitting right beside mom) in order to get the girl some exercise. Another (not quite, but nearly as offensive) has a mother turning off the power so her children will go outside and play.
What does that imply? That you have to trick your children into exercise - and that you don't need it yourself? What about taking a walk or bike ride with the child?
On principle, I have very little respect for advertising, and less and less respect for the entertainment (at least television) industry as a whole. Virtually all of the unscripted "reality" show television makes me ill, because most of them showcase people being incredibly hurtful and exclusionary to others, all in the name of "entertainment." Because the shows stay on, and get worse every season, it shows just how much people love watching other people being mistreated.
We still are the same creatures who built the collosseums to watch criminals being executed and gladiators fighting to the death for our amusement. We may prefer our violence a little cleaner today (and more often simulated), but the impulse to judge, exclude, and even harm others is still alive and well - some expressions of the impulse are just more socially acceptable than others.
The Lane Bryant ad is just such a weak example of the negative impulses in humanity and in our own culture, that it's hard to get too worked up over it - not when much more extreme examples of racism, sexism, beautyism and elitism are all so alive and well in every aspect of our society.
I wouldn't say that I'm worked up over it but I don't believe it came from a purely good place. It would be nice if we could believe that a marketing campaign could be "pure" but when you get right down to it, it's a business's job to make money so whatever works is what companies will typically go with. And the "curvy" versus "skinny" battle is a stupid one for many reasons.
Personally, I have a much bigger problem with supporting unhealthy habits in general.
Of course it's not from a purely good place - it's advertising, it's meant to sell. Advertising can get you in a few ways and most of those ways play on some insecurity or another. LB has managed to hit on one that is both a reaction to and the exploitation of the message that large women don't count. Very clever on their part but I'm not dumb enough to think LB isn't worried about the bottom line more than my peace of mind.
At the same time, I can not see how "real women has curves" logically implies, "and the rest of you are a bunch of fakes."
There's a thread here right now where someone is talking about having the best husband. I'm not going to get upset that she MUST be insinuating that mine is, at best, second best.
I quite agree with you that all women are real. By the very nature of being a woman they are a real woman. Regardless of what they look like. I don't particularly like that meme about the 'real women have curves', and I, too, think it should just go away already. Real women are real women. I'm 100% behind you on it.
What I'm saying is that if Lane Bryant called it "Smart Women Dollars" would that imply that women who do not shop at their store are not smart? To me it doesn't.
I just don't connect the Lane Bryant "Real Women Dollars" to anything else.
It's not "Real Women Have Curves Dollars".
It's more like "Yep, we're plus-sized, but we're real women, too! Dollars."
So, I can see, and agree that when seeing it as "Real Women Have Curves" it would be offensive and obnoxious. However, since I have for the past however many years that they've had Real Women Dollars read it as the "We're Real Women, too!", I do not find it offensive.
This.....so much this.
I think as a culture ( although it has been getting better, I think ) plus size women are looked down upon, and this is their way of saying, plus size women are women too. I mean look around, we have what, 3, maybe 4 stores that a plus size women can go to at any given mall, where women under a size 14 or 12, have.....oh, i don't know, 30, easily?
That would bother me, too. Mostly because their size range is so narrow, and they have always been SO rude to me when I tried to shop while heavier. But I digress.
I have always hated "Real Women Have Curves", because even when I was heavy I had no curves. I didn't get any chest to speak of until I got pregnant (and by "to speak of", I mean above a B cup). Some real women don't have boobs and butts!
I do think that "Real Women Dollars" deliberately exploits the "Real Women Have Curves" language, and that the original saying is exclusionary and implies those without curves AREN'T real women. BUT, to most of Lane Bryant's demographic, the phrase draws them in by answering to insecurities that heavy women aren't "real" women (those insecurities having been formed from a lifetime of advertisements that imply, subtly or directly, that heavier women aren't sexy/real/attractive/etc). That it turned ME off a bit, being a relatively small part of their demographic (plus size, curveless girls), is irrelevant, because it was overall effective to their core customer base. And in advertising, it's about pleasing your demographic.
A WHOLE LOT of advertising, unfortunately, exploits stereotypes, overgeneralizations, and jokes made in poor taste. But such advertising isn't going anywhere, because it works in the demographic it is targeted toward. Speaking to your demographic is a key part of marketing 101, and Lane Bryant isn't alone in doing so (and frankly, is a little LESS offensive than some other players in the field).
While it would be great if the whole "Real Women Have Curves" thing could go away entirely, it's not likely to happen. And there are lots of other objectionable things out there I'd like to see go that way as well. As long as they're effective advertising, they're likely to stick around.
Thank you, this sums up a lot of what I was initially trying to say. I do think that Lane Bryant's advertising is a lot less offensive than other companies.
On the flipside, another thing that bothers me is when people say that VS Angles have curves and are curvy women. I know they're comparing them to couture runway models, and that they are a bit bigger, but to me, that's not curvy. That's having a slim, more muscular body rather than just being slim without muscles. But that's another topic for another day.
Even if people don't agree with the OP, the point has still been made - the name they have chosen for this particular program has created confusion. It's not called "We Are Real Women, Too!" It's called "Real Women Dollars". Who shops at Lane Bryant? Larger women. Who is this being marketed to? Larger women. Who doesn't shop here or benefit from this program? Smaller women. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what was intended when this name was chosen just as it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what 2 plus 2 is.
I'm glad you understand what I was trying to say too. Sometimes I wonder if I'm making any sense at all. I have a tendency to over-explain without being concise and to the point.
i think this links to the increased amount of 'skinny-shaming' that ive seen going around lately on the internet and in real life. Usually its started by women making pictures of marilyn monroe type women and than showing like nicole ritchie and saying monroe is hotter than ritchie or whoever they use it doesn't matter. its basically all saying that if you don't have a specific body shape, you're not beautiful, you're not a real woman, and you're not sexually attractive to the opposite sex.
And the problem is, a lot of women lose a lot of weight in order to conform to society's idea of being "perfect". Look at how some celebrity women eat and exercise constantly. How they are so cautious of what they eat and how they eat, and how they exercise and when.... it's an obsession that also affects regular women. it also has to do with plastic surgery culture and obsession. Then they're criticized for being "too thin" looking "too plastic" or "too fake." It's like we can never win!
there's this new singer out there named Lana de Rey. I think she's got a cool voice but unfortunately she didn't do too well on SNL. The thing about her is that she tried unsuccessfully at a career under the name Lizzy Grant, so she changed her name, changed her looks, etc. And now she's being criticized for it! How many artists have changed their names and looks in order to be successful? Too many to count. And now she's being accused of getting plastic surgery. It's like she can't freaking win. Poor girl. No matter what she does, she'll be criticized for it.
We need to stop criticizing women and expecting us to be perfect. And the whole Lane Bryant, along with VS, is just another cog in the machine.
At the same time, I can not see how "real women has curves" logically implies, "and the rest of you are a bunch of fakes."
There's a thread here right now where someone is talking about having the best husband. I'm not going to get upset that she MUST be insinuating that mine is, at best, second best.
i personally know more than one woman who view this "real women have curves" as degrading to themselves. It implies that non-curvy women are not real. Not that they're necessarily fake, per se, but "not real." They see it that way. You might not, but what matters is that other, non-curvy women are seeing it that way and it's making them feel erased and devalued as women.
I think we underestimate the strength of most women. Even if Lane Bryant marketing does believe (or wants it's customers to believe) that only fat women are "real women," how can that make anyone feel degraded unless that person actually respects the company or the person talking? And what would make a person believe Lane Bryant, when 98% of the culture believes the opposite - that it's the plus-sized women who are devalued (and most people, sady the research suggests believe the devaluation is legitimate).
If 99.9 of your culture tells you that you're great, and .1% tells you that you're worthless, who are you going to believe (especially if that .1% is not comprised of the people close to you)?
The fashion industry as a whole, our culture in general, and many people in our culture want me to believe that I am ugly and worthless because I am not a size two. Do I feel degraded? Nope, because I KNOW they are all wrong. They can say what they want, because they're wrong. I can tell them they're wrong, or I can prove them wrong by living my life.
You all have the right to tell me I'm not a real woman, that I'm worthless, that I'm ugly... and if you do, I have the right to tell you, you're full of crap.
My husband looks "scary" to many people (350 lbs, 6'2", long hair with beard and mustache - all he needs for the classic "scary biker" look is a leather vest).
I can't tell you how many times women in grocery stores have pulled their children away in my hubby's presence. THAT offends me far more than what any company has to say.
Real prejudice has a lot more to do with how we treat each other on a daily basis, than what companies try to tell us during commercials (and why is anyone believing commercials and advertisers anyway?) If we're so foolish as to believe what advertisers say about us, there's not much hope for us as a people or as individuals.
As children we learn that advertisers lie. The cool toys on tv, aren't ever as fun as they looks on tv. Cologne, toothpaste, beer and winecoolers do not make handsome men and women fall in love with us. This or that ketchup or mayonaise isn't the best in the world. The syrup bottle won't really talk to us (boy did I feel ripped off as a 4 year old to learn that).
We also learn (or should) as children that people lie, and we can't trust everyone including adults and people in authority. We teach our children that if an adult asks them to help them find a lost puppy - to run.
And we need to teach our children and remember as adults, that we can't trust or believe everything that we're told - especially by people who want something from us.
Yes, I'm offended that advertisers lie. I'm extremely offended by the Nutella commercial that implies their spreadable candybar is a health food by saying (truthfully, but misleadingly) that it's made with "healthy ingredients like hazelnuts, skim milk, and just a touch of cocoa," forgetting to mention the sugar and pam oil that are the first ingredients.
but until "absolute truth in advertising" is required across the board (which will probably be never, because people like and respond to ridiculous advertising claims), we have to learn to dismiss all advertisers as not just potential, but probable and almost-certain liars.
I think we underestimate the strength of most women. Even if Lane Bryant marketing does believe (or wants it's customers to believe) that only fat women are "real women," how can that make anyone feel degraded unless that person actually respects the company or the person talking? And what would make a person believe Lane Bryant, when 98% of the culture believes the opposite - that it's the plus-sized women who are devalued (and most people, sady the research suggests believe the devaluation is legitimate).
It has nothing to do with respect for the company, though. What it has to do with is the idea of a "real woman." You ought to read the website www.microaggressions.com. it's about tiny little assaults in our every day life, and it applies to race, gender, ethnicity, etc. People submit things that happen to them and say how it made them feel. It's not about underestimating the "strength of most women." You could have zero respect for someone or could care less about what they say, be the most confident person in the world, and still feel hurt by what they say to you.
The point isn't that MORE plus-sized women are devalued (I certainly wouldn't disagree), but that in attempting to make them feel better (myself in that demographic), they're devaluing thin women.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaplods
If 99.9 of your culture tells you that you're great, and .1% tells you that you're worthless, who are you going to believe (especially if that .1% is not comprised of the people close to you)?
Well, sometimes, it's that one person who can ruin your day.
I'll tell you something about myself. I'm white, but I look ethnically biracial. People assume that I speak Spanish because I'm dark. When someone comes up to me speaking Spanish, it upsets me because they don't do it to my light-skinned, white, coworkers. I know it's something silly to feel upset over, but it makes me feel like I'm not a part of my family. And it's the same when people ask me "What are you"? when referring to my ethnicity/race. And when they express disbelief when I say "White." And then when they suggest that maybe I was adopted, etc. And I'm a confident person too. But it's that one person who can make you feel like crap. And that's where microaggressions falls under.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaplods
The fashion industry as a whole, our culture in general, and many people in our culture want me to believe that I am ugly and worthless because I am not a size two. Do I feel degraded? Nope, because I KNOW they are all wrong. They can say what they want, because they're wrong. I can tell them they're wrong, or I can prove them wrong by living my life.
You all have the right to tell me I'm not a real woman, that I'm worthless, that I'm ugly... and if you do, I have the right to tell you, you're full of crap.
And I think that's great that you have that confidence and feel that way because not a lot of other people do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaplods
Real prejudice has a lot more to do with how we treat each other on a daily basis, than what companies try to tell us during commercials (and why is anyone believing commercials and advertisers anyway?) If we're so foolish as to believe what advertisers say about us, there's not much hope for us as a people or as individuals.
Ads can be hurtful. Ads can make people angry and upset and ashamed. And they have every right to be. and only they can decide for themselves how to feel.
