discussion Victoria's Secret debuts rebrand - gets dragged

[Gwendolyn]

 

Victoria's Secret debuted their new look on Wednesday, signalling a end of a era of their iconic glam, fashion show, models and 'angels', going for a more inclusive style and serving M&S underwear, however it has gone down like a flat balloon. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 2, 2022 by Gwendolyn

[XO_Life]

Well...

[Mr. Mendes]

I mean I guess I get it but this is just one show, I think it's a little soon to be making judgements about everything their new initiatives have to offer

[UnusualBoy]

People just complain for the sake of it at this point.

[Trent W]

I wonder if big brands will ever understand that people in twitter will complain no matter what and  the pandering will never ever be enough to make them happy.

 

Honestly it’s good they are trying to be inclusive, but they should’ve kept their original concept and just add XL collections and the likes.

 

Destroy the whole brand like that was not a good idea.

 

 

[Aristide]

I thought the whole point of the rebrand was because people were saying sexual objectification of women is misogynist...?

[TROPICUM]

2 minutes ago, Aristide said:

I thought the whole point of the rebrand was because people were saying sexual objectification of women is misogynist...?

Same? But inclusion I guess! 

 

They should’ve just added plus sized and differently abled-bodied models and that would be more than enough

[ProudLBS]

are they that clueless about their target audience?

 

Their underwear is very mistress-like and women buy it for the fantasy.

 

Women want their husbands to tell them "you're so sexy tonight, I wanna f*ck that p*$$y" not "I like you as you are" 

Edited July 2, 2022 by ProudLBS

[Trent W]

1 minute ago, ProudLBS said:

are they that clueless about their target audience?

 

Women buy Victoria's Secret for the fantasy, especially since their underwear is very mistress-like.

 

Women want their husbands to tell them "you're so sexy tonight, I wanna f*ck that p*$$y" not "I like you as you are" 

 this part has me in tears

[Pavement Princess]

Spent a whole semester chronicling VS for  final project and every time I talked about the rebrand and their current rehaul (which has seen them boosting sales) my professor called them LOSERS and would ask why I wouldn’t choose a winning brand. 

[sourtwink]

i agree with the complaints, however, let’s be real… if they kept the sexy image they would be dragged even harder for sExUaLiZiNg WoMeN 

[BOOMBAYAH]

I’m ctfu why couldn’t they just keep the glamour and runways but just have more diversity with the models? 

[GraceRandolph]

It looks more generic, but then again I don’t hate it or anything. 

16 minutes ago, ProudLBS said:

are they that clueless about their target audience?

 

Their underwear is very mistress-like and women buy it for the fantasy.

 

Women want their husbands to tell them "you're so sexy tonight, I wanna f*ck that p*$$y" not "I like you as you are" 

That specific and niche brand clearly isn’t enough anymore. They will still focus on sexy items, but they clearly are branching out into underwear more broadly. 

[TasteOfYourLips]

15 minutes ago, Aristide said:

I thought the whole point of the rebrand was because people were saying sexual objectification of women is misogynist...?

 

16 minutes ago, Trent W said:

I wonder if big brands will ever understand that people in twitter will complain no matter what and  the pandering will never ever be enough to make them happy.

 

Honestly it’s good they are trying to be inclusive, but they should’ve kept their original concept and just add XL collections and the likes.

 

Destroy the whole brand like that was not a good idea.

 

 

The problem with VS was the fact that around the time Fenty released their first collection, VS sizes were extremely small and the owners were going around saying **** like 'plus size women can't sell the fantasy'. The twitter was right to be mad.

 

All they had to do is to add sizes for 'normal' and plus size women and put them on their fashion show. And with the rebrand it seems like they still think that glamour lingerie=small sizes, inclusivity=grandma's underwear

[RockStarShit101]

23 minutes ago, ProudLBS said:

are they that clueless about their target audience?

 

Their underwear is very mistress-like and women buy it for the fantasy.

 

Women want their husbands to tell them "you're so sexy tonight, I wanna f*ck that p*$$y" not "I like you as you are" 

wait

[Trent W]

10 minutes ago, TasteOfYourLips said:

 

The problem with VS was the fact that around the time Fenty released their first collection, VS sizes were extremely small and the owners were going around saying **** like 'plus size women can't sell the fantasy'. The twitter was right to be mad.

 

All they had to do is to add sizes for 'normal' and plus size women and put them on their fashion show. And with the rebrand it seems like they still think that glamour lingerie=small sizes, inclusivity=grandma's underwear

Yeah I really don’t think they can repair it now.

 

They already insulted plus sized women and now they only selling point which was sex is gone

 

The tweets in the OP are still people looking to be outraged and just want attention tho

Edited July 2, 2022 by Trent W

[Aristide]

5 minutes ago, TasteOfYourLips said:

 

The problem with VS was the fact that around the time Fenty released their first collection, VS sizes were extremely small and the owners were going around saying **** like 'plus size women can't sell the fantasy'. The twitter was right to be mad.

 

All they had to do is to add sizes for 'normal' and plus size women and put them on their fashion show. And with the rebrand it seems like they still think that glamour lingerie=small sizes, inclusivity=grandma's underwear

You're making it sound like VS has always been exclusively a lingerie brand when that's just not true. Yes I see plus size women wearing underwear in these ads but that's because I thought VS has always been first and foremost an underwear brand.

[magazine]

Very off brand, wow. Have they ever done something like this??

 

The complains are very weird.

Who told those people that those women didn't feel "sexy" or "glamorous" in the video?  The irony

Or are they asking for socially defined sexy/glamours standards? 'Cause that's literally contributing to the problem 

[satellites.™]

The men who FUNDED the show and VISITED the show were not about to be front row looking for overweight angels and 60 year old angels.

 

Its not realistic. 

[Aristide]

9 minutes ago, magazine said:

Very off brand, wow. Have they ever done something like this??

 

The complains are very weird.

Who told those people that those women didn't feel "sexy" or "glamorous" in the video?  The irony

Or are they asking for socially defined sexy/glamours standards? 'Cause that's literally contributing to the problem 

Exactly. Not these people saying the models aren't sexy simply because they look like "regular" people.

Edited July 2, 2022 by Aristide

[Triton]

Bring back the Brazilian glamazons. Healthy, gorgeous and with some curves. 
 

I want to see Adriana’s tiddays pushed to the high heavens, Alessandra hitting every pose with humongous wings, Gisele strutting down the runway as she ignores JT. 

[BOOMBAYAH]

1 minute ago, Triton said:

Bring back the Brazilian glamazons. Healthy, gorgeous and with some curves. 
 

I want to see Adriana’s tiddays pushed to the high heavens, Alessandra hitting every pose with humongous wings, Gisele strutting down the runway as she ignores JT. 

None of those girls where healthy though, a lot of the models have come out and said they starved themselves and would overly exercise to maintain their bodies - especially in that NYT expose. One of the most famous angels (Romee) didn’t get her period and became infertile for years because of her eating patterns and finally started getting her period during lockdown when she started eating better and not working as much. Even Adriana who you named talked about how she would go through phases of only drinking liquids for weeks + working out everyday to get ready for the show.

[BOOMBAYAH]

I remember when Barbara Palvin was hot during the early 2010s and Victoria’s Secret snatched her up and where clearly grooming her to be the next face of the brand, even making her the focus of one of their major ads. They eventually chose not to make her an Angel and stopped working with her because they thought she was too fat. This is what she looked like at that time:

 

As much as it’s easy to say the brand being “cancelled” was people being “anti-sex”, I think we do need to be real and not revise history because they very much where promoting an incredibly unhealthy standard of beauty. Society is so brainwashed that people even thought the VS models where just “athletes” and equated their skinniness with working out and eating clean but in fact the models where starving themselves and over-exercising. 

[terrorblade]

[Illuminati]

Don't really care for the wings and the tackiness, I feel like it was very past its time anyway but the whole rebrand feels very forced especially after their STRONG stance against inclusivity.

 

It's basically saying our wallets are hurting so we've expanded the target audience.