Victoria’s Secret fashion show
officially canned after outrage
by
Marisa Dellatto
Original Article
Posted By: MissMolly,
11/23/2019 5:11:46 AM
The Victoria’s Secret Fashion Show is a bust.
L Brands, which owns the storied lingerie company, announced the decision Thursday, saying it’ll be moving on in order to “evolve the messaging of [the company],” reports Fortune.
“We will be communicating to customers, but nothing similar in magnitude to the fashion show,” CFO Stuart Burgdoerfer said on an earnings call with analysts.
As The Post reported earlier this week, insiders have long predicted the demise of the show, particularly after catwalk staple Shanina Shaik leaked the news to the Daily Telegraph in July.
Reply 1 - Posted by:
ireneR 11/23/2019 6:22:20 AM (No. 242870)
Well if they use transgenders, prepubescents, and morbidly obese "models" (oh- with the correct mix of skin colors!) they will be applauded by the Left.
8 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
hershey 11/23/2019 6:36:37 AM (No. 242876)
That's probably the problem....trying to make all those 'types' look good in their lingere....
8 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
GrandmaP 11/23/2019 6:52:01 AM (No. 242890)
I'm surprised they didn't cancel this monstrosity several years ago when #MeToo blew up.
2 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
planetgeo 11/23/2019 7:17:44 AM (No. 242913)
Maybe if they included some burqa-jamas in their show...
5 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
Terry_tr6 11/23/2019 7:28:19 AM (No. 242923)
Interesting what the industry's image of a"plus sized" model is. Pretty much a normal female shape and size.
6 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
Sunhan65 11/23/2019 7:41:21 AM (No. 242936)
FTA: "Last year, Ed Razek, VS’s former chief marketing officer, made offensive comments to Vogue.com, saying that there was 'no room' for plus-size models on their runway and that he would not cast transgender models."
Note how journalistic judgments are placed in what should be a news article. "Offensive" is a subjective opinion, not an objective fact. "Offensive" to whom? I'm not offended by what the man said at all. I think it's funny, honest, and entirely sensible.
It is figuratively--and quite possibly literally-- true that there may not be room on the catwalk for fat women. People who are offended by that fact, need to grow up. There is no catwalk in the world that would want me. I'm too fat, too old, and would make most of their clothes look terrible. That reality doesn't defend me on any level because I'm not stupid or crazy. In other words, I am realistic. I wish I looked like Remington Steele, but wishing doesn't make it so.
Which brings us to the second "offensive" part of the remark. Men who dress up as--or are surgically altered--to look like women look awful. At best, they look like ugly women; at worst, they look like men wearing scary Halloween costumes.
Bruce Jenner was a good-looking guy who is now an ugly-looking fake woman. Jenner doesn't realize that because he is, frankly, a little bit crazy and a whole lot stupid. He is not in touch with reality. I mean him no harm. However, I am not obligated to participate in other people's delusions. I wish Bruce Jenner understood that, but he won't.
Because wishing doesn't make it so.
13 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
Sunhan65 11/23/2019 7:43:55 AM (No. 242937)
Please substitute "offend" for "defend" in the third paragraph above. Sorry for the error.
2 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
anonymous 11/23/2019 7:58:29 AM (No. 242956)
I never watched the Victoria's Secret show. The small clips I saw in ads suggested a form of theater with impossibly thin women wearing next-to-nothing. No wonder they veered into the "transgender" controversy. When real women are employed on the basis of being extremely thin, it's only a hop and a skip to very thin men demanding their turn in the "wearing-next-to-nothing" stakes.
In any case, what should be worn underneath your clothes is not something that should be paraded on a stage in such a gratuitous way.
6 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
walcb 11/23/2019 8:45:45 AM (No. 243024)
What #6 said--I will have a smile the rest of the day.
4 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
anniebc 11/23/2019 9:03:48 AM (No. 243055)
Leftists really are destroying themselves, aren't they? Good riddance, and praise the Lord!
6 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
Highlander 11/23/2019 9:06:11 AM (No. 243059)
I never bothered watching that show. Skinny women don’t do a thing for me. I don’t like seeing a bony chest plate on an undernourished female.
3 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
DVC 11/23/2019 11:07:28 AM (No. 243217)
So, unless they have fat women in lingerie, and guy's wearing women's lingerie in their show, they won't have a show.
Good plan. Don't need to see either of those disasters. Pretty, slim girls in lingerie, sure, but stop there.
2 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
red1066 11/23/2019 12:57:27 PM (No. 243349)
As discussed on the FIVE yesterday, the show has been losing money for years. They stated it costs 20 million to put on this show, and viewership has been shrinking for years. I never watched the show, simply because it just seemed stupid to me. The show made no sense.
2 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
Smart11344 11/23/2019 1:19:49 PM (No. 243371)
A "storied lingerie" company? Shirley, you jest..
2 people like this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
jlw509 11/23/2019 1:35:33 PM (No. 243388)
Yeah, I'll be missing glimpses of vulva on the pompitus of love.
Credit SteveMillerBand
0 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "MissMolly"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)