Sex not selling anymore

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: Vic
I don't think this is saying that sex doesn't sell. They've just been selling the wrong kind of sex, like they said. "We will return to an ultra-feminine lingerie brand to meet (customer) needs and expectations." This is kind of a codephrase BTW that their designers are gay men, and that they've been designing according to those ideals of feminine sexuality, a la Sex in the City. There's nothing wrong with it except that their sales are flagging because that's not what women want, especially this size emphasis of being skinnier than a heroin addict. Nor do I see this as a sign of "overweight America," women just like to show off their curves. Marilyn Monroe was a size 14.

Actually she got up to a size 16 at one point. Mind you as I and Safeway have pointed out that is not a size 16 today. Her largest weight was 140. But her waist was 22-23 inches. Find a size 16 that would fit someone with a 22" waist today.

Try comparing apples to apples and women are getting fatter but do not want to admit it. Oh wait I am sorry, I forgot its PC to say "curvy" not fat.

Like this little Q/A story

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: Geekbabe

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: Geekbabe
they charge top dollar for their things.. and imho the overall quality,of the fabric,construction of garments has slipped over the years.

nah,

La Perla is top dollar.

But you're right. VS is still over-priced based on their quality

seriously...real women don't want to wear feathers and bejeweled shit, right?

years ago VS was seen as an upscale brand, the quality of their things and some of the fabrics and colors and prints now.. they're more like Fredricks of Hollywood. Fredrick's has it's place but if I'm paying good money for a bra to wear under work clothing I won't be shopping there.

apt analogy.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: Vic
I don't think this is saying that sex doesn't sell. They've just been selling the wrong kind of sex, like they said. "We will return to an ultra-feminine lingerie brand to meet (customer) needs and expectations." This is kind of a codephrase BTW that their designers are gay men, and that they've been designing according to those ideals of feminine sexuality, a la Sex in the City. There's nothing wrong with it except that their sales are flagging because that's not what women want, especially this size emphasis of being skinnier than a heroin addict. Nor do I see this as a sign of "overweight America," women just like to show off their curves. Marilyn Monroe was a size 14.

Actually she got up to a size 16 at one point. Mind you as I and Safeway have pointed out that is not a size 16 today. Her largest weight was 140. But her waist was 22-23 inches. Find a size 16 that would fit someone with a 22" waist today.

Try comparing apples to apples and women are getting fatter but do not want to admit it. Oh wait I am sorry, I forgot its PC to say "curvy" not fat.

Like this little Q/A story

Okay, so a size 12/14 then would equate to a size 4/6 now. I can see that. I'm not sure how this contradicts my argument though. Designers today are not designing for size 4/6 but for 00/0, which is extremely skinny, both now and then. And size 4/6 is not "fat" for any average-sized mature woman (older than 18), so it's not PC to call that "curvy."

Let's put this in perspective. The average man has like a 36, maybe 38, inch waist. A bit of a gut, yeah, but not fat. Hey, it gets harder to keep it off the older you get. Now suppose there was some kind of nationwide retail store for "sexy" men's clothing (just suppose, okay) and everything was designed for an 18 year-old boy with a 28-30 inch waist. And that you, as a man, were supposed to conform to this ideal of sexuality or else the societal attitude was that you aren't supposed to have sex. How would that make you feel? Would you buy from such a place?