Sunday, November 24, 2019

Good-Bye Victoria's Secret Fashion Show

The 2019 Victoria's Secret Fashion Show Has Been Canceled

Women on the left and women on the right are cheering the demise of the Victoria’s Secret fashion show. In truth, ratings have been declining for some time now, and, what with the notable association of Leslie Wexner, who owns it, with one Jeffrey Epstein, it makes good public relations sense to scuttle the display.

Apparently, a conservative woman named Madeline Fry sees this through the lens of feminist ideology, sort of.

While the company has tried to brand itself as helping women feel good about themselves, its advertising has always been about fulfilling male fantasies.

As though there is something bad about being attractive to men. And, as though anyone ever believed that the company was in business to make women feel good about themselves. I think that the idea was, to feel sexy beneath it all. Perhaps not only to feel sexy... to feel mysterious.

So, Fry complains about how women are being hypersexualized and commodified by Victoria’s Secret. She thinks that she is striking a blow for modesty:

Now, after last year’s fashion show had the lowest ratings ever, the sordid event appears to be gone for good. “Oh, Thank God,” ran a headline in New York magazine’s website for women, the Cut. “It’s Over Now.”

Whether concerns about the show center around “the male gaze” or the hypersexualization and commodification of women, both radical feminists and conservatives can agree on one thing: The Victoria’s Secret fashion show was no good for women, and we're better off without it. Good riddance.

In truth, we are all for a return to modesty. We recall that when Wendy Shalit proposed it two decades ago, the notion was widely rejected as prudish and Puritanical.

One understands, to the extent that one is capable, that women look at the Victoria’s Secret fashion show and see something that they hold sacred being rendered vulgar. They see such shows and feel that they are no longer the gatekeepers to feminine sexuality, that it is being bought and sold on the marketplace.

And yet, sad to say, the ubiquity of pornography has caused many women to feel dispossessed of their sexuality. It is no longer something private, something intimate. It is everywhere. Everyone can see it, and thus reduce its mystery. The sexual revolution, with a prompt from many feminists, has destroyed the feminine mystique.

Now, young women are trying to take back possession of their sexuality by sexting images of their resplendent nudity over their iPhones. In that context, Victoria’s Secret must have seemed like a relic. After all, women and girls do not sext in order to show off their underwear.

I would also note the important role that hookup apps like Tinder play in the social lives of more and more young American women. Strangely, women have come to believe that they can retake possession of their pornified sexuality by giving it away for free.

In truth, modesty begins at home. Modesty begins with personal behavior. At a time when the world is awash in pornography, blaming it on lingerie merchants seems like a quaint throwback.


Anonymous said...

It was only a matter of time before the transgender movement ruined it anyways.

trigger warning said...

" I think that the idea was, to feel sexy beneath it all. Perhaps not only to feel sexy... to feel mysterious."

I think you're right. Back in the late 80's I dated a VS buyer. As one might expect, and much to my delight, she wore VS undies. And wore them well, I might add. I did ask her why she wore sexy underwear during the day and at times when there could have been no expectation of revealing her fashion choices, and she told me that it was fun, like having a little secret.

UbuMaccabee said...

GloboHomo > Breeders. Peel away the onion and you get the ressentiment and self-loathing of university lesbians. I wonder if this indicates a trend to dampen the public display of male homosexual eroticism? Not a chance.

Sam L. said...

I don't care. Period.

n.n said...

Why target Victoria's Secret? Surely, if they cared about women's dignity and respecting their faculty, they would focus on the progress of trans/neo-females, normalization of voluntary moderation, judgments and labels of mothers and wives, and unplanned parenthood (e.g. four choices and not the fifth choice: the wicked solution).

Anonymous said...

Hum? Is this the kind of thing that caused a woman to kill her three sons because they might grow up to abuse? Too bad, her parents did not take the same action because she might grow up to kill her children. Amazing how feminism has led to a lack of respect for life, especially male life.

Doug Cranmer said...

You do understand it was never about fashion.

It was about procuring girls. Always was.

Dan Patterson said...

Ah yes. Modernity. Deconstructionism. Strip everything of it's poetry, imagination, and beauty and use the bones to make weapons. Weapons commonly employed against The Patriarchy, and all that it created and made valuable. Values of the women in society, once held by men as a treasure to be protected, have thus been transformed into a stern and harsh recalcitrant foe. Think propaganda characters of Chinese women under Mao and Russian women during the cold war. Nice, huh? Makes you really want to unzip and pleasure yourselves to those images dunnit? Rub one out for the cause.
The value of women is not to be like men. We already have men, and if we need more we'll wait a bit and the boys will become men. The value of women is to create a warm and loving home for raising children, and to do that requires attracting a capable man, and for that a variety of visual simulations are useful. Lingerie is one of the means of arousal and it works very well. Just ask a 15 yr old boy or a 50 year old man.
But no! We can't have any of THAT shit! By God this is the 21st century and GRLLL POWER! is the theme, so get with it and bow to your mistress you cuck! Her fat thighs and canckles, her chopped-short stringy hair, and her underarm bush are not to be criticized but are to be adored. It is YOU, you misogynist, you bigot, you immature fool. It is YOU that is the problem and Sports Illustrated, Miss America, Victoria's Secret why they all support the outdated concepts of "attractiveness" and "sex appeal", and those must be destroyed.
Prager is right: They ruin everything they touch.