Should Victoria's Secret Keep Their Signature Style of Model Selection?

Should Victoria's Secret Keep Their Signature Style of Model Selection?

After reading thoughts on Victoria's Secret getting negative feedback for their choice of models, I have some thoughts on the matter as well and how it affects our cultural view of models and of course, the style that we photographers shoot. There're some critics who feel that Victoria's Secret should include plus-size or transgender models in their fashion show.

Hazel Cills writes here about how she feels the fit, beautiful women for the signature lingerie company are causing them to lose popularity with the younger viewers. It sort of reminds me of the criticism that A&F received for not manufacturing clothes for plus sizes.

There was a quote about Ed Razek not understanding why it's culturally ok to skinny-shame the Victoria's Secret models. I agree with him: it isn't ok; these models are fit and beautiful. The Victoria's Secret models are a source of inspiration to young models and photographers as well. I watch the Fashion Show and follow all the Angels on Instagram. Why? Well, they are pretty girls, and that's a nice bonus. But the real value for a photographer here is how great of models they are: the ways they walk into a room, stand, sit, etc. are top notch. These are some of the finest models in the world in my opinion. 

Mr. Razek is accused of being out of touch with the younger customer base by featuring pretty, fit models. Honestly, that is his choice, after all, but I agree with his choice. The reason why is because these models are fit and healthy, after all. They eat healthy, exercise, and are great role models. They are most certainly not malnourished, unhealthy, too skinny, etc. America is known as the most obese country all around the world and for a good reason. I myself am overweight, and I hate it; it's wildly uncomfortable, and I am working to remedy that. So, I certainly don't think a company should be bullied into promoting being overweight. At the end of the day, this is a world-leading lingerie company; it's expected they would have healthy and fit models. 

Shooting the style of photos I do, I shoot a lot of thin, fit women, and I've always thought Mr. Razek's choices have been stellar. I like to learn from the Angels in tips and things I share and help my models with on set.

And most importantly here, when I think of Victoria's Secret, I think of the tall, thin, pretty models. I have nothing against a plus-size model, and I do not wish to bash them. Plus-size models have a right to be whatever size they are comfortable with; however, brands also have a right to select models they are comfortable with to promote the type of image they choose. There are other companies out there that specialize and cater to different types of models. I would compare this to me being upset that I couldn't be in a Calvin Klein ad because I am too heavy. Instead of being mad at them for featuring fit guys, I admit I am overweight and I go on about my business with what is within my means.

Encouraging positivity and happiness, the Victoria's Secret models always are healthy, happy, and friendly, and I think that's a wonderful image to present these role models in. Because let's face it, young girls do look up to these models. Below is one of my favorite Victoria's Secret models, always smiling and happy, promoting positivity. She never bashes heavy women; it seems pretty unfair that the bashing is a one-way street.

Some of today's culture seems to want everyone and everything to be equal. The reality is people are not the same: some people are tall, some short, some fat, some thin, and it is what it is. Victoria's Secret is known for tall, thin models; that's their right. Let's not try to push a square peg through a round hole. They are a great source of inspiration for me as a photographer, and I like it the way it is.

I normally average 250-400 likes on a model photo. When I recently posted a thin, fit Czech model shot in the same way I do everything else with the same hashtags, it rose to over 1,800. It seems clear to me what people would like to see when it comes to sexy models, and this would apply to the Victoria's Secret lingerie as well.

What do you think? Do you think Victoria's Secret should change its branding and platform to concede to these requests? If you do think that plus-size models should be in this show, I'd like to hear a reason why.

Lead image credit: Tofros via Pexels.

Bill Larkin's picture

Bill is an automotive and fashion inspired photographer in Reno, NV. Bill specializes in photography workflow and website optimization, with an extensive background in design and programming.

Log in or register to post comments
101 Comments
Previous comments

A lot of people who are considered medically overweight are in fact perfectly healthy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/five-myths-about-obesity/2013/12...

As for transgender models. Why not? Lead the pack. When big corporation throw their weight behind celebrating diversity they have the power to normalize. See enough TG people in TV shows, advertising, etc.. and it will become much more "normal".

As for the young, they will always be confused no matter what. But they're also much smarter and can understand a lot more than we give them credit for. If they see some beautiful trans man or woman on TV it's not going to screw them up for life or anything.

I don't know how many kids are getting sex change operations after seeing a trans person represented in public but it's probably more of an outlier than anything else

@Jack Millerson, stop watching fox news.

Disagree on the TG part....why shouldn't those models be included. It wasn't so long ago that people of color were excluded...and here we are today.

Why?

And that disqualifies them from appearing in a catalog as models?

I know that's what you would like...might explain your absolutely stupid comments.

Also I haven't lived in the USA in a very long time...I do recall that reading and comprehension were among the first things we learned in school though. Did you skip grade 1 and 2?

VS and any other company can choose the type of model they wish. Why? Because it is THEIR company. If you don't like it, don't buy into their products. Simple as that. If they loose enough revenue, they will change formats, because, they want the sales.

well our opinion does not really matter

It's so sad that this is where we've gotten as a society.

Don't like it, Don't look at it.
Seems simple enough.

Oh God - this is a white man's fantasy article. Bring on the white male privilege and fragility! This is your final gasp, as the world is changing, and the white male is in decline.

For generations, the white male has determined what is attractive - the generation that thought it was ok to sleep with their secretaries on the side. But that is changing. Women have become more influential, more in control of their appearance and choices. And the men can't stand it. Should a company that allegedly creates clothing for women represent a wider, changing concept of women? Jesus, who comes up with these questions? A better question would be, is VS a company for women, or for men's fantasies? I think we all know the answer to that in our heart of hearts.

If Bill was smart, he'd try to get as many women on his side as possible, of all body types. Otherwise, he can expect to become irrelevant, just another photographer of skinny women and a purveyor of an outdated patriarchy. Like most of Fstoppers.

Lol! That's not actually him.

LOL - no. No it's not really me. Google is hard though,

Seriously Bill, you do know you don't really have to write an elaborate article here to convince everyone that your needs have some form of magical mystical powers for us all to embrace and drool over.

You had your say and exercised your equal opportunity rights to free speech. Now it is time to pack your bags, and go on that very long journey to discover your very own amazonian women tribe and fountain of youth. And good luck.

Arrivederci

i noticed someone is going through and negging those who've posted common sense replies like, "don't like it? don't look or shop there." lol, sigh.

Exclusivity is a thing of the past. To evolve as a business is to become inclusive, and represent all of your potential clients.

As a woman, and one that has worn and hated VS lingerie(their bra sizes are REALLY off and cs reps do not know how to fking measure right), I feel they should represent all women. I do not like shaming a woman for her body type. It doesn't matter if she's 5'1 and 200lbs or 5'11 and 140lbs. Fit or fat, skinny or chubby... a woman is a woman. There is a huge issue with fit shaming going on, and that is a major problem with body positivity.

VS needs to get with the times. Things are changing, and they need to change too. Yes, the show is a fantasy of sorts, same with runway shows during NYCFW, but even then designers are stepping out of sample sizes to become INCLUSIVE.

There are also models breaking the mold like Ashley Graham(who's been in multiple issues of SI:Swimsuit),Mia Tyler, Tess Munster,all gorgeous curvy models pushing the boundaries of the typical sample size.

To be so exclusive in the age is a not always a good thing, especially when those women you're excluding are the driving force of the money being spent on goods. Let's face it, they do have the right to pick whatever model they see fit. Consumers respond to that, and if you're not representing them in any fashion they will not spend their money on your product. Again, this trend of body positivity, natural looking makeup, large range of tones for makeup etc... ARE what is what women are looking for.

"There are also models breaking the mold like [...] Tess Munster,all gorgeous curvy models pushing the boundaries of the typical sample size."

Wait, you're talking about Tess Holliday? She's 5'5 and weighs 280 lbs, which means she has a BMI of 48! I'm all for inclusion and body positive mindset, but she's very morbidly obese. Despite what she says, that's incredibly unhealthy and we as a society shouldn't promote this as a positive thing.

Again, not the point of body positivity. It's not the promotion of being fat, but acceptance of your body regardless of size. You cannot be exclusive to X-X weight range. It's a matter of saying "This is my body and I love ME". It goes against the grain of perpetuating the unrealistic societal expectations to be thin and pretty.

"You simply don’t eat more in calories than your body needs"
-Incorrect! What about the people that have medical issues that prevent them from losing weight? What about the people who must take medications that cause weight gain?

"Most people, including fat people, agree that fat bodies are less attractive"
Did you do a study on this? Where did this information come from? How do you know this to be true? because you think so?

"People that truly love themselves don't allow themselves to get fat and don't allow themselves to stay fat"
-Again, false! Do you even know how many people can't lose weight because of things beyond their control? Does it mean they don't love themselves? So the medication that could be saving their life makes them gain weight, does that mean they don't love themselves or that they want to stay alive?

Your opinions are actually disgusting. The fact that you keep using the term Fat is also disgusting. You are judging people based off of their appearance when in fact you know nothing about them.

According to medical professionals I would be over weight. According to me I am chubby. Do I work out 5x a week? YES. Do I eat healthy? YES Do I burn more calories than I eat? YES. So why am I "chubby" I must not love myself, right? WRONG. I have a thyroid that doesn't want to work properly and even though I am on medication it is always off. I also had brain surgery 3 years ago and 2 neck surgeries since then which means I HAVE to take medications that cause weight gain and bloating.

You should really take a hard look at yourself and your opinions and make some changes to the way you see/view things. Shaming people for their size is just wrong and this is what causing so many young people to do dangerous things just to be "skinny".

Shame on me for promoting body positivity? Where in body positivity is the promotion or encouragement of gaining weight? It's about acceptance of your body regardless of the size. A person can say "I'm fat!" and still be positive. Some people choose to be larger, some people have medical conditions that limit their ability to lose weight, some people are depressed. Every story is a different tale.It's not mine, or anyone elses place to shame someone for their body. Shaming fatness does not make people lose weight, it only perpetuates the cycle of overeating. I don't think you understand what fat shaming is unless you've actively been fat shamed.

On the other hand, there's nothing healthy about being underweight either. Some may say that it's better than being fat, but not always the truth. Malnutrition is as much of an issue as obesity.

I agree with the cut of their lingerie its really off never found anything comfortable at the store

"America is known as the most obese country all around the world and for a good reason."
In the age of information it's important to check your stats before writing an article. The US is NOT the most obese country in the world, far from it:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/finance/markets/the-world-e2-80-99s-fattest-co...

Now go have a quadruple decker with bacon and cheese you fat ass :) :)

I would clearly not use this source as a quality information to be honest, and would also use the data given to have a pinch of salt (and admit a poor health situation in a country).

When we use the example of "but he too has obese, and he to has more", it is a way to find excuses to avoid solving a problem, and in this case a huge one.

On the topic of models and VS, the interesting point is that we are in a social media age where everyone feels like they have a right to an opinion, and to make changes in the corporate world, and decide for others what they should do... and that's quite fascinating.

VS is a private business, with ideas, plans, certain views, certain products for a certain clientele. It is not for clients who are not their target, or people who don't enter the target audience of VS to even say, nor is it to those who are clients.

If i compare (for what it's worth) a private business to our home. Would we change the disposition of our house or the furniture, or exteriors because a stranger or a bunch of strangers told us it was shit and not correct and we had to do it otherwise ? Would we change it if our parents told us it was bad, shit etc, but we actually liked it like that ? if we decided to do so, by peer pressure, not by personal decision, Why should we ?

Same goes with a Business. I don't ask luxury brands to change their prices to reach my budget, nor do I ask a brand to develop something I want which is not in their line of products, so why should I have an opinion on how they promote their products ? Their products are not for me, full stop.

inclusive, exclusive, who cares ? those who feel pain, because they feel they are loosing something from this situation. It's just a pain/pleasure relationship in which some are stuck.

That being said, the good thing is that articles like that are great for SEO for Fstoppers and VS and the models listed, and that, business wise, is a good move.

Did you even bother reading the article or just assumed that if it comes from MSN it's bull? 3rd paragraph: " Wall St. reviewed World Health Organization 2016 BMI data for adults in 195 countries. In the 20 most overweight countries, at least 66% of adults have a BMI of 25 or greater. WHO analysed data from 195 countries. WHO, not some obscure unknown organisation.

I have read the article, and formerly also worked for a who program, therefore would assume a certain level of knowledge regarding the matter.

What i am maintaining is that, in the top 16, 9 are islands depending on goods from ashore, and low to very low income and almost impossible inland growth.

And that the US does have an issue, which could be solved with what the land produces, and with its gdp pro capita, could highly increase solving the problem, its not easy and most industrialized face the same issue.

I also know from fact by my own experience that stating others are worse will never sole ones problems, only hide them and prevent us from tackling the issue. I'm sure you will agree with me. If a neighbour is more in debt than i am, stating i'm not as in debt as he is wont solve my issue... tackling my own debt will.

As per the BMI, it is clearly not the only index to go with, and it should always be combined with skinfold measurements, and other indexes to define provide viable data. BMI doesnt take into account the morphology such as endomorph, mesomorph etc.

And the bone density which can have a huge impact on the index.

That being said, the topic was on VS and you didnt mention that, so i guess we agree on some point.

VS models are what they are, if the company decides to change their image it will be on their terms on their time. Are you mad because Coronel Sanders isn’t the slim nerd with glasses because people today play video games and I think fried chicken should be represented by gamers and old white men alike... the logic is the same here...

When Lane Bryant starts having an annual llingerie show that rivals the Super Bowl ratings numbers then maybe this conversation would get some steam IMO.

While it's true that every brand has a right to represent themselves however they want through their choice of models and style of photography, Victoria Secret is not every brand.

VS is not some small boutique lingerie brand that can cater to a narrow demographic. VS is a giant of the industry on par with Levis, GAP, Calvin Klein, etc.. They are in every shopping mall everywhere. I believe that companies of this size have a responsibility to be aware and responsive to current cultural and social issues.

Unlike the author of this article, companies this big don't need to pander to an audience of men to get their social media posts to get over a 1000 likes. A company that size doesn't need to be guided by their followers, they have the power to influence their followers.

Should they stop using some of the most elite models in the industry? No. But are there other incredible looking and equally professional models that represent a wider swath of the public? I say yes.

Should mobile phone companies stop building their iPhones in China for the price they pay and the high suicide rates they have in their factories ? They are public brands, high end brands in shopping malls, and promote consumerism, controlled obsolescence and addiction to their devices by design.

Should the people be concerned by these issues, as they are with the models used by VS, they should just stop shopping, the client is the Nr 1 owner of companies, no clients, no earnings, no earnings, no business.

The web is full of ranters, but so little doers (not speaking about you, just in general). If people, one by one, just started acting and letting others act as they wish, things would change.

7 billion individuals on the planet, 7 Billion points of view, some similar, some different... But it's not for corporations or businesses to be bullied out of point of view, it's for a corporation to adapt should they wish to, or face consequences should they take the wrong route. Whatever business we are in, rules are the same, and the long run will tell, not us, not ranting, not opinions.

I agree, the rules are there to deter companies from going the "wrong route" but aside from the rules, companies usually benefit from being on the right side of history.

I think they are missing out on a lot of the youth because they stick to a really tall skinny body type when curvier with a booty is in right now.

Louboutin is missing out on the whole bottom of the client pyramid who can't afford the shoes.
Patek Philip the same with all the G-shock buyers.

... Or Not.

Photographers are missing out by not lowering their prices to attract more clients.

I am glad we agree this would be total nonsense... that was exactly my point with the "or not"

I don't think women should be rewarded for being at a dangerous health size in either direction. Instead of telling women it's okay to not be that thin we are now telling them that it is okay to be that obese. And I love the double standards. Men are fat, women are plus sized.

And don't tell me they are happy being that size because they tell me to retouch the hell out of them so apparently not. Same as a skinny girl will tell me to hide her bones. The VS model has never been for women, it's to attract men who think that if they buy lingerie for their woman, she will look like that. Same reason they give dog food titles like Steak and lobster cause if sounds good to us as a pet owner. Marketing.

I feel like this is a self-promotionary article mixed with a rhetorical subject/question to disguise it as a legit article.

It's almost like "Hey! Look, I've posted a half naked beautiful woman on Instagram and got 1800 likes".
YAY.

We have a winner!

We live in a time where women can vote (in most places) and have money to spend. If they dont agree with VS marketing or products then they can support other companies and buy their products. Its a simple choice that the buyer can make.

Most advertising is meant to make you aspire to something (to be like the ad). The backgrounds, the clothing, the look of the person.

I'm fairly certain that being fit and skinny is because everyone aspires to be "like they were in high school" because most people complain they started gaining weight after 20 or 30.

Imagine if ads did have an average person in an average background... Would that make you work out? Would that make you want to buy something?
That'd actually make a good photo series...hmm..

Victoria's Secret can do whatever it wants to do. It's their company. I'm a woman and I don't shop there. They don't market to me. The lingerie they showcase is impractical for everyday wear. I don't want to be at work feeling like I have to pick a wedge out of my butt all day. I also don't run or lift weights in lace panties. Victoria's Secret sells a fantasy. I'm firmly planted in reality. There's no reason to get outraged one way or the other. It's a silly waste of emotion over a non-issue. Victoria's Secret unapologetically sells sexual fantasies. The lingerie they showcase is meant to turn on significant others and probably meant to be left on the floor of a bedroom. It's no different than KY ads/product. If they were selling granny panties this way, then they'd be way off market. ;-)

P.S. You are incorrect in calling the bashing a one way street. Take a look through these comments. Bashing goes both ways. The world is polarized and the bashing is happening both ways.

It seems that the writer may not have ever set foot in a victora secrets store. If he had he would have seen groups of pre-teens shopping there. And incidentally a lot of these models r young teens that r still physically maturing. The store does not cater for women. I have never successfully found anything there to fit me (even when i was younger) because they often dont carry enough stock of the sizes for "women" as opposed to "teens". Like the music industry VS try to catch their customers young

I would add that the leading articles image is provocative and i fail to see where it reflects lingerie because i cant see it - i presume they feel that women become writhing sexual beings on a bed in a darkened room when they put on badly cut VS underwear, lol

"I normally average 250-400 likes on a model photo. When I recently posted a thin, fit Czech model shot in the same way I do everything else with the same hashtags, it rose to over 1,800. "

And men, young and old rejoiced!
Take the same model, same set up with a shirt on, 500 views? The now topless model showing sideboob (underboob?) 1800 not a surprise. It's not art, it's nothing earth shattering or different it just is.

This is not news. People like to see shiny sexy people, expensive things they can't afford and places they will never visit. Fantasy is what sells.

If VS decides the market is curvier they'd be stupid not to embrace it. And they will get PR like when other companies said "no retouching" or "no makeup".

Strongly disagree.

"Big girls" are not all "unhealthy". In fact, anyone with a little meat on their bones, and maybe a slightly higher BMI, is probably MORE healthy than some of the skinny, borderline anorexic models that are usually featured. Nobody is asking VS to start using truly unhealthy, overweight models in their advertising. (Or if someone /is/ suggesting this, they don't understand a company's responsibility to balance acceptance/positivity, and setting a good example for healthy behavior.)

But, there is simply SO MUCH MORE to being healthy than having an unrealistically skinny waist and a flat stomach. So, let's not pretend that VS models are the ONLY visual of ideal healthiness. They're absolutely not. Their choices are nothing more than a marketing decision.

For the record, I know innumerable "curvy" girls who are badasses at hiking, climbing, fitness, etc, and they generally eat right. But, they just don't like to starve themselves, or maybe their metabolism is just too slow for them to ever look "skinny". Hey, if VS doesn't care to market to these girls, that's fine. But if the whole of society shifts its perception of "healthy", let alone its standards or scope of what is seen as truly "attractive", then bye-bye VS.

Next, a little bit of history. This is gonna sound weirdly irrelevant at first, and most people will tune out, but does anybody love Fiddler on The Roof? There's a line in the song "If I Were a Rich Man" where Tevye dreams of his wife having "a proper double-chin". Did you ever stop and think, wait, what?

Also, of course, have you ever wondered why there are so many Renaissance paintings of bigger, curvy women?

The fact is, ultra-skinny hasn't always been the standard for attractiveness. In fact, many times throughout history, "heroin chic" would have been ridiculously unattractive.

Today, indeed some of modern society is already over that skinny look. (Don't make me quote "Baby Got Back" or mention a Kardashian, okay?)

Either way, VS is indeed likely floundering due to its choice of models, and if they're interested in surviving long-term, they probably ought to change their branding to represent a broader scope of what healthy bodies can look like.

I suspect, unfortunately, that these decisions are being made by males who "have a type" themselves, and unless they themselves change, they may drive their business into the ground because of it. Oh well!

Ironically, in the sidebar right now I'm seeing an ad for "Bombshell" sportswear, and the /slightly/ wider-hipped girl model looks way more realistic, and attractive, than the "stick insect" of a model who in this article's first IG embedded image. (I'm sorry, I know that was a shallow jab at the model, but honestly, she needs a sandwich, and the choice of lens/perspective is also largely to blame.)

I find it funny that people refer to the VS Angels as "ultra-skinny" when in reality they are just what should be "normal" which is healthy and fit/trim. They only "appear" to be "ultra-skinny" by contrast since such a huge mass of the population of America is morbidly obese.

The fact that you can find ZERO ground between a VS model and what you deem "fat" means you've failed to open your minds to the possibility that healthy body types aren't all identical.

Either way, the fact that you're talking about a "moral compass" in an industry that is one of the biggest culprits in objectifying women means this conversation is clearly never going to be a productive one.

Be honest. You have a type. You're attracted to it more than others. There's no shame in that. But to label every OTHER type as "fat" or unhealthy is the type of attitude that will not only get a business run into the ground, but will also be less and less accepted by society in general.

You're trying to put words in my mouth by saying that this argument is about whether or not it's OK to be fat, let alone to encourage being fat.

So, I'll just leave it at this, even though I already know you disagree with it: these models do NOT represent "healthy". Especially the models depicted in this article, when photographed closely with a wide-angle lens that distorts their features to make them /seem/ anorexic by warping the proportionality of their knees/elbows versus their waist.

It's unnatural, and NOT at all a good photographic representation of "the epitome of health", as you want to think. A body can be 100% healthy, and not look /that/ thin. I'm sure that model works out and eats healthy, but she's been photographed in such a way that the end result is not the /only/ representation of what a truly healthy body looks like.

And saying so is not an automatic approval of being fat. There's room between THIS, and being obese. But I've already tried to say this, and you're not interested in hearing it, so...

"I don’t put words into people's mouths. You are encouraging people to become and remain fat..."

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

"Some of today's culture seems to want everyone and everything to be equal." Yup, just like it emphasizes in Harrison Bergeron, there's a difference between everyone being equal and everyone being the same.

More comments