Victoria's Secret...too sexy?

On February 29, The Wall Street Journal featured an article that explained that Victoria’s Secret CEO Sharen Jester Turney (hooray for female CEOs!) thinks that the brand has gotten too sexy. I admit, I was confused at first.

“Following a dismal holiday season, during which sales at stores open at least a year dropped 8%, executives have been doing some soul-searching and preparing to take steps to overhaul the brand's image.”

So I kind of had mixed feelings. Do I really enjoy Victoria’s Secret’s image? No, not really. But it sounded like the only reason they were thinking of an image overhaul was because of poor sales. If it were still profitable to use absurd tactics that exploit women’s bodies, like selling make up with ads featuring shirtless models, would the brand still be willing to change?

We discussed this during a consciousness-raising even that I organized (along with Kate and another classmate) as an action project for my first gender and women’s studies class last Fall. We talked about women’s bodies and their use in advertising.

I know. It’s lingerie. It’s supposed to be sexy. But I’m glad that Victoria’s Secret is going to explore a new direction, even if their (possible) reasoning for doing so may be less commendable. I think it’s about time that someone said, “Hey, there really IS more than one kind of sexy!”

EDIT: I agree with Kate: "Now, if Victoria Secret's was going to change their image of what is means to be sexy by introducing more racialy diverse women or women with different body shapes, I would be excited. But, since they are probably going to use the same models wearing a more clothes, I will hold my applause."