Victoria Secret

[agbasinger]

I know of a Catholic lady who is engaged and today I found out that she is going to be shopping at Victoria’s Secret.

I have seen clips of their ads and its revolting. Can you anyone give me sound Catholic reasons why one can shop there? Is shopping there any different from a sex shop?

Have you seen the Hanes underwear packages at Walmart? It’s advertising for underwear in general that can be offensive, not just VS.

 

[Consecrated]

I think that the reason the ads are targeted towards men is to make them more comfortable buying gifts for their wives (and girlfriends–don’t get huffy-there are a lot of perfumes, lotions, makeup, etc. that a chaste man could buy for a chaste lady) at VS.

well, that could be, but I have to say that their advertising actually makes my DH LESS comfortable with shopping there. He has a very healthy, holy and well-formed concept of sexuality, but seeing OTHER women in lingerie with obviously come-hither attitudes (that’s the important part, IMO) does not make him comfortable. He averts his eyes when the ads come on tv, or in the mall. he’s a dear! But I buy all my lingerie, sometimes from VS! They do have some nice things. and that’s ok!

 

[Serap]

Its a lingerie store. And other than 12 year old boys (and a few men who are much older but are about as mature as twelve year old boys) most people aren’t regarding the VS catalog merchandise any differently than they would say the JC Penney or Sears catalogs’ lingerie pages.

My husband must be VERY immature b/c whenever he sees VS ad or catalogue…he becomes a deer in headlights. We could be in the middle of a conversation and he’ll stop speaking and all I get is…“duhhhh”…his IQ goes down the drain Once the ad is over, I get my husband back.

He is a good husband too and very dedicated to me. I think it’s the “Y” chromosone.

 

[Nicollle]

Victoria’s Secret sells primarily underwear, bras, and health and beauty aids(such as make-up and shower gel). These are products all women use. One hardly has to be married to need what they sell. I know of no one who shops there for bedroom lingerie.

 

[BiologyBrain]

I must live in a VERY conservative area or not watch enough TV. I haven’t seen a VS ad for ages. The last one I saw was the “Angels” one where the girls are wearing the bra & panty (plunge bra & bikini panties) w/ wings & stuff. I personally didn’t feel that was soft-core porn at all. I tend to be very modest myself (actually I feel stupid when I wear ‘sexy’ stuff for my DH b/c its just not me), so I don’t think I’ve been desensitized. The VS closest to me is about 45 minutes away, but their store again doesn’t look soft-core porn to me. It looks like any other section of a store w/ lingerie. I personally love their basic cotton panties. They are about the only ones that don’t give me wedgies. I had a prejudice against the store most of my life though similar to what some of you have said. However, a girl friend & I went to the Mall where the VS is and she absolutely HAD to have some new panties. I told her I was uncomfortable w/ the store. She (another Catholic) said, if you’re uncomfortable when you get inside, we’ll leave. I looked around & saw headless/armless/legless maniquens (sp?) wearing the undies. Granted some of the panties were thongs, but the maniquens weren’t even in the slightest life-like. I actually bought some panties that day (that I still have) and love them. I’ve also received their catalogs & again I don’t find them any worse than any other lingerie catalog I’ve seen (the Hanes Place one, and some of the department stores send out lingerie only catalogs).

I guess my point is that sometimes I think there is an inherent prejudice against a place like VS in the minds of conservative/modest people (Catholic & otherwise). However, I think the reality doesn’t always meet up with the perceived wrongs. A&F is MUCH more offensive both in their catalogs & their stores. At least you KNOW VS sells lingerie (sometimes meant as enticement), so you can expect more skin to be showing.
I guess my point is that

 

[BiologyBrain]

Second, it’s still objectifying women! I don’t care whether it’s hardcore sex or just an airbrushed girl. It teaches men that women have to look like that all the time, that women are just meant for beauty and sex, and that they can abuse their bodies and refuse to guard their eyes (even though Jesus said that looking at women lustfully was tantamount to adultery) just because a woman is pretty.

Maybe one pretty girl in Playboy doesn’t cause rape. But the fact of the matter is, it starts out that way. It always does. There’s a fine line between modeling pretty lingerie so a woman can see how it fits and using a woman’s body/sexuality to sell other things. When you treat women like commodities, even in the smallest ways, it comes back with consequences.

Sin is sin, regardless of your sex drive and hormonal state. If you know it’s wrong, don’t do it. If you’re struggling, pray, talk to someone, and figure out a way to manage it while still acknowledging it. Go to Confession, go to Mass, pray daily (hourly if you need to), stay close to Jesus, etc.

Call me a prude, I don’t care. I’m just saying, it’s not easy for women to be faithful either, that we have sex drives too, yet we’re expected to stay pure. But men are told, oh, it’s nature, it’s biology, it’s OK. No, it’s not! If you can’t learn to master your sex drive, what are you going to do when you’re married and you can’t have sex for whatever reason?

It also makes me sad that women, it seems these days, are judged based on beauty and sexual attractiveness. I see it every day and it’s something I’ve struggled with. We’ve been told from an early age that beauty is skin deep, that it’s our intelligence and character that matters, but the media tells us a contradictory message: that if we don’t have a toned body and turn on every man in the room, we are worth nothing. Thus, the superwoman complex: that women must have it ALL or she’s worth nothing, while all a guy needs to do is look cute and breathe and he’s perfect. It doesn’t just hurt women, it hurts both of us.

Women are worth nothing if we’re not pretty, men aren’t supposed to have self-control. That’s the message spread by this culture and I believe THAT’S what Monicatholic and others are saying when they speak out against this.

I agree w/ some points, but others I think are possibly showing your personal struggles & projecting them on others. If its objectifying women to use pretty women in ads - almost EVERY ad should be pulled. How often have we seen a 1/2 dressed woman selling cola, shampoo, tools (now there’s objectification!), etc. I think a previous poster pointed out that instead of viewing the beautiful models as objectifying women for men, we should be flattered that our husbands can see us in those same clothes & think we’re beautiful too.

I have a very healthy (sometimes extreme according to my husband) sex drive. It has nothing to do w/ what I see that makes me have that sex drive. Its all about my man & my personal biology. Prior to my marriage, I didn’t think I had a sex drive. I was 25 b/4 I ever had sex. It was a ‘turn off’ for me to even think about sex. Not b/c it was dirty or whatever, but b/c I knew that as an unmarried person I wasn’t allowed to have sex & I had never experienced the joy true union can give you.

Women have always been objectified throughout history. I seriously doubt that is ever going to change. Historically, veils were worn b/c hair & even eyes were a ‘turn-on’ for men. The bible warns about, not dressing modestly, but simply dressing ornately. These were times when a woman was covered from her neck to her feet & often wore a veil or head-dress. Yes, its sad that women are supposed to be beautiful to men (and other women apparently). However, denying this biological fact isn’t going to make it go away. Instead we need to work with it and educate our children (male & female) that controlling your urges is just as natural as acting on them willy-nilly.

There’s no doubt in my mind that there are just as many women as men who struggle w/ purity, modesty, and chastity. However, I look at this struggle as a cross we bear b/c of our sinful nature. That doesn’t make the human body dirty, ugly, or sinful. It makes mis-using it sinful (dirty & ugly sometimes too). Mis-using your body in anyway is wrong. However, I don’t view wearing pretty under garments abusing my body or inciting my husband to lust. Afterall, its been psychologically proven that if you feel good about yourself you are more likely to present yourself w/ confidence. They’ve also proven that feeling like you look good helps this.

I, for one, buy pretty under garments for my own personal pleasure. I don’t harbor any thoughts that I actually look like the models w/ their airbrushed perfection. However, in my eyes pretty things make me feel like I am worth the effort. My husband doesn’t care whether I wear my Hanes boy-style undies (complete w/ fake fly) or my VS undies or thongs or nothing (although he thinks nothing is pretty easy access ). He’s told me that I could wear a paper-bag, nothing, etc and its all the same to him. I hazard a guess that most husbands feel that way about their wives. I like showing my husband that I’m willing to ‘suffer’ for the sake of beauty by wearing some sexy undies just for him.

That’s not to say there aren’t some men & women that struggle with lust - and I pray for them. However, I personally know just as many people who struggle w/ gluttony (another deadly sin). That doesn’t mean that food shouldn’t be advertised & objectified. I means that we (as a people) need to pray for our struggling counterparts & be charitable & thoughtful.

 

[Big_Willis]

I don’t care if you want to shop there, but they should tone down their ads and displays. This makes showing half naked models worse than naked models. A nude isn’t objectional, but a model wearing skimpy clothes add a layer of suggestiveness, as if inviting you to see more. There’s nothing wrong with the shop, but there is with their advertisement.

 

[BrokenFortress]

I didn’t read the entire thread, so sorry if I’m not going to make sense with the flow of the thread.

I do shop there. The store is the only one I’ve found that has bras that fit me comfortably. And I haven’t had any issues with quality, mine all last a couple years, and I only shop during their semi-annual sale to save money. I do also buy some of their swimming suits, they’re also the only suits I’ve found that comfortably contain my top half.

I do agree that their advertisements are too much. They are very revealing and can be inappropriate. But, I do continue shopping there because it works for me.

There are plenty of other lingerie and underwear stores that have just as bad advertisements. I think it’s the nature of the business.

 

[LynnGM]

My problem with VS is their marketing. I don’t approve of their commercials being shown during “family” hours. I also don’t like the gigantic cut outs of scantily clad models that are in front of the stores. T

Then again, I’m not a fan of the Fruit of the Loom commercials where scantily clad women (bras and panties only) are doing circus stunts. I get it, the point is to show how flexible and comfy the underwear is. But, I’m not down with how sexual the commercial is.

I need underwear. I’;m not talented enough to make my own. So, I’ve got to get it from somewhere. My own personal beliefs have led me to boycott VS. (Until their marketing is toned down.)

But no, it’s not a sex shop and there is nothing wrong with an engaged woman shopping there.

Sex shops sell personal pleasure apparatus, edible creams, videos, etc. VS sells nothing of the sort.

 

[mariamarchita]

When the ads come on T.V. my husband’s eyes pop out of his head like he has been hit in the back of his head. Typical…

That doesn’t seem like very respectful behavior towards you, his wife… If my husband reacted like that to an underwear commercial, I’d have a few things to say about it!

Just my opinion…

BTW, hi, I’m Maria. I’m new

 

[CountrySinger]

You can’t blame the husband. I do the same thing over Elliott Yamin (a singer). When I was dating my last boyfriend, if I was starting to get mad at him, all he would have to is show a picture of Elliott Yamin, and I would forgot what I was mad at him for. It’s not just a man thing.

 

[mariamarchita]

my teen boys have a hard enough time understanding and maintaining chastity. my teen girls have a tough enough time embracing a healthy, modest body image. VS advertising undermines everything we’re trying to impart to them.

VS doesn’t get my money.

Here, here! I agree 100%. VS doesn’t stand for anything that I want around my family. When I think about their stores, ads, etc, I don’t think about anything even remotely resembling purity, modesty or holiness. “Bionic” women with fake breasts, fake nails, fake hair, fake tan, fake teeth and more… posing nearly naked, deliberately trying to entice men to make sales… Yeah, I’ll pass on all that.

Maria

 

[CountrySinger]

I love VS, I love wearing sexy underwear even under the worst clothes. It puts a spring in my step. It’s not like anyone is seeing it. Plus, when you are, ahem, blessed by God’s gift in the upper area, you need support.

 

[masha]

I’m sitting here with VS’s latest catalog - all marked up with my favourites - and wondering how many people who dislike VS have actually looked through their catalog. Over half the catalog is made up of jeans, shirts, dresses, boots and shoes, lotions, and coats. The lingerie is sexy, but not obscene, and it is lingerie. It’s supposed to be sexy.

When I think about their stores, ads, etc, I don’t think about anything even remotely resembling purity, modesty or holiness. “Bionic” women with fake breasts, fake nails, fake hair, fake tan, fake teeth and more… posing nearly naked,

This disturbed me. The models are models. They’re wearing make-up, and their hair is well done. Their nails are barely noticeable - and don’t look much more “fake” than my uber-natural, but clean nails. I can’t say for certain but their breasts look pretty normal too. They’re fit, they take care of themselves, but unlike runway models, these women look healthy. VS is actually known for hiring models at a healthy weight, because they want their lingerie to look good. Just because they’re good looking women doesn’t mean they’re “fake.” There are plenty of beautiful women out there who don’t have to buy beauty, they work for it, because beauty is important.

Modesty works both ways. Mary Beth Bonnacci wrote once that many who pursue modesty “seem to fear all attraction to the opposite sex. Some women seem to make a test out of requiring men to look past their deliberately slovenly appearance to find the ‘gold’ of inner beauty disguised within. Personally, I don’t think this is such a hot idea.”

Modest is more about attitude than anything else. Modesty elevates human dignity. Wearing VS (or any) underwear out and about is immodest. I’m saying I disrespect myself, that I’m desperate for any type of attention. Wearing it underneath some nice clothing shows that I care how I look to everyone - the public, my husband, myself, and God (who is not a prude in any sense of the word). Ugly, dumpy, shapeless clothing can be just as immodest as revealing clothes, because we say with those clothes: “look at me, look how holy, how pious, how very modest I am.”

I like Victoria’s Secret because their bras fit well and look good. Finding sexy bras above a C is difficult and necessary. Their lingerie is lovely, high-quality, and much classier than most departmant store lingerie. I’ve been shopping there since I was in high-school, and I have to say - if people don’t remember what it’s like being a teenage-girl, it means a lot to feel good about how your body looks, even if no one is seeing your underwear. knowing you look good all over is a confindence builder. It’s healthy.