Tongues were wagging. E-mails were flying around PTA message groups and church listservs. People who heard about it came by to take a look for themselves. The issue was tiny underwear -- women's fine lingerie, to be exact-- and how it should be displayed on lifelike mannequins in the newest wing of one of America's biggest malls.Source. (emphasis mine)
Inside the store was a display of one scantily clad female mannequin crawling toward another who reclined on a left hip and leaned back on both hands.
"I've shopped here for 10 years, and I won't come back until they change the window," said Joe Cowden of Vienna.
"I walk the mall. I've been walking the mall for nine years," said Jana Spencer, 53, of Vienna, who said she has three grown children. "This is shocking. This is semi-pornographic. This is insulting."
Some shoppers said they have an issue not with what the store was selling but with the proximity of the displays to the mall's public areas.
"I love it," Rosario said, "I like the dark side of Vicky's. Every woman has a little bit of the dark side in her. They can do this. The mannequins aren't real. I have a husband, and I know he would love this. This is what keeps you happily married."
Lady, if that is the only thing keeping you happily married, then we have a serious problem on our hands, but I digress. If you want to wear these things, that's fine. That should be between you and your husband. Does that mean it should be publiclly displayed next to Aunt Annie's Pretzles? No. The store could have set up the display within the store, out of the genral public's view.
Do I realize they are trying to advertise? Yes, but I don't think it was nessicary to advertise within eye site of young children. They make millions of dollars a year, the women that shop there are generally repeat customers, so the store could have easily set up the display within the store and it would have still been effective for advertising. Though some would argue by setting it up within the store they wouldn't be drawing in any new customers that this display would appeal to. But I don't think that is necissarily true either, since I'm sure word of mouth would have gotten the line of products out to the future Victoria's shopper.
Heck, they could have put an ad out with a black background and red text spelling out the name of the new line or something. That could have gotten attention. Especially since V.S. advertisements are always filled with beautiful women in their underware. If they had put something out with no photos, that would have just screamed "There's something even we can't show you in the mail! Come to the store!"
The changes seemed more subtle than significant yesterday afternoon. Marie Patterson, 25, of Springfield said the store was "cool, really cool." She said she had been there Wednesday and noted only a few differences in the displays.Source.
In one window display, the change involved standing up and turning a mannequin that had been bent over, its thong-clad posterior pointed toward the window. The mannequin now faces the window. Inside the store, one mannequin was removed from a display in which a scantily clad female mannequin crawled toward another, which was leaning back on both hands.
A mannequin that had been tied up was unfettered, though it still leaned against a pole with arms raised above the head, and a rope and pulleys still loomed ominously in the background. Two female figures lying spooning in a bed were replaced with a single mannequin sitting with legs crossed. A mannequin on hands and knees, crawling toward another female figure, was also removed.Source.
"I had no problem with it, and I had no problem taking my daughter there," Lesley Daisley said.
The more I hear about the changes they've made the more gets revealed as to the nature of the first display. Can you imagine walking out of KB Toys to head to the food court with your toddler and have them seeing this stuff? And what about our teens? As if resisting sex wasn't difficult enough, now they cannot walk through the mall without virtually walking into a porn shop.
But what is the problem, some would ask. This empowers women, we have control, we have power, we demand respect, it's a feminist's dream realized. Or is it? Do these women not realize how weak men can be? I think they do. They feel insecure with themselves, so to compensate for that they break out the chains and whips and go to town. They flaunt themselves, thinking if they can bare it all in public it will empower them and make them feel less insignificant. Yet, the more that is shown, the more empty we feel inside. It's like we lose a piece of ourselves every time we go out.
We look for something to strengthen us, to complete us, and all we succeed in doing is objectifying ourselves. We become nothing but a body, because in our quest for respect we can lose our souls. And then what is there left for the men around us to respect? I dare say nothing. If all we put forth is a body, is it any wonder that many men see nothing but a body? And then we complain that they don't respect our minds and souls. Well, perhaps it is time to really show off the goods?
I wonder, if we weren't so busy showing off our bodies, if men would have an easier time really hearing what we say. This is not to say that we should dress in potato sacks, nor am I trying to imply that it is all our fault for the fact that we are often seen as objects. I'm simply saying, if we want a change we have to start with ourselves. We can't sit around whining, waiting for the men of this country (of this world) to start treating us like more than bodies. We have to stop behaving as if that is all we are, then perhaps we will begin to see change. Then we will truly begin to have respect.
"Finally, Victoria, here's a tip: There's more power in a secret than in an exhibition."