Victoria's Secret cancelling their annual runway show - Anorexia Discussions - Forums and Community

Jump to content


About MPA

MPA is a site dedicated to the support or recovery of those suffering from eating disorders or body dysmorphic disorders. Please be sensitive to this fact when creating an account and contributing to the board.


Photo

Victoria's Secret cancelling their annual runway show


  • Please log in to reply
72 replies to this topic

#1 justlookthroughme

justlookthroughme

    Advanced Sage

  • Accountability access
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2434 posts
  • Locationin my head.

Posted 22 November 2019 - 07:30 AM

the root of this situation, i believe, is VS's refusal to diversify their models. with people nowadays embracing their bodies (as they should) i assume its hard for VS to remain relevant (edit: thus, their decision to cancel it of their own accord)

my personal opinion on this, however (i might be getting backlash from this but this is purely my own personal opinion, as i mentioned earlier), is that VS has the right to keep their brand exclusive. if the image of VS is of tall, waif-thin skinny female skeletons then so be it. if they refuse to cater to every single public person's representation on the runway, then let them. its THEIR show. its THEIR identity. its the image that they have uphold probably since their brand conception.

while i fully support other brands endorsing body positivity because every body is different and beautiful in their own way (except mine because i cant convince myself that my body is acceptable) i feel like VS has the right to run their business the way they want to even if it means the only target audience left for VS is people on this site. if they rather go bankrupt than be inclusive, its their decision.

what do you all think? please remain respectful in your comments. we're here to discuss, not to start arguments.
  • Neptune96, a good sniff, pinkcotton and 27 others like this

#2 ☆ d o l l h o u s e ☆

☆ d o l l h o u s e ☆

    Sage

  • Accountability access
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1052 posts

Posted 22 November 2019 - 07:36 AM

Yeah exactly, they've established that as their brand. There are brands that only target plus size women and nobody gets mad at them. If VS wishes to keep their brand the same then so be it, it's their business decision. PINK has more plus size models now and it's ran by the same company. Skinny people are kind of being shamed now because brands like VS and brandy melville always get people against them
  • justlookthroughme, sunshine_today, mayrick22 and 12 others like this

#3 GreenFaery

GreenFaery

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 45 posts

Posted 22 November 2019 - 07:39 AM

I have my own issues with VS (why do all of your bras make my boobs stick out more I’m trying to get smaller!) but I always liked their runway show. It’s a bummer for all those models that work really hard.
  • justlookthroughme, mayrick22, MakalakaDingDong and 1 other like this

#4 Guest_comatosebaby_*

Guest_comatosebaby_*
  • Guests

Posted 22 November 2019 - 07:41 AM

I never cared much about VS or their show, but what you think makes sense. in all honesty, many brands try to cater to everyone but it ends up being fake and cringey. it's not like their show got banned or something though, it's their decision to cancel it. as far as I understood they did it mainly because there are fewer and fewer people who watch it. it's not like someone's directly pressuring them, right?


  • justlookthroughme and ☆ d o l l h o u s e ☆ like this

#5 Amy Floyd

Amy Floyd

    Guru

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 512 posts
  • LocationSummoning Chtulu in the dead city of R'lyeh.

Posted 22 November 2019 - 07:46 AM

I agree with you but on the other side i hope the body inclusive movement will kills the fashion industry. It's a sick industry, it does objectify the women bodies and push impossible normes to our society.
  • Auditore, justlookthroughme, yourbrokenballerina and 4 others like this

Sorry for the bad english. I do my best. Please tell me when I make a mistake, don't be shy, I'll always thank you!

“Biology gives you a brain. Life turns it into a mind.”

 


#6 justlookthroughme

justlookthroughme

    Advanced Sage

  • Accountability access
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2434 posts
  • Locationin my head.

Posted 22 November 2019 - 07:49 AM

I never cared much about VS or their show, but what you think makes sense. in all honesty, many brands try to cater to everyone but it ends up being fake and cringey. it's not like their show got banned or something though, it's their decision to cancel it. as far as I understood they did it mainly because there are fewer and fewer people who watch it. it's not like someone's directly pressuring them, right?


i completely agree with you. some look like theyre just trying to be "woke", not because they believe in the cause. also im sorry if it seems like i implied VS has been banned. i made corrections on the original post xx
  • mayrick22 likes this

#7 Orthorexic.Hourglass

Orthorexic.Hourglass

    Sage

  • Accountability access
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 963 posts

Posted 22 November 2019 - 07:56 AM

my personal opinion on this, however (i might be getting backlash from this but this is purely my own personal opinion, as i mentioned earlier), is that VS has the right to keep their brand exclusive. if the image of VS is of tall, waif-thin skinny female skeletons then so be it. if they refuse to cater to every single public person's representation on the runway, then let them. its THEIR show. its THEIR identity. its the image that they have uphold probably since their brand conception.

while i fully support other brands endorsing body positivity because every body is different and beautiful in their own way (except mine because i cant convince myself that my body is acceptable) i feel like VS has the right to run their bussiness the way they want to even if it means the only target audience left for VS is people on this site. if they rather go bankrupt than be inclusive, its their decision.


Completely agree. There are exclusively plus-size fashion shows, so they have the right to have an exclusively super skinny fashion show


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
  • Auditore, justlookthroughme, mayrick22 and 2 others like this

#8 anarchiczera

anarchiczera

    Omniscient

  • Accountability access
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3307 posts
  • Locationhiatus

Posted 22 November 2019 - 07:59 AM

yeah i always thought the whole body inclusivity pressure for companies was ridiculous. ok you’re insecure about your body but a corporation isn’t responsible for that, sorry stacy...

i love the vc show but i found the last couple of years the models they used were a bit bigger than in the past and that turned me off. they still looked really good but i watch the show because i want to see waify models in underwear, not muscular/bigger women whose presence casts an annoying politically correct shadow over the whole show. the recent models are still objectively skinny to normal people, but back then they were pretty small which i really liked. i watch it for the skinni bitches lmao. and i’m not white i’m asian
  • RumHam, justlookthroughme, mayrick22 and 4 others like this

-- ⚜ --

age: 22  |  h: 5'8.5"  |  cw: 115 lbs

gw: as close to 0% body fat as I can manage

I just want to leave my mark... make people feel like they belong... make people happy... and be happy... if my chaos-ridden brain will let me do that...

I am not mortal, I am lunar energy trapped on earth... one day I will be able to return home to faraway stars where i belong..

If I am lucky, one day I will have the great honour of offering if only a little beauty to this world... there is none within me, but every day I still try to grow flowers in the wasteland.

 

37X2b47.png

31-25-34

repentance  •   purity  •  selflessness

disordered since ... like 2010?


#9 Lily Smith

Lily Smith

    Advanced Guru

  • Accountability access
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 655 posts

Posted 22 November 2019 - 08:07 AM

Yeah they have to right to choose wich models represent their brand and if that leads to them not being relevant anymore i don't mind that either. I just don't think it's a smart business move lmao
  • trubbish, Auditore, SunFromHell and 3 others like this

#10 paperinukke

paperinukke

    Advanced Guru

  • Accountability access
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 600 posts
  • LocationFinland

Posted 22 November 2019 - 08:50 AM

I'm sad but not surprised about it considering the current social climate.  :(


  • justlookthroughme, mayrick22, Pygmalion Effect ~ and 1 other like this

#11 Dannymine

Dannymine

    Advanced Warrior

  • Accountability access
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 332 posts

Posted 22 November 2019 - 10:20 AM

Yeah I mean...like you said, if they would rather go out of business than be more diverse, that’s their choice and no one is stopping them.
BUT I do think people have the right (and sometimes the responsibility) to point out the damage VS has done. More so (I think) than some other high fashion brands, because while most fashion companies don’t even bother trying to justify their crazy skinny models, VS is very adamant about how heathy they are (even though they are all underweight despite having muscle).

Idk I always thought the shows were amazing, the music and costumes and things were just the coolest. And I mean yeah, if they have a certain body type they prefer that’s cool but no one can be upset when other people stop liking it and buying it.
But regardless I feel like people have a warped idea of what healthy really looks like, which is that it varies incredibly from person to person. So I think having conversations about it especially with younger people is a really good idea.
  • justlookthroughme, Mauvee, Princess Daisy and 1 other like this
CW: 124
GW: 115
5’9

#12 Redheaded step child

Redheaded step child

    Advanced Sage

  • Validating
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1819 posts
  • LocationThe Firey depths

Posted 22 November 2019 - 10:23 AM

the root of this situation, i believe, is VS's refusal to diversify their models. with people nowadays embracing their bodies (as they should) i assume its hard for VS to remain relevant (edit: thus, their decision to cancelling it of their own accord)

my personal opinion on this, however (i might be getting backlash from this but this is purely my own personal opinion, as i mentioned earlier), is that VS has the right to keep their brand exclusive. if the image of VS is of tall, waif-thin skinny female skeletons then so be it. if they refuse to cater to every single public person's representation on the runway, then let them. its THEIR show. its THEIR identity. its the image that they have uphold probably since their brand conception.

while i fully support other brands endorsing body positivity because every body is different and beautiful in their own way (except mine because i cant convince myself that my body is acceptable) i feel like VS has the right to run their bussiness the way they want to even if it means the only target audience left for VS is people on this site. if they rather go bankrupt than be inclusive, its their decision.

what do you all think? please remain respectful in your comments. we're here to discuss, not to start arguments.

like one of their models is skinny all the good ones left. Now they was really mediocre. They all have the middle ages thing mom bod that nobody cares about.
Let's face it. Do you wanna see a bunch of soccer mom looking people on a runway with Taylor's swift prancing around thinking shes one of them? It get redundant quickly
  • mayrick22 and Anzui like this
no im not banned. Yes my profile is glitched. I guess I was accidentally immortalized.
But I cannot PM so if you'd like to talk to me please email me here [email protected]

I and trying to startup a new ED site. Where everything works and we all are a family. If youd like to help and maybe be a mod please join! There's posts about becoming mods and how to help us.

#13 skinnymissbitch

skinnymissbitch

    Sage

  • Accountability access
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1088 posts
  • LocationJupiter

Posted 22 November 2019 - 10:26 AM

I honestly just feel bad now for all the models who work their asses off to be able to be in the show but didn’t make it yet. Now they never get to


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • RumHam likes this

HW: 240lbs

CW: 194.4lbs

LW: 143.2lbs

UGW: 100

Height: 5"7'


#14 trubbish

trubbish

    Advanced Sage

  • Accountability access
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1809 posts

Posted 22 November 2019 - 10:36 AM

god this is hilariously sad since you think theyre cancelling it simply bc of some backlash over ~skinny models~

they have diversified their models a bit. a tad. always skinny, but yaknow 

that's not the problem theyre up against though 

 

VS is being recognized for the shitty company it is. VS's chief executive was known to frequent Jeffrey Epstein's mansion (which if you don't know, was kind of like a brothel of underaged girls for rich predators), and in general since that news broke, paired with the yearly trend of ppl debating whether or not to boycott VS for their models and shit, VS has seen a steady drop in sales

 

I mean. Love ya'll but the whole world aint about EDs. This Epstein shit is real news and the actual reason VS is trying to stay out of bad publicity and lay low to keep their patrons. 

 

 

Also literally any brand in the world can choose to market to a specific subset of people, but that certainly does not mean they won't face backlash for that. We're moving towards inclusivity, accountability, and responsibility for all individuals and brands alike. I hope VS gets phased out, that fucking executive dude sounds the peak of trash human beings. He praised Epstein as a friend and business partner all the way until the public got to know about his sex trade. Nasty as fuck.


  • ~Goddess Annea~, Kid A, Seitan and 12 others like this

🌱Accountability (113 to 89lbs)🌱

5'3.75 

CW: 91.4 (BMI: 15.8)

GW 1: 110 (BMI: 19)
GW 2: 100 (BMI: 17.3)
GW 3: 95 (BMI: 16.4)
LW: 90 (BMI: 15.9)
UGW: 85 (BMI: 15.1)
 

#15 PiggyTwiggy

PiggyTwiggy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 80 posts

Posted 22 November 2019 - 10:46 AM

I think the body positive movement hurt the brands popularity a lot and prevented new viewers from watching. But I also think they ruined the show for longtime viewers by repeating themes/outfits, bad music choices and bad filming.
I watched the show for years but stopped last year because I was tired of feeling like I was watching “The Jenner-Hadid Show (with some other people I guess)”. Plus it’s cringey af to watch Taylor swift flail around and think she’s a model.
  • Pygmalion Effect ~ and miss_world like this

#16 Dollie Bones

Dollie Bones

    Omniscient

  • Accountability access
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2751 posts

Posted 22 November 2019 - 10:50 AM

The VS models aren’t deathly skinny; I agree with the user above and think this is mainly about politics/Epstein.

I also think the newer models are lame and just... idk they don’t seem like real people. Giselle, Heidi, Tyra, adrianna, naomi all seemed like genuine people with semi-normal lives
  • mayrick22, Pygmalion Effect ~, Yeetmebigchugnus and 2 others like this

#17 Yeetmebigchugnus

Yeetmebigchugnus

    Advanced Guru

  • Validating
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 672 posts

Posted 22 November 2019 - 10:52 AM

Vs models are usually BMI 16-18
That isn't waif thin
  • ivyboned likes this

I swear each performance is the last ,but I lie every time. 


#18 Dwindling_Girl

Dwindling_Girl

    Omniscient

  • Accountability access
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4305 posts
  • LocationCanada

Posted 22 November 2019 - 12:00 PM

Although I think you're right, unfortunately their right to be able to do what they want with their business doesn't negate their 'social accountability'.

Sometimes society will hold people accountable for things (like using underweight models, not paying employees living wages etc.) And for the most part I think that's great. No one is forcing them to make a move, they usually just write an opinion article or something that exposes the truth so others can decide where they want to put their loyalty.
  • Joy_Incision and Princess Daisy like this

tumblr_mmyii8gf4C1qjnqapo1_500.gif

tumblr_inline_n2mpddWk2W1rg0g8s.gif

Height:
5'7"
Current weight:
120Lbs
Lowest weight:

85Lbs

:wub: Kind of in recovery? Maybe not so much :wub:


#19 vangoph

vangoph

    Advanced Guru

  • Accountability access
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 572 posts
  • Locationusa

Posted 22 November 2019 - 12:14 PM

I’m glad it’s over, any diversity they would’ve put in would’ve been so they’d stop getting yelled at online, not because they actually care about diversity. Don’t trust them as a company at all, especially after the Epstein thing. Them crashing and burning would be the best thing they’ve done thus far...their shit is overpriced as hell anyway.
  • trubbish, Joy_Incision, narcissistist and 3 others like this

#20 SpongebobZeroPants

SpongebobZeroPants

    Sage

  • Accountability access
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1190 posts
  • LocationIn a pineapple under the sea?

Posted 22 November 2019 - 12:45 PM

Vs models are usually BMI 16-18
That isn't waif thin

I wish I could thumbs this down. BMI 16-18 is medically underweight on a level that is dangerous to preserve life. On someone 5' 11" it is even more unsafe. Take away the extra weight for disproportionately big boobs, curvy hips, and ridiculously long hair/extensions (which if they are getting weighed, they get weighed with cuz they're sewn in long-term), and then plug them back through the newer BMI calculation for tall people, and you'll see that they're way underweight. Especially given that these are fitter models, so if one were to measure body fat (again, minus breast implants/naturally larger breasts), they would be a dangerously low level for the most part for long-term health. How do you know? Because the vast majority of them gain 20-30lbs/9-14kg when they get older and leave the runway. It is not a sustainable healthy weight for their body frames. Nor is it remotely like 99% of the body types found in adult women across the globe.

 

So good riddance to their shitty, sexist, racist, hyper-capitalist, superficial bullshit legacy. I look forward to a world where underfed young women strutting down a runway on 5 inch stilettos in lingerie and bikinis while creepy old men stare and take photos, walk into their dressing rooms at will, and rate them on a scale, and the whole world watches like this human auction block is normal or something to aspire to, is a thing of the distant past. Women and girls are treated like pieces of plastic for men's and boys' amusement, rather than as fully sentient beings with brains and ability to change the world, or to run the economy or governments. And yes, it really does have a deep impact on girls' sense of self as they are growing up, when lingerie shows, beauty pageants, and insta models/thirst traps/porn are such a big part of the culture. It certainly helped a lot of people to enter ED land in the first place, and to have such a warped sense of body expectations that we normalize here on MPA. How do we know? Because there are so many threads on MPA about VS, beauty pageants, Insta/youtube/twitter models, cam girls and porn. If it didn't affect us deeply, we wouldn't be talking about it on a forum for anorexia.

 

So with great love and compassion for everybody here, I just want to push back against this kind of idea wherever I can.

 

Tits on a stick does not make for healthy, for virtually anyone on Earth. Walking through blinding flashing lights on heels that have long since proven to warp women's backs and feet, and intentionally make it hard for them to run away or defend themselves in an emergency (not unlike foot binding in China), while wearing corsets that have been proven to shift organs and compress them to the point of loss of blood flow and potential tissue death, is not healthy. Adding so much fakery - eyelash extensions, cancer-causing makeup, lip implants, hair extensions, shoes to change height, shapewear to change shape of body, stockings to change shape of legs - gets us to the point in society, where the "ideal woman" does not even resemble a woman at all! And who designed these shows, these clothes, the makeup, the marketing so that women feel a need to buy buy buy...? Men. Some gay, some straight, some pedophiles, some playboys... but none of them interested in the general health or happiness of women. People whose first priority is money, and whose second priority is sex. So is it any wonder that's all we are to them as consumers?

 

I wish us all more healthy mindsets and expectations, and for us to demand that we are valued as equals in the hierarchy of world power. In industrialized nations across the globe, women make up 51% of the population! We are a MAJORITY! And yet we do not have equal pay, equal rights, or anything close to equal representation in the leadership of governments or corporations. Instead, we have countless methods for objectifying our bodies and emptying our wallets. We do not have shows of men walking down runways in heels and fake hair and eyelashes with a rating system for their bodies, airing on TV with huge viewership. All while global initiatives for women's health issues, childcare assistance, and domestic violence/rape prevention/aftercare are in the toilet. We need to demand better. And we need to eat more so we can think straight. Hope you're all having a good day, and taking a moment to take a little better care of yourselves. You have value and ability, so much above just what you look like in a bra and thong under harsh lighting.


  • ~Goddess Annea~, trubbish, SunFromHell and 19 others like this

I am trying hard to stay medically stable, after having caused permanent multiple organ damage, and losing everything I loved in my life to ED.

 

Did you know?:

 

*Female bodies generally require a minimum 1200cal/day; Males, 1800cal/day; just to have basic organ function (can require a lot more if tall and/or athletic).

*800 cal/day or less is considered medical starvation.

*The definition of high restriction is no more than a few hundred cals below TDEE. The definition of low restriction is generally anywhere between your BMR (likely at least 1200 cal/day), and high restriction. So for a person who when healthy has a TDEE of 2000 cal/day, high restriction is about 1600-1950, and low restriction is about 1200-1600. With patience, it is very possible to increase your TDEE so you can eat a lot more without gain.

*Eating less harms metabolism and shuts down systems. Eating more than the bare minimum can make metabolism work faster, and also help you feel way better. Low restriction is not necessary, is counterproductive, often leads to binges, and is super dangerous. It also causes the body to eat muscle and bone faster, which frequently leads to heart failure, osteoporosis, and seizures, among other things.

*The brain requires at least 130g of carbs at minimum, per day, just to function. And that is assuming you're not doing a ton of exercise, or very tall or muscular, or in other ways burning through the stores more quickly. Eating less than that, risks not only your intelligence, but causes more anxiety, BDD, depression, makes it very hard to think clearly and make reasonable decisions (including regarding the ED), and risks your organs failing because the brain is responsible for telling each of them what to do. It can also lead to dizziness, coordination, and speech and language problems. 

*You train your brain how to think, and your body how to act, with repetitive behaviors. Repeating healthy thoughts and behaviors every day makes being healthy get a lot easier. Repeating unhealthy thoughts and behaviors every day, makes getting better a lot harder.

*Malnutrition biologically causes depression, anxiety, and OCD behaviors like ED to get way worse. The brain needs carbs, healthy fats, B vitamins, Vit. D, calcium, and magnesium, among other things, to be able to think straight and feel happy. Getting enough of each, can make ED symptoms lessen in whole lot in time.

*Drinking around 96 oz. water/day, getting in daily balanced electrolytes and a multivitamin, and eating just a little bit of a wide range of foods and types of nutrients, can reduce likelihood for organ failure and seizures.

*The longer you stay in ED, the more severe your behaviors need to be to get the same results. It gets way harder over time, not easier, to hit goals.

*ED damage is cumulative, and each relapse gets increasingly more dangerous.

*Pro-ana content makes people sadder.

*ED makes everything in life worse, and does not solve problems. Building a wide range of stress management skills is a much better option, that also has longer-lasting results.

*Recovery might feel rough for a year, or a year and a half, but will feel awesome then for the rest of your life. Harm reduction is way better than nothing! Each day we get to live, is a new day to start over and try again.

*A majority of people with ED recover fully eventually. You can get there! The sooner you try, and commit fully to it though, the easier it is and the more likely it is to be permanent. It is easier if you don't have brain/organ damage yet. Keep trying! You deserve to be happy and healthy. <3



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users