Lana Yoo
Victoria may or may not really have a secret, but she sure stirs peculiarities – one of them being the significance of the Victoria’s Secret Semi-Annual Sale, currently going on until the end of January.
It’s pretty bizarre, really. How can a lingerie chain’s sales be calendar-marking events? Yet, we find women piling into the stores during these sales.
The root of VS’s peculiarities are the VS models (“Angels”), the revered fashion icons of a lingerie monopoly.
Indeed, female sexuality permeates marketing campaigns because it works, albeit being commonly accused of objectifying women.
However, a new connotation of female sexuality is emerging. Given its influence, impact and power in society, today’s female sexuality in advertisements defies its previous position of dehumanizing objectification.
It is a common view that female sexuality is exploited to lure men into buying masculine products such as cigarettes, cars and alcohol.
Interestingly, ads geared toward women employ these images too, including Victoria’s Secret, which aims at an exclusively female market.
Flip through a woman’s magazine and you’ll find ad spreads similar to those targeted toward men: women in seductive positions, half-naked, promoting makeup, perfume, clothing and other beauty products to women.
“Female sexuality sells. It sells to men who want to have it, and to women who want to emulate it,” said Rocio Rosales, a student coordinator for UCLA’s Sociology of Gender Working Group and graduate sociology student.
So why are women perpetuating these advertisements by responding to these “objectifications” – memorizing Angels’ names and idolizing them?
And it’s true that VS models are objectified – we’ve all seen men ogling outside a VS store. But why do these models not suggest the vulgarity associated with objectification? What is the difference between these models and, say, prostitutes?
VS Angels occupy prestigious positions in society as elite supermodels. Today’s lingerie models, seen as respectable individuals and not as dehumanized sex objects, reflect the expanding freedom of female sexuality.
In the streets, women wear shirts with “Can’t Touch This” written across their chest. On Halloween, merchants report that promiscuous costumes account for the highest sales, according to the New York Times.
Perhaps these bolder assertions derive from growing female independence, with more women attaining higher education, leading governments and high-powered companies – which adds to clashes over conventional ideas of marriage, sexuality, and the overall ideal of femininity.
“The new young women ... brazenly enjoy their sexuality ... (and the) absence of finding a husband is countered by sexual self-confidence,” Angela McRobbie wrote in an article titled “Post-Feminism and Popular Culture.”
The difference between Angels and prostitutes is that Angels have more or less chosen these paths – symbolic of the modern woman’s autonomy – whereas prostitution is a sign of desperation and being victimized by financial crises.
Of course, there’s always the controversy over only a subset of women – the unnaturally tall and thin – being represented as sexually empowered and desirable.
Regardless, it is interesting to see female sexuality’s grip on society alongside growing female independence.
Perhaps this is Victoria’s biggest secret of all: that the men ogling outside her store, the millions of shoppers in her stores and her women admirers are all reflections of the controversial, but provocative, face of the changing modern woman.
If you’re a victim of the lingerie monopoly, e-mail Yoo at jyoo@media.ucla.edu. Send general comments to
viewpoint@media.ucla.edu.