Are Curvy Women Too Sexy for TV?

In a tasty morsel of lingerie-related news that’s sweeping the blogosphere, Lane Bryant alleges that ABC network rejected their brand new Cacique lingerie ad for being “too sexy.”  Yes, the very same ABC that broadcasts the Victoria’s Secret fashion show every year.

According to Lane Bryant, ABC demanded excessive editing and recuts because the model’s cleavage was, well, too cleavagey.  ABC vigorously denies the claims and is all but calling Lane Bryant a bunch of liars.

Regardless of what actually happened, this is an excellent excuse to post a couple of lingerie commercials.  For your perusal, I present the deliciously sexy Lane Bryant lingerie ad, followed by the scandalously scintillating Victoria’s Secret ad from their most recent fashion show.

Tell me which one you prefer in the comments!


Credits: Thanks to LunarCamel for the heads-up! Photo courtesy of Fox News.

18 Comments

  1. Kristine
    23/04/10 at 6:53

    I've read about this earlier and what strikes me is that no one is saying if the posted LB commercial is the original or it it is the post-edited version per abc's request. I'm assuming it's the original. And yes, those organization who denied airing it are just a bunch of pigs.

    The VS commercial has a woman posing on a pool table with her ass in the air, which is supposedly less provocative and suggestive than merely having large breasts. Bizarre

  2. Evija
    23/04/10 at 7:33

    This is simply ridiculous. I mean, mathematically the larger breasts are even more covered and the lingerie itself provides more coverage than that of VS models.
    Besides, I have to agree with what Kristine said about the girl on the pool table.
    What is more, the VS ad is nearly trashy compared to the LB ad: the makeup, the way the models move, everything!
    Well, I guess you could say that being THAT confident is WAY too sexy for TV.. And maybe the person responsible for the airing has size AAA breasts? That might explain it!

  3. mzfatbooty
    23/04/10 at 9:06

    As a big girl, I've always had issues with this. A tank top on my tiny breasted friend was cute, but somehow massively inappropriate because my breasts were too "pronounced". It can be frustrating, especially since nearly everything EASILY ATTAINABLE for my size is matronly–as though we don't want sexy lacy bras too! (and without trekking to Intimacy or ordering online.)

    I find it disheartening that though both ads are using sensuality and sexuality to sell their products, the one that might also affirm plus-sized women is the one that gets silenced.

  4. Panty Buns
    23/04/10 at 9:48

    i definitely prefer the look of the model and the editing in the Lane Bryant Commercial. The model in the Lane Bryant commercial looks healthy and normal, whereas in the Victoria's Secret commercial the women look emaciated, the music doesn't fit the product, and all the sudden flashing light changes and over-editing are very hard on the eyes and would make me want to change the channel. Curvy Wome Rock. Victoria's Secret needs a management shake-up.

  5. Katie@Knickersblog
    23/04/10 at 9:51

    Sorry I'm really too bias. I don't like VS at all. Their marketing tactics are abhorrent (from their duel catalogs charging women more than men to the sexy children lingerie -preteens) oh and their bras are poor fitting.

    I really liked seeing Lane Bryant break free of their staid past but they still don't make bras I can wear (smallish back/large cup)

  6. Nicole Maki
    23/04/10 at 10:04

    This really sets my teeth to grinding. Thank you for bringing it to my attention.

    This morning over breakfast we used your post as the base of a discussion about censorship, culture, body image sexuality etc. My husband (41) and boys (13,12,11) all thought the LB ad was less scandalous and more affirming to women (and they thought she looked "pretty and nice") whereas the VS ad was annoying and made them uncomfortable as well as the girls need to eat a bit.

    Hands down, everyone agreed the VS ad was a bit much – especially the pool table bit.

    I may post about this (linking to you of course) as it's a shame how us big-on-top girls are always accused of being too much in whatever we wear. It's a tent or an X rating. *sigh*

  7. Kelly
    23/04/10 at 11:17

    I'm so angry at this.

    From what I hear, the argument against the commercial is that the time slot is more oriented toward "family" shows. Or something. I *know* I have seen VS (and other lingerie commercials) on those channels before 10pm. I usually don't watch much TV after 10pm and I've seen my fair share of lingerie commercials. So anyway, my point is: I could understand the "family programming" argument *IF* the networks were similarly conservative when it comes to the other commercials they show in that time slot (and TV shows, even – the Desperate Housewives wear their fair share of lingerie and the Dancing with the Stars cast might as well be in lingerie when you look at some of their costume).

    And you know what, I've seen Playtex commercials on those channels before around 8/9pm. I don't know if you know the ones – there are a few full-figured women in their bras talking about how much they love their chest and love their new bra. But it's not a "sexy" commercial, the women are more friendly/funny. So as far as I can see, the message these networks are sending is "you can be sexy, as long as you're skinny, and if you're not skinny then you're only allowed to be jolly because no one wants to see you sexy"

    BARF.

  8. Nicole Maki
    23/04/10 at 13:10

    Just saw a VS commercial during Survivor which is considered family friendly and is on well before 10:00 PM.

    Sad state of things.

  9. Andy
    23/04/10 at 19:59

    I'm going to change my name to Dan

  10. sexylegsandbody
    23/04/10 at 22:43

    Nothing wrong with curvy women, my opinion is that if you are a woman and you have the desire to look sexy, you can wear sexy lingerie, no matter what your shape or size.
    It is after all your body and your choice.
    As for the commercial, no comment.
    Colin.

  11. Skinny Dip
    24/04/10 at 11:55

    I think the Lane Bryant girl is WAYYYYY sexier than any of the Victoria's secret girls. Her curves are amazing! With that said, I think the network is being prejudiced. The Lane Bryant commercial IS suitable for TV (what's wrong with showing a normal looking woman, being sexy & natural looking?!). Whereas I feel like the V.S commercial (although fun to watch) is a lot more gratuitous and is selling a fantasy look that isn't very realistic. I say go curves!

  12. badside
    24/04/10 at 16:48

    Well, you already know what I think, I can't stand prudes! BTW, ABC does NOT air the VS fashion show, that would be CBS. ABC is owned by parent company Disney and thus the oddball prudism that crops up over there.

  13. FashionJazz
    25/04/10 at 8:28

    Wow, this is really interesting post hun. Hope u are well and having a lovely wknd! xx

  14. MissNeira
    28/04/10 at 8:10

    I totally see them banning it for too much sexiness..its true curvier women have a lot more sex appeal on camera, its just the nature.. but they are soo not cool for being prudes

  15. Anonymous
    29/04/10 at 4:12

    I haven't seen either of those ads here in the UK – but we do have our own curvy ones here. Like the Simply Yours one… very cute!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2UioXyw6hk

  16. Jerica Truax
    06/05/10 at 7:09

    I just wanted to say I think it's completely ridiculous that the LB commercial got a bad wrap. I thought it was great!

Leave a Comment

Thanks for leaving a comment! I love hearing from TLA readers.