Won’t somebody think of the children?!? (The only link I could find this early in the rising shitstorm)
To parse: Victoria’s Secret just opened a new store that they called “the nation’s sexiest” in Tyson’s Corner VA. And are currently getting deluged with complaints because the mannequins are so sexy that they are (in the minds of all the Miss McChurchyCan’tKeepHerTuttingToHerFuckingSelfs) so sexy that they are smut, pornography.
I’ll grant that VS has chutzpa to have big picture windows with posing mannequins in very skimpy lingerie, and to have them relatively close to a movie theater in the mall. Maybe not the greatest idea, with the general national opinion on sexual display (lest we ignore other examples such as Same Sex Marriage and of course, Janet’s Saggy Boob). Maybe it’s in poor taste to even try. Or maybe it’s completely worth the fire they’re going to get that they’ll get to say the entire time “sex is not evil. And our products can help facilitate sex being sparked back into relationships.” Personally, I don’t much care about VS here, other than to generally agree that a little display of sex is not a bad thing.
But in swarm the Defense of Family and Morals and the Baby Jesus busybodies who decide that as they feel sex to be evil and shameful, they must impose their view on everybody by raising the shitstorm.
Here’s an idea: you don’t like it, DON’T LOOK. Don’t go in the store, boycott and refuse patronage all you fucking want, avoid that spot of the mall. There’s a walkway on the other side. You can keep a good 15 foot buffer between you and the filth without breaking a sweat. But for those who like a little lingerie, for those who aren’t afraid to admit that sex can be a good, positive experience, let us have our fun and spend our money how we wish. And let our misguided heathen eyes be drawn to the displays all we want.
Of course, the store becomes the lead story on the local news stations, and a number of disingenuous points were raised, after a bullshit disclaimer that allowed the station to wash their hands of responsibility of showing the dirty images while still giving (guiltily) voyeuristic America what they want:
-There was a simulated display of lesbian sex in a mall-facing display window. I seriously doubt that. No matter how many mannequins one dresses up to look sexy, and heck even have the mannequins in sensual poses with one another, hiring live actresses probably just ain’t happening. I’m calling bullshit that the news is reporting conjecture as fact without proper checkfinding. Granted, I just don’t know on this one.
-It’s by a movie theater. Somebody think of the children who just want to go see shit getting blown up in A History of Violence, Serenity, or the upcoming Doom without being subjected to the horrific evil of WOMEN’S UNDERWEAR!
-Children brought in by their shopping parents are able to wander freely in the store, including the relatively open “adult” section. The parents don’t have a problem with teaching their children to have a healthy opinion of sex. Stop shoving your hangups on somebody else’s kids.
-It’s just EVIL and PORNOGRAPHIC. To echo Justice Potter Stewart, I know pornography when I see it. A commercial display of (some functional, some certainly not) women’s underwear is not pornography to me. It’s barely interesting at all until it’s on a flesh-and-blood (and hopefully no silicone) woman. If it is pornography to you, good for you, but don’t try and tell me what I think of it.
In short, Whiny Miss Moral Crusader Corps, fuck off and let the store exist in relatively unobtrusive peace.
