Is Victoria’s Secret Identity Politics? – The Wall Street Journal

The retailer finds itself politically and culturally out of step.

Rhiannon Lucy Cosslett

complained at the Guardian of the “pornified aesthetic” that the “male gaze” had foisted upon Victoria’s Secret’s customers. “It’s refreshing that comfort and inclusivity are now on the agenda,” she wrote. Big Think’s

Molly Hanson

credited the “body positivity” movement for the cancellation, which she called the “nail in the coffin to an archaic, androcentric definition of ‘sexy.’ ”

Conservative commentators expressed similar sentiments. The Washington Examiner’s

Madeline Fry

called the show a “sordid event” staged by a company whose “advertising has always been about fulfilling male fantasies.”

The left also complained that Victoria’s Secret models lack “diversity.” True, Victoria’s Secret made the reputations of black supermodels

Naomi Campbell

and Tyra Banks. But “none of the models have been plus size or gender nonconforming,” Buzzfeed’s Scaachi Koul grumbled. Asked why in November 2018, Ed Razek, L Brands’ marketing director, told Vogue: “Because the show is a fantasy.” Mr. Razek has left the company, and in August Victoria’s Secret hired

Valentina Sampaio

as its first transgender model.

It is quite a change since 1977, when

Roy Raymond

founded Victoria’s Secret as a bordello-décor haven for men to buy sexy underwear for their wives and girlfriends. Raymond’s birthday- and holiday-focused business plan couldn’t sustain sales. When Mr. Wexner bought the chain in 1982, his first move was to reconfigure the stores to appeal to women who couldn’t afford to spend hundreds of dollars for a La Perla bra but would snap up midpriced lace and satin.

Mr. Wexner marketed his wares by employing gorgeous models like Ms. Banks,

Heidi Klum,

Gisele Bündchen

and

Candice Swanepoel.

That was Mr. Razek’s “fantasy”: Customers knew they didn’t have supermodel bodies, but the idea was that some of the glamour would rub off on them. And of course it was an “androcentric” conception of sexiness. The vast majority of women are heterosexual.

Beauty, however, is not democratic. And in the age of militant identity politics, identity has replaced beauty as a marketing strategy. Increasing numbers of women, especially the loudest in the media and social media, aren’t interested in partaking vicariously of the supermodel glamour of

Kendall Jenner

or

Gigi Hadid.

They demand instead to be told that they themselves are just as lovely as Ms. Jenner and Ms. Hadid—and to see versions of themselves on the runway.

One form of fantasy has been traded in for another. Plus-size and other figure-flawed ladies are now ubiquitous in womenswear advertising, especially among Victoria’s Secret’s upstart competitors: Aerie, Third Love, and singer Rihanna’s Savage X Fenty line. An X Fenty fashion show that streamed on

Amazon

Prime in September was heavy on performers of uncertain sex and hefty bra-and-panty models showing off their cellulite dimples.

Beauty has been declining in Western culture for more than a century, starting with the fine arts. Now it’s vanishing even from advertising. But the market is democratic, and we’ll see if social justice can sell underwear.

Ms. Allen is author of “The Human Christ: The Search for the Historical Jesus.”