Hollow Fantasy – Cleo Robins

Hollow Fantasy

Cleo robins

Is it possible for a brand to re-work their image if their entire business model is founded on patriarchal values?

There are a few notable brands that people love to hate. Some are divisive due to their proprietors – like Elon Musk’s innovative and eccentric company, Tesla. Many people despise Amazon, too, for the disparity between its minimum wage and the wealth of its founder, Jeff Bezos. But lingerie brand Victoria’s Secret is a special, glaring case. Renowned for its annual lacy runway extravaganza, Victoria’s Secret shows and capsules were, until recently, size-exclusive and predominantly modelled by white women. The company’s lack of inclusion has rubbed people the wrong way for several years and, recently, public distaste has taken a toll on the brand’s fortunes. In 2019, the annual Victoria’s Secret fashion show was called off amid growing controversy over its lack of diversity, and last year, due to the havoc-wreaking pandemic, the company was forced to close 250 of its stores worldwide.

Perhaps it was this misfortune, coupled with the realisation that trying to sell a fantasy perhaps isn’t all that realistic, that influenced Victoria’s Secret to announce that it would be completely overhauling its image. Victoria’s Secret revealed last month on Instagram that it had formed a new “VS Collective” of women

‘ACCORDING TO VICTORIA’S SECRET’S FOUNDER, ROY RAYMOND, THE INSPIRATION FOR CREATING THE COMPANY DEVELOPED FROM THE “EMBARRASSMENT” HE FELT WHENEVER HE TRIED TO PURCHASE LINGERIE FOR HIS WIFE.’

who are trailblazers in their field, to serve as advisors and ambassadors for the brand. This seems to be a step away from the legacy of the supermodel Angels, but is Victoria’s Secret’s belated diversification enough to entice consumers back into the pink-striped fold? Looking at the company’s history, I would argue that it will be hard for the brand to divest itself of some seriously icky baggage.

According to Victoria’s Secret’s founder, Roy Raymond, the inspiration for creating the company developed from the “embarrassment” he felt whenever he tried to purchase lingerie for his wife. He specifically wanted to develop a business front which made men feel welcome. When I read this quote from Raymond, I let out a guffaw of shock, but deep down his motivation makes sense. Only a company which was built on the excessive need for male dominance over female spaces could have produced the lollipop monstrosity that was the Victoria’s Secret fashion show.

The first fashion show took place in 1995, and was described by its overseer Ed Razek as an event of “self-assured strutting” and “voyeuristic pleasure.” The Victoria’s Secret fashion show only grew bigger and bigger after its inception, with its 2000 broadcast attracting two million viewers, and the advent of the internet spawning the opportunity for pirated viewing. The influence of the show throughout the 2000s and early 2010s was a great success for the Victoria’s Secret brand, but a detrimental event for the mental health and self-esteem of girls worldwide. I still remember discussing the show at school the day after it aired, pondering on the techniques the supermodels used to slim down their toned stomachs. I spent many hours Googling the Angels’ pre-show rituals, which ranged from fasting for hours, to foregoing water for the days leading up to the event. I am sure that many young girls went through similar experiences, trying to emulate the ‘perfect bodies’ of the Angels. Academics have also observed the way that Victoria’s Secret has contributed to the perpetuation of unrealistic body standards, and the lack of body diversity

was a key complaint which led to the cancellation of the show back in 2019.

The Victoria’s Secret fashion show has also come under fire for its lack of inclusion of transgender models. In 2018, creator Ed Razek responded to questions about why the show did not include trans women in the Angels line-up by saying that the show was “a fantasy.” Razek was criticised for his transphobic comments and he stepped down the following year, but as one of Victoria’s Secret’s longest-serving creative directors, it is hard to see how his harmful views wouldn’t be shared by at least a large proportion of the company’s staff. While Victoria’s Secret’s new branding strategy includes swapping out a male-dominated staff for a predominantly female board of directors, sceptical consumers are likely wondering how far, and how fast, the changes will trickle down.

I want to be optimistic about Victoria’s Secret’s about-face. It is heartening to see large corporations making an effort at inclusion, but with so many doing so, Victoria’s Secret just seems to be jumping on another trend to save their business. When there are so many emerging brands popping up, like Rihanna’s Savage X Fenty, and even smaller Australian businesses like Hara the Label – who are not only reworking the definition of lingerie, but the word sexy too – companies like Victoria’s Secret seem rather superfluous. What is the point of buying from a brand which was built to uphold limiting patriarchal values, when I can buy directly from women who are creating their own garments, the way they want to?

It is not enough to change the establishment by altering the brand image of existing companies. What is really needed is the dismantling of patriarchal power structures, and a redistribution of publicity to newer brands, which have been founded with the goal of diverse representation in mind. It seems the biggest fantasy that Victoria’s Secret has ever created, is the notion that a company which was created to epitomise male desire could ever serve the women it claims to empower.