I just received an ask about this above photo.
Do I think it’s a *good* thing… yeah. It’s hard to have anything against the premise that an underwear retailer is making a point to not hire supermodels and to not retouch their images.
Do I think it’s revolutionary, a sign that feminism has won, completely void of problems… not at all.
Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s a good thing that companies are realizing they aren’t allergic to the look of a non-airbrushed body. This is a victory that is probably already making a lot of young lingerie buyers feel empowered/more comfortable.
But we should be careful in making sure we don’t make the mistake to frame this as something that all women are empowered/feel good about. I think it’s worth noting that whenever ad campaigns use body positivity as a marketing strategy they still only show imagery of “acceptable flaws” and “acceptable plus size bodies.”
In short. I think it’s perfectly acceptable to feel like this is positive. I personally am interested to seeing how these types of media campaigns evolve and change media. However, keep in mind that media still operates in a problematic bubble, and to be respectful to the voices of people who might still feel excluded/insulted/left out and rejected by things that others find positive.
The ad does a good job of rejecting absolute perfection. In her latest album Beyonce sings that “perfection is a disease of a nation” and I see a lot of people destroy themselves in order to replicate it. But does this campaign, or any other embrace bodies like mine? Does it embrace the body type of a majority of it’s constituents?
We can celebrate these things, but if we want to go farther and push more - we should support more local/less well known initiatives that highlight bodies of color, dark skinned bodies, fat bodies, trans bodies, dis-abled bodies etc. Letting one overshadow the other will defeat the purpose.