Sorry if someone already posted this but I just heard about a commercial for Lane Bryant that was either banned or only shown once on ABC and FOX. I don't see anything wrong with this commercial especially when you compare it to a Victoria's Secret ad. Here's a link to the commercial: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/21/lane-bryant-accuses-fox-a_n_546131.html Give me your opinions on the subject. (By the way I think the woman in the commercial is sex as hell. :smt077 )
Agreed, she's not showing anything you don't see on other commercials featuring smaller women, and Victoria Secrets commercials get plenty of air time. Cacique offers larger sizes of lingerie and bras than Victoria Secrets, so it stands to reason they'd feature a woman who can wear their sizes, just as Victoria Secrets features smaller women. You market to your demographic, plain and simple. Banning this commercial seems baseless to me, and a decision perhaps more influenced by someone's personal biases?
it is just a thang where they want a certain look. they need to have women to appeal for the masses. I like thinker women
Networks couldn't handle seeing all them tittays poppin!! A thick, glamazon like that in a two-piece lingerie set just looks more sexually provocative than a skinny Victoria's Secret model in the same outfit. That girl is gorgeous btw, like a super voluptuous Eva Mendez.
Damn!:heart: I normally go for the petite smaller girls but she is bangin. Kinda looks like a plus sized Eva Mendez.
That is so sad, yet the Victoria's Secret ones are supposedly the "standard" of beauty. She's gorgeous and I think it's so unfair. They're rockin' the same exact outfit, only she's meatier. Assholes!
I *know* it's cliche.. It's even cliche to *call* it a cliche... But is it FACT? Yes, it IS, m8's: ONLY IN AMERICA!!!!! 'Nuff Said!!!! OpinionsCartoonStudios@Yahoo.Co.UK
