Scandalous display

Attention: racy mannequins coming to a mall near you. Apparently, it's not so much about what the Victoria's Secret mannequins are wearing, but how they are posing that has recently upset dozens of shoppers in the Virginia Tyson's Corner mall.\nWith Oliver's Owls toddler play room located just upstairs and a teen shopping hot spot nearby, the new Victoria's Secret national campaign titled "Backstage Sexy" is not faring well with parents in Virginia. Parents are getting their underwear in a twist over the racy campaign, some deeming it the "Little Shop of Whores" and others calling the lingerie "slut ware."\nAnd who's to blame them? Three stores down from a Gap Kids stands bare-bottomed mannequins in provocative poses and suggestions of bondage decked out in bejeweled garters, fishnets and feathery thongs. Not to mention the two females lounging side-by-side in a bed. \nWhile the mall has made some changes (one mannequin's bare bottom was turned around), it looks like Victoria's Secret no longer has any secrets. From soccer moms to PTA presidents, Victoria's Secret has received its fair share of telephone and e-mail complaints. Despite charges of pornography, some shoppers enjoy the display. \n"I like the dark side of Vicky's ... I have a husband, and I know he would love this. This is what keeps you happily married," a woman told The Washington Post.\nLadies, this is what it takes to keep your husband pleased: Look impossibly thin, dye your hair blond, buy microscopic lingerie and sprawl across the bed on all fours. The problem is not just that these displays are too sexy for middle America (One mother said, "This is shocking. This is semi-pornographic. This is insulting."), but that they objectify and demean women. Consider this: If mannequins were real women, they would be too thin to menstruate and bear children.\nIt's the same old problem. Remember the racy Abercrombie and Fitch catalogs that bore more resemblance to an issue of Playboy than actual clothing catalogs? In the 2002 edition, there were 54 pairs of exposed breasts, 40 girls who did not wear any clothing at all and one article that offered advice on how to get "this chick I banged last summer" to return phone calls. What kind of message does this send to Abercrombie's target consumer, a teenage girl?\nBut as we learned from Abercrombie, sex doesn't always sell. Hormones don't necessarily translate into increased sales, especially when soccer moms and PTA members are involved. As the protesting moms' pink stickers said, "No Bucks for Victoria's Secret Smut."\nHistorians have traced the conception of mannequins to the male's stereotypical desire for a woman who is mute, obliging and flawlessly beautiful. As a reflection of the "ideal" woman, many real women strive to look more like mannequins. In fashion magazines, women are airbrushed to perfection, and on the runway, breast implants and collagen have made women living Barbie dolls. \nLove it or hate it, Victoria's Secret's not-so-soft porn displays are sending young women the wrong message. It's time companies who market to young adults step up to the plate and demonstrate ethical accountability. And turning around one mannequin's bare posterior is simply not good enough.