Page Summary
yendi - (no subject)
leiacat.livejournal.com - (no subject)
cjsmith.livejournal.com - Random thought in response
wispfox.livejournal.com - Re: Random thought in response
wispfox.livejournal.com - (no subject)
wispfox.livejournal.com - (no subject)
wispfox.livejournal.com - (no subject)
wolfieboy.livejournal.com - Re: underpants
cjsmith.livejournal.com - Re: underpants
wispfox.livejournal.com - Re: underpants
yendi - Re: underpants
wispfox.livejournal.com - Re: underpants
yendi - (no subject)
leiacat.livejournal.com - (no subject)
leiacat.livejournal.com - (no subject)
wispfox.livejournal.com - (no subject)
wispfox.livejournal.com - (no subject)
cjsmith.livejournal.com - Re: underpants
ayalanya.livejournal.com - (no subject)
leiacat.livejournal.com - (no subject)
wispfox.livejournal.com - (no subject)
motyl.livejournal.com - (no subject)- (Anonymous) - (no subject)
quietchylde.livejournal.com - (no subject)
wispfox.livejournal.com - (no subject)
wispfox.livejournal.com - (no subject)
wolfieboy.livejournal.com - Re: underpants
quietchylde.livejournal.com - (no subject)
dancingwolfgrrl.livejournal.com - (no subject)
wispfox.livejournal.com - (no subject)
wispfox.livejournal.com - (no subject)
leiacat.livejournal.com - (no subject)
wispfox.livejournal.com - (no subject)
motyl.livejournal.com - (no subject)
lightgatherer.livejournal.com - (no subject)
rosefox - (no subject)
cjsmith.livejournal.com - (no subject)
dancingwolfgrrl.livejournal.com - (no subject)
leiacat.livejournal.com - (no subject)
leiacat.livejournal.com - (no subject)
leiacat.livejournal.com - (no subject)
rosefox - (no subject)
cjsmith.livejournal.com - (no subject)
wispfox.livejournal.com - (no subject)
Style Credit
- Style: by
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags
no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 06:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 06:31 pm (UTC)Random thought in response
Date: 2005-07-22 06:34 pm (UTC)The society I live in is profoundly weird.
Re: Random thought in response
Date: 2005-07-22 06:42 pm (UTC)The society I live in is profoundly weird.
Indeed. To all of that!
no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 06:45 pm (UTC)However, yes - the trend you are noting is certainly one I've seen often enough.
Variety, people, variety!
no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 06:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 06:46 pm (UTC)Re: underpants
Date: 2005-07-22 06:47 pm (UTC)Re: underpants
Date: 2005-07-22 06:57 pm (UTC)I admit that every time I look in my underpants I see a, well, a smallish curvy woman. Part of one, anyway.
Re: underpants
Date: 2005-07-22 07:03 pm (UTC)Re: underpants
Date: 2005-07-22 07:03 pm (UTC)Re: underpants
Date: 2005-07-22 07:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 07:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 07:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 07:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 07:09 pm (UTC)(otherwise, seriously, though - yes, reality is far more wide than any specific ad or generalization can make use of. Thus, the problem)
no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 07:10 pm (UTC)*grin* Yes! ;)
And I have no useful reply, because advertizing is, in it's core, about generalizations.
Re: underpants
Date: 2005-07-22 07:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 07:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 07:29 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 07:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 07:50 pm (UTC)Because while they do exist in the real world, there aren't many naturally ribby triple Ds, and I've certainly never seen a woman without pores =P
no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 07:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 07:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 08:03 pm (UTC)Commentary, however, not so good... Meh. (are you
no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 08:03 pm (UTC)Re: underpants
Date: 2005-07-22 08:04 pm (UTC)My second thought was a
After reading the comments, it made much more sense...
no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 08:14 pm (UTC)sorry bout that. silly being-at-work. feel free to delete one or the other ;)
no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 08:17 pm (UTC)The irony is that they're mostly accompanied by ads for Dove's "Intensive Firming Lotion." They have catchy slogans, like "Let's face it: firming the thighs of a size 2 supermodel isn't exactly a challenge."
It's a bizarre double message: "Look, all these women are beautiful! But they'd be even *more* beautiful with firmer thighs!"
no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 08:18 pm (UTC)(and I get it; I forget to log in before replying to comments _often_)
no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 08:18 pm (UTC)And I still love your icon. ;)
no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 08:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 08:24 pm (UTC)And that is all I have to say. :)
no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 08:47 pm (UTC)And while I don't think I've been turned down for cuddling, it's still no fun to have people react with shock when they find out how much I weigh. And I still don't know what to make of being told I have "serious wristage" =P
no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 09:14 pm (UTC)What I think of when I see these ads are that the women are fit, of a variety of sizes, and all beautiful in their own way. While more variety in the ads would be nice, I don't think that a woman with large amounts of cellulite would be able to promote a firming cream as effectively.
I don't think that the ads convey the message that all women are beautiful but rather that a wider range than is commonly accepted are beautiful. It's not a perfect message, but I think that it's an excellent step in the right direction.
no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 09:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 10:03 pm (UTC)[In a girly-confidences voice attempting to hide an edge of desperation:] Sooooooooooo! Where do you shop??
no subject
Date: 2005-07-22 11:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-23 03:02 am (UTC)I've got a stash of Victoria's secret ones that they don't make anymore. (I found them in one of those semi-annual sale bins, and picked up every one I could find).
Currently, I have high hopes for a particular Playtex (http://www.playtexnet.com/detail.asp?id=251&bId=13) one that they don't have in 32, but I think a 34 would work on me on the tightest setting (which I know isn't too helpful to you). A couple of my favorites came from TJ Maxx (Jockey, and they don't make'em like that anymore), which is always a hit-and-miss proposition.
On the other hand, right now I'm actually a bit skinnier than I should be. When I don't stress so much that I forget to have lunch for a few months, I'm a 34, which makes shopping a lot easier.
no subject
Date: 2005-07-23 03:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-23 03:08 am (UTC)Also, thank you!
no subject
Date: 2005-07-23 06:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-23 08:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-25 03:58 pm (UTC)Agreed. :)