ABC & FOX ban plus sized lingerie model commercial

Resi12

The commercial:

Her reaction:

How stupid, I mean what message are they sending to people banning such a commercial? ABC refused to show it during/after Dancing With The Stars because it shows "too much skin", now I am sorry but the irony of that is sickening. She is a beautiful woman and it is nice to see them portrayed in the media, shame the broadcasters are too narrow minded.

JupiterKid

Typical pathetic American moral puritanism. TBH that country is still in the dark ages in social terms - no problem executing someone with a firing squad but a bit of flesh is deemed obsecne.

A society with a very warped sense of priorities.:(

Or it a could be a ploy of actually getting some "controversy" going to get the product and the model noticed. Banning pop songs in the past made them go to No.1.

Relax, anyone?:cool:

starbelgrade

Nice bazunkas.

bonerm

*boing*

myflipflops

Dan is a lucky b**tard.

Stinicker

More cushin for the pushin! :pac:

Mrmoe

jaysus, not bad, not bad at all:eek:

Duggy747

Ban the skinny bitches commericals!! THIS is a damn fine woman!

*wipes drool off keyboard*

bonerm

That's a real woman. (not really, she's far too good looking).

Stinicker

Duggy747 wrote: »

*wipes drool off keyboard*

Are you sure thats all it was?

squod

Poll added.











In my pants!:D

Duggy747

Stinicker wrote: »

Are you sure thats all it was?

That's what I call "it" :pac:

force majeure

What a let down, like I always liked to see those add's on the TV, my tired eyes just cant focus on the skinnies. :P

Euro_Kraut

How could any man stand over the decision to ban that ad??

JONJO THE MISER

Jaysus my type of woman, mmmmmmmmmmm Jonjo likes.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

JupiterKid wrote: »

Typical pathetic American moral puritanism. TBH that country is still in the dark ages in social terms - no problem executing someone with a firing squad but a bit of flesh is deemed obsecne.

A society with a very warped sense of priorities.:(

Or it a could be a ploy of actually getting some "controversy" going to get the product and the model noticed. Banning pop songs in the past made them go to No.1.

Relax, anyone?:cool:

... and we're not...???

Super-Rush

Closes thread.


I need to..eh.. check the validity of the video.


Fcukin hell.....

davyjose

JupiterKid wrote: »

Typical pathetic American moral puritanism. TBH that country is still in the dark ages in social terms - no problem executing someone with a firing squad but a bit of flesh is deemed obsecne.

A society with a very warped sense of priorities.:(

Or it a could be a ploy of actually getting some "controversy" going to get the product and the model noticed. Banning pop songs in the past made them go to No.1.

Relax, anyone?:cool:

/Overheal's head explodes

MagicMarker

WTF?

She's not plus sized, she's NORMAL!!







.....and smoking fúcking hot.

starbelgrade

MagicMarker wrote: »

WTF?

She's not plus sized, she's NORMAL!!







.....and smoking fúcking hot.

Her jugs are f*cking massive.

marco_polo

Resi12 wrote: »

The commercial:

How stupid, I mean what message are they sending to people banning such a commercial? ABC refused to show it during/after Dancing With The Stars because it shows "too much skin", now I am sorry but the irony of that is sickening. She is a beautiful woman and it is nice to see them portrayed in the media, shame the broadcasters are too narrow minded.

By the fact that you are shocked I take it you have never tried watch an R rated film on a major American TV Network?

Duggy747

So, which one would you choose?

It wasn't me!

*boggle*

Overheal

A little late to the punch, OP.

Remember yesterday, when we wrote about some major TV networks balking over whether or not to air a sexy Lane Bryant lingerie ad? Well, it looks like Fox -- the arbiter of good taste in prime time -- has decided to not be so prim and proper, and will actually air the commercial.
According to BrandWeek, the spot will run during the April 28 broadcast of American Idol. "Following Lane Bryant's refusal to make requested edits, Fox agreed to air the unedited ad during the last 10 minutes," the site quotes a source as saying.
Meanwhile, ABC, who Lane Bryant said would only air the ad during the final seconds of Dancing With the Stars, denies the allegations:

“
Their statements are not true. The ad was accepted. Lane Bryant was treated absolutely no differently than any advertiser for the same product. We were willing to accommodate them, but they chose to seek publicity instead.”

http://consumerist.com/2010/04/fox-no-longer-has-anything-against-this-womans-boobs.html

It wasn't me!

Overheal wrote: »

A little late to the punch, OP.

http://consumerist.com/2010/04/fox-no-longer-has-anything-against-this-womans-boobs.html

Hehehe. I love the title of the article in the link.

Kasabian

Duggy747 wrote: »

So, which one would you choose?

The girl at the back talking to the guy , she looks dangerous

Wibbs

Duggy747 wrote: »

So, which one would you choose?

Honestly? One of the two on the right, or maybe lonad's choice . The subject of the OP would be much bigger than I personally like. And thats grand. Im clearly in the minority.

Plus its still BS. Look at how the video is cut. If they're "celebrating her curves" than why do they not show her curves? The long shot of her has her wearing a dressing gown type thingy that covers said curves. If she was a victoria secrets model they wouldnt have. The ad is all about her face and tits, everything else is hidden. As I say, the usual BS.

davyjose

Wibbs wrote: »

HThe subject of the OP would be much bigger than I personally like. And thats grand. Im clearly in the minority.

You need your dick confiscated if you don't find her hot. :eek:

spinandscribble

Wibbs wrote: »

Plus its still BS. Look at how the video is cut. If they're "celebrating her curves" than why do they not show her curves? The long shot of her has her wearing a dressing gown type thingy that covers said curves. If she was a victoria secrets model they wouldnt have. The ad is all about her face and tits, everything else is hidden. As I say, the usual BS.

I noticed that as well, I kept thinking, how stupid this is that they wouldnt show her ass, which is probably just as nice as the rest of her.

Dudess

Resi12 wrote: »

ABC refused to show it during/after Dancing With The Stars because it shows "too much skin".

"Shows too much skin"? Eh, it's lingerie - that's what lingerie does...

Alicat

Well that's just depressing for all of us 'normal' girls We're not even allowed on the tv now?

Dudess

Alicat wrote: »

Well that's just depressing for all of us 'normal' girls We're not even allowed on the tv now?

Isn't it more about too much skin being revealed rather than the woman being considered too fat though?

Euro_Kraut

Dudess wrote: »

Isn't it more about too much skin being revealed rather than the woman being considered too fat though?

'Too much skin' is a euphemism for 'too big boobies' in this instance.

Wibbs

davyjose wrote: »

You need your dick confiscated if you don't find her hot. :eek:

Nope I dont. Gorgeous face but figure wise no. Doesnt do it for me. Too big for my scrawny undernourished bony arse. Not pushed on bewbs much beyond a C cup for a start. Plus if she's a size 12, I'm a 6'4" hunky bastard who women cant resist(I'm not, just in case there was any confusion ). I'd say 16/18 more like. And again bang on. Like I said contrary to the fashion industry's and too many womens take, men like me who like the smaller woman are actually a minority. Way more go for that woman's look. And more go for bigger again than go for smaller IME.

spinandscribble wrote: »

I noticed that as well, I kept thinking, how stupid this is that they wouldnt show her ass, which is probably just as nice as the rest of her.

Exactly. Usual "plus size, we love you" BS in play. She's in a very subtle way reinforcing the skinny stereotype, while apparently thinking she's making a difference(she's seems well clued in so I doubt she is TBH). Thats even more insidious IMHO. Like the "normal" women dove ad. The biggest size in that lot was a 12. Tops. I smell publicity stunt TBH.

Alicat

Dudess wrote: »

Isn't it more about too much skin being revealed rather than the woman being considered too fat though?

The "too much skin" thing is BS as far as I'm concerned. She's wearing a coat/dress/shirt thing for half the ad! If they were really concerned about "too much skin", they wouldn't allow half the ads on the telly these days and the girls from DWTS would be made cover up more.

MistyCheese

A size-16 lady flashing the flesh in an ad? Drool, Fap, Approve
A size-14/16 lady on Boards? Ew, You're too fat, A drain on society! Disgusting. You should lose weight. You're not healthy. You don't care about yourself.

Giselle

Wibbs wrote: »

I'd say 16/18 more like. And again bang on.

American size 12 is a size 16 in Irish/British sizing.

Wibbs

Yep we'll show the bits that most skinny women dont have(bewbs) without surgical help, but cover up the bits that dont "fit".

Scram

Mrmoe wrote: »

jaysus, not bad, not bad at all:eek:

this was banned? lol wow americans you can shoot anyone with a gun but show some boob and its all over.

Wibbs

Giselle wrote: »

American size 12 is a size 16.

Doh! sorry yes.

Piste

I don't get it, where does it say it was banned because she's a plus-sized model? (God I hate that term, fashion's "plus size" is reality's "average" =/)

Euro_Kraut

Wibbs wrote: »

Like I said contrary to the fashion industry's and too many womens taste, men like me who like the smaller woman are actually a minority. Way more go for that woman's look. And more go for bigger again than go for smaller IME.

I think that is often the issue with models. Models are not meant to be attractive to men. They supposed to are attractive to women. Not sexually, perhaps appealing is a better word.

When models are involved the target market is nearly always women. Therefore the industry often reflects a womens ideas of what a beautiful women is, rather than a mans.

It would explain why often models have smallish boobs.

Dudess

Piste wrote: »

I don't get it, where does it say it was banned because she's a plus-sized model?

Yeah, but I think others are arguing the "too much skin" excuse is a smokescreen, seeing as there's never such a fuss over slimmer women (but also with big boobs) showing too much skin in ads.

Alicat

Piste wrote: »

I don't get it, where does it say it was banned because she's a plus-sized model? (God I hate that term, fashion's "plus size" is reality's "average" =/)

They don't, apparently

A source at Lane Bryant said: 'The cleavage of the plus-size model, they said, was excessive, and we don't think that's the case.

Just a cover up for not wanting her on the tv! Wasn't there a Dior ad where Charlize Theron stripped down to her nip, walking away from the camera? No complaints about that as far as I'm aware. There are countless ads on the tv for all sorts of underwear/perfumes, models walking around half-naked and you don't see them banning them.

Last one I remember them banning was Eva Mendes for CK because they showed a nipple. Maybe a bit of an over-reaction but fair enough.

K-9

Whether you find her size attractive or not, the point is the ad would be shown during Dancing on Ice, probably more flesh shown during that!

PS. She is hot.

Euro_Kraut

I think I should help inform the debate by letting you know that the model in question (Ashley Graham) is in this photo, third one in from the left.

Ashley Graham and some friends

MistyCheese

Euro_Kraut wrote: »

I think I should help inform the debate by letting you know that the model in question (Ashley Graham) is in this photo, third one in from the left.

Ashley Graham and some friends

Which one is she?

Resi12

Fox agreed to air this but only if it is an edited version and they also gave a date of its airing (28th during American Idol) which is a bit odd for an ad, perhaps they only plan to show it once and no more after that.

ABC deny they rejected it and claim Lane Bryant are only after publicity but I don't really believe that. Whatever is being said still isn't the full story by all parties involved surely?

Wibbs

MistyCheese wrote: »

Which one is she?

The brunette you ringed at the top. She has a very pretty face, redolent of Eva Mendes.

MistyCheese

Thanks Wibbs, I did think so, but wasn't clear.

Euro_Kraut

MistyCheese wrote: »

Thanks Wibbs, I did think so, but wasn't clear.

Sorry. By 'third one in from the left' I meant 'fourth one in from the left'.

Obviously.