Victoria’s Secret and Rule 5

Stacy McCain’s Rule 5 states: Everybody loves a pretty girl. [Boldface in the original.]

After all the years that Victoria’s Secret has been in business, you’d think that they would have some grasp of that Rule, but it seems that they’ve gone woke. The company has announced they will switch from the models they have been employing in the past and begin being represented by a new sort. They refer to these new models as The VS Collective, and they have published headshots of seven “founding members.”

Tastes vary. From my perspective, two or three might pass my standard for pretty, and I suspect (but can’t tell from the headshots) that the athletes in the group probably have the sort of well-toned bodies that look good in a bathing suit. However, the group as a whole doesn’t strike me as the sort of women who can effectively model Victoria’s Secret’s products. The tone of the webpage announcing The VS Collective suggests that the “women” were selected more for their politics than their appearance. One of them has a Y-chromosome. They’re described as “trailblazing partners who share a common goal to drive positive change.” Perhaps, but will that positive change be in Victoria’s Secret’s bottom line?

Sarah Hoyt commented—

I’d say the new plan is to appeal to butch lesbians, but that’s silly. By calling their new models the “VS Collective” they clearly want to appeal to communist butch lesbians.  I don’t think they’ve thought this through, though. There’s no way to put a Mao collar on a pair of panties.

Exit question: What sort of person finds a group of people like The VS Collective to be attractive?

I’m Not Making This Up, You Know

She Guevara is espousing Capitalism to support her Socialism—If you’d rather support genuine Capitalism (and save a few bucks while you’re at it), you can buy the Hogewash! Team Lickspittle sweatshirt for only $35.99 at The Hogewash Store.

Buy one and increase this blog’s taxable profits!

Shooting One’s Self in the Foot

Blake Mycoskie, the founder of TOMS Shoes, is a strong proponent of gun control, and he has spent millions of dollars of company funds pushing universal background checks. Now, creditors are taking control of the company, which has been losing money and was in danger of being unable to pay a $300-million loan due in 2020.

I took a look at the company’s website and found the image on the left. Maybe times have changed more than I realized, but I’m so old that I remember when men’s dress shoes were actually … well … dressy and suitable for wear with formal attire. If the company’s management has this sort of trouble understanding how to properly categorize their own products, I suppose it’s not surprising that they wouldn’t fail to see that sinking corporate funds into virtue signaling on a matter unrelated to the company’s business might not good for its bottom line.

Get woke. Go broke.