Plus-Size Lingerie Ad Gets Rejected… for Being Too Sexy

Plus-size brand Lane Bryant has a new lingerie line out and a new commercial that features a beautiful model in lingerie – but when they submitted it to ABC, it was denied… because it showed too much skin (read “boobs”). At the same time, the brand points out that the Victoria’s Secret commercial was accepted, even though the VS models were just as uncovered.

Lots of details from Fox News:

ABC is issuing a fat-wa against full-figured models, plus-size label Lane Bryant says.

The Disney-owned network refused to air the brand’s lingerie ad during its hit show “Dancing with the Stars” saying it bared too much cleavage, a Lane Bryant insider said.

And Lane Bryant thinks the net’s executives are a bunch of prejudiced boobs.

“The cleavage of the plus-size models, they said, was excessive, and we don’t think that’s the case” said the source. “It certainly appears to be discrimination against full-sized women.”

Lane Bryant had been set to launch its campaign for Cacique, its new lingerie line, during “Dancing” this week.

After the ad was pulled, the company posted the too-sexy-for-TV spot on its Web site yesterday.

In it, a pleasantly plump model gracefully shows off her curves before the camera in a slew of sexy poses.

“Mom always said beauty is skin deep” a voice-over says. “Somehow, I don’t think this is what Mom had in mind”

Lane Bryant said Fox, too, had originally balked at showing the ad on “American Idol”

But a Lane Bryant insider noticed that a sexy Victoria’s Secret lingerie spot starring a skinny model had been slotted for “Idol” Tuesday night and complained about a double standard. That caused Fox to change its tune, the source said.

“They wouldn’t run the ad, but have you seen the Victoria’s Secret spots? If you saw the Victoria’s Secret spot and our spot, you’d see nothing different” the source added.

Fox bristled at the notion it gave Lane Bryant a hard time, saying it is set to air the ad during Wednesday’s “American Idol”

“We didn’t treat them any differently than Victoria’s Secret” a Fox spokesman said.

A rep for ABC declined to comment.

Fox had asked Lane Bryant to flash less flesh, the source said. But the label said no.

Both networks had a first glimpse of the disputed ad last month from Lane Bryant execs.

“They sent the storyboards in late March to Fox to approve. Fox rejected them, saying it was too racy, too risque” the source said.

“We said, – Wait a minute. It’s no more racy or risque than the Victoria’s Secret ads you’re running!’ They rejected them again, said, “No, no, no, edit things out!’ “

If the label had heeded Fox’s suggestions, the spot would have shown the model’s face – and virtually nothing else.

Wow, this one is definitely a debatable issue! Watch the video and share your thoughts!

Incoming search terms:

https://www skinnyvscurvy com/page/19?tag=cleavage

72 thoughts on “Plus-Size Lingerie Ad Gets Rejected… for Being Too Sexy”

  1. I would describe as a more conservative-type, and I think this commercial is tasteful and identical to Victoria Secret ads. There’s a definite double-standard here.

  2. *sneezes* I’m allergic to bulls—. Thus I better not see ANY Vicky Secrets commercials on ABC and if I do they better be wearing turtle necks……that is all…..lmao WHAT A FAIL OF A REASON. And just for the record I’m not against vicky secret commercials I like most of em a lot but what’s good for the geese must be good for the gander…..

    • Totally Agree!!! The problem here is that ABC has NO BALLS and they are too scared to air something that goes against the status quo.

      *but what they DON’T realize is, a majority of women are sick of being force fed this REDICULOUS idea that beauty only comes in a size 0 package. Which is totally unattainable for most of us. Don’t they realize they would sell more clothes if they fit well on actual WOMEN and not these clothes hanger thin models?

    • Totally Agree!!! The problem here is that ABC has NO BALLS and they are too scared to air something that goes against the status quo.

  3. what i know for sure is that the girl is very sexy and beautiful, this ad shows that u dont have to be skinny to be sexy, it’s all about attitude .

  4. The baring of cleavage argument is a bit idiotic, it’s a bra for heaven’s sake, if you have big b❆❆bs you’re bound to have a cleavage! The ad itself, it’s ok, sexy ads easily turn to looking cheap (which they often are, i think the “sexiest” ads i’ve seen usually promote some totally weird products), but this ad manages to be reasonable instead of tacky imo. I can see why they wouldn’t want to air it at all times, it is provocative, but i don’t know what the VS ads are like, i do think that if they use the same kind of language etc, the ads should be treated equally.

  5. @ versus: good story 😉

    definitely interesting. i think VS ads are much “hotter” and exude more sex than this ad does. i love the woman in this ad — she seems so confident and happy and THAT is what makes it sexy! this commercial did not warrant the censorship at all. i guess they don’t want ‘moms’ to look provocative which is a joke because humans are sexual, period.

  6. it’s not debatable if they send VS underwear ads. then it’s BS. but if they don’t, i find it stupid, and fox is a bunch of conervative white old men anyway, but it’s their right.

  7. I bet the people at Lane Bryant are thanking the gods for being rejected.

    There’s no publicity better then bad publicity (or in this case unfairness).

  8. Well first of all, that girl is HAWT!! Dan sure is going have a lucky lunch date looks like. 😉

    Secondly, that is nothing worse than Victoria Secret ads.

  9. I agree actually, yes i know they show FAR worse things on tv and in video clips.. but i don’t agree with that either 🙂

  10. I almost laughed. This is not racy at all. It’s actually a very pretty empowering ad. It says love how you look. That woman has a great body. She is healthy not obese and very beautiful. In the NEW VS all the girls are too skinny except doutzen they need to up their game.

  11. The shower gel commercials when a woman is standing naked in the shower runs everyday n they wont show THAT??

    I like this one, i thought it was cute and its nice with some variety.

  12. Besides they show ppl murdering each other, bloody fights and so much violence every single day on tv but god forbid you show a pair of b❆❆bs lol

  13. Well maybe it was rejected because as a more “average” woman she is sexier than the Victorias Secret chicks, who are getting almost scary skinny as the world gets heavier. I think she is super gorgeous and sexy.

  14. maybe they say it is too sexy because her b❆❆bs are so much bigger and shows so much skin because she is a much bigger woman??

    • hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
      i don’t think so
      more skin because she is bigger does not mean it is sexier.

      granted, she IS sexier than most VS models. confidence is everything! totally gorgeous, really think this ad could have been something empowering for women to see on television…alas the small mind of the man wins again.

  15. I love VS ads, this is nowhere near as suggestive or sex driven. It seems pretty tame in comparison, well now I’m going to be watching to see if they air VS ads on ABC.

  16. Craziness, the VS advertisement was accepted because the models don’t actually have boobs, so in comparison, this looks very ‘booby’.

  17. I think this whole thing has more to do with her b❆❆bs being bigger than with her being bigger…if she was a big woman with small b❆❆bs they might not of minded…though this is just an idea

  18. Does anyone know what time ABC actually airs the VS ads? I don’t know if I’m just missing them, but i usually only see them during later shows, like 9pm or 10pm? If they are only showing the VS ads at later time slots, then i don’t see anythign wrong with asking the ad to be toned down before it was aird during a major show like DWTS, which could be considered a family show…after all they are a Disney owned network that has to be fairly cautious with eveing programming. But if they are showing the VS ads during an 8pm slot, first they probably shouldnt be, and second they’re full of crap because they lose any excuse they could possibly come up with.

    I understand that the same thing looks very differnt on people with differnt body types, so yes there is more cleavage in this ad then in the VS ad, but the VS is one is by far more suggestive and racy than this one.

    • I totally agree w/ Sharen it is not a “plus size” issue , it is an issue of large breasts in general.

      And Nea brings a very strong point,that no on seems to be considering. However, I strongly agree and see your logic.

    • The VS ads are almost erotic.
      This ad is just fine, ABC and Fox are full of….!
      Ok, don’t air it during family shows, but not air it at all?!?

  19. …i really like the ad…i think its kinda sassy and very sexy- but not cheap at all….do you remember the ad with adriana lima( i loveeee her by the way)? she dressed up and made sexy faces and so on…i cant remember anyone mourning about this ad…..same right for everybody…


    the original version had copyright infringement issue with the phone the lady was using, so they edited the logo out and reposted the video.

    NOW only abc are being dicks about it. fox is going to air it next wednesday after american idol.

    i really don’t have a problem with the actual video/images of the ad, but the storyline sucks. they’re making that lady seem like a really trashy w—-. there is this idea that women with large breasts always flaunt them around and are therefore whorish. well, the smug voice-over in this is perpetuating that concept. i mostly just want to punch her, not buy lingerie.

    • Whoa, “trashy w—-“?

      Because *gasp*, this lady knows how to look good naked and is brimming with confidence?

      Please go back to the 1600s.

      • if you’re about to go out on a lunchdate with a guy, and you’re wearing a coat with only underwear underneath, i think that definitely sends out the wrong signals to young girls. i’m talking about the 14-17 year olds. the lady who looks like them on tv did it, so why shouldn’t they?

        would you be comfortable if you had a daughter who, at age 15, went and did this? curves/flatchested-ness/confidence argument aside, that would be messed up.

        • that’s ok, if they don’t see it in an ad, they’ll definitely see it in a movie! or over the internet!
          I get your point, but I believe it’s best to teach your children to make the right choices, rather than being paranoid.

    • I agree. I don’t have a problem with her body..I think she looks great. I do however have a problem with the suggestion she’s off to have sex. VS ads exude sex…not the intent to go have sex RIGHT NOW.

      • Where is the problem ? So what if she is out to have sex and therefore put on some sexy underwear ? I do not she anything wrong with that. Besides having sex and showing of her curves and some cleavage does not make her a w—- … jesus.

        Not to sound bitter but … if it would have been a man setting out to a “sex date” nobody would complain. Another double standard right there.

        I don’t see the problem with this ad at all, it’s classy, the woman is beutiful and has some amazing curves and they covered everything that should not be shown on TV. Total double standard ABC. I’m always amazed that something like that can still be a topic of discussion in the USA .

      • I believe the TV channels said “less flesh” not “a different message”. It’s a huge difference! And yes, VS ads do imply on having sex NOW (there is one with a girl in sexy underwear rolling around in bed while a voice said “waiting for him” or smth like that, one where a girl opens the door to her bedroom like it’s inviting the viewer in and with a really sexy look… and so on).

  21. well i’ve never been one who likes a plus sized figure but i do think this ad was sexy…i think just get rid of the close up on her enormous b❆❆bs and then it would be fine…she looks exactly the same as eva mendes when she walks out the door!!

  22. When there’s something’s bigger, fuller, rounder, you stare at it more. It’s more IN YOUR FACE, by virtue of dynamics and shape aesthetics. The same thing applies for people. Big boobs, big booty posing in the same way that a small girl with small b❆❆bs and small booty automatically makes a lot of people think the fuller is more p—-esque, more lewd, too abrasive. Tyra makes her big-busted girls tuck all that in and not arch their backs because it looks a bit too p—-y when you’re a fuller girl. That’s just the reality. Fuller is more in your face by virtue of there being more and what fuller figures have come to be associated with in society–more sexiness, more womanliness. Smaller makes it seem more delicate, less in your face, and thus, more acceptable. Only saying this because i GET aesthetically why fuller is viewed in the “TOO MUCH” department, although technically, if there’s a lewd pose, no matter the shape or figure, it’s still a lewd pose. But before I digress lol, I think the commercial is in good taste. I didn’t really need the underwear view. I think overall commercials are too racy anyway, but if you’re gonna run the Vicki ads and then say THIS was too racy, you’ve been eating a pile of hooha. It is bordering on the size discrimination level, and the commercial was quite tasteful I think.

  23. This is absolutely ridiculous and as a thinner, smaller-busted woman I’m completely offended.

    If anyone has seen a VS commercial, they would see that it is just as bad, if not worse than this commercial. VS oils up their models, and most of their commercial are second close shots of the models’ breasts and butts, in sexy poses.

    By not including this commecial, ABC is saying that VS sized models are not sexy. Maybe some of them aren’t, but I’m sorry, Candice is freaking hot. And so is Adriana, Heidi, Tyra, Gisele…etc and I’ve seen all of them in VS ads on ABC.

    Being a size 2 does not make you asexual nor unattractive. Neither does being below a D cup. And being a DD+ does not automatically make you “sexy” to the point of trashiness that you need to censor.

    Shame on ABC. But I’m willing to bet there is some sort of politics involved in here and not just a mere “big boobs” issue.

  24. I love this ad, although surely it’s more of an insult to the vs ad by implying that the lack of flesh/cleavage on their terribly thin models is NOT sexy/risque!

  25. i agree with hydrangea. yes, there is a double standard and i completely understand why people would be angry about the commercial getting rejected, but if you look through the comments on this site about the victoria’s secret models, most of what you see is “they’re all too skinny, this isn’t sexy at all”, while this commercial is full of curves

  26. I think the ad IS more racy than the VS ones but not because of the models. There is a very distinct and sexual sub-story going on. She walks out the door to have dinner with a man wearing only her underwear and jacket. AKA she’s going to go have a quickie with her beau, probably in a public place. I also think that instead of putting this commercial on the air to even the score with VS, we should just take them ALL off. American Idol?! Hello, do you have any idea how many kids under the age of 14 watch that show?

  27. they are definitely against plus sized models for sure. But i think in a way they are wrong and in a way they are right. I don’t think really thin girls should be in those ads because as we all know, young girls and even older ones get the wrong message and go through limitless diets and exercises to be “perfect.” However, what do plus sized models represent? Obesity. Curves originally meant having assets. Today curves is being bigger. And i know that in the fashion world if models are either really thin and in or bigger and considered plus size. But this model is a bit too big, I think healthy models should be on there. Average healthy body, nothing more, nothing less.

  28. This is size discrimination and it’s offesnsive to both sides. They’re saying the skinny women aren’t sexy and the bigger women look too s—ty.

    This reminds me of a time in high school the girls were all rounded up we were told if we had larger breasts we could not wear tank tops to school because the cleavage was distracting the boys. The flatter girls were still free to dress how they liked . They damn near had a riot on their hands.

    • omg are you serious? that is awful. as a thin girl with very large breasts i hate that double standard. i always have to watch out to not look s—ty. when i wear a bikini even my friends look funny at me. idk where to hide them. oh well. thin flat girls can wear whatever they want, but i guess i rather love my curvy body and be censored.

      and i do agree that this ad must be getting hard time because a cleavage on bigger girls is more in your face. i wonder how this issue will play out in the future

    • The only reason they think she looks too sexy is because she’s plus size. If this were Brooklyn Decker it wouldn’t be a big deal.

      Plus size women have that ‘sexy’ stigma. It’s one of the reason why they’re not typically used for high fashion; their curves are seen as a distraction.

      Take a look at lads mags, tvs, e.g. mad men, and literature, and you’ll see that it’s a common theme that full figured women can only be seen as sexy.

      It’s ridiculous.

  29. ya know, they’ve shown a lot more risque stuff in the past. remember the old herbal essence commercials with a woman screaming “Yes! Yes! Yes!” mimicking an or—- over shampoo????? let’s get real here. If you can show VS B-sized models wearing bras, why can’t you show DD sized women??? B❆❆bs are boobs!!!! How unfair. (that woman looks gorgeous by the way)

  30. Im sooooo sick of underwear commercials on tv. Its annoying having gorgeous girls prancing around, it just makes me feel depressed about my body….and its worse when they are on when im sitting watching tv with my boyfriend 🙁 makes me feel like a giant ugly elephant

  31. I guess Victoria’s Secret adds pay better than this one…they should air it. finally, people would get to see bodies, skin, curves on tv rather than the faces of the VS models. 😀

  32. This is not a ” plus size “issue. Any size women with large breasts will be seen as vulgar. i wish our society and culture would not have this bias double standard but they do. Esopecially women. As a thin girl with large breasts, I truly believe it would make no difference If I was there in lingerie. It would still be seen as offensive. Its no secret, the less breasts you have the more you can get away with revealing clothing.
    In Canada, women are legally allowed to go topless. This law attacks the double standard of men being able to go topeless.When our basic automy of breast and the surrounding tissue is the same. I won’t do that b/c i feel weird going without a bra(no support). However, I am proud that we have that right.
    The censhorship of breast is based on false morality or odd western sexuality. It could also be seen as a women rights issue.In many countries breasts are not censored and this has no effect on recipents of the according media. One of those countries having no censorship on breasts happens to be Italy, home of the Vatican.

  33. Its a sad day in america when this average hippopotamus is considered the new sexy. lane bryant is a fashion line for depressed fatties anyways.

    • It’s not the new sexy. It is the has been sexy, is currently sexy, and will be sexy. Just as VS models are also sexy and not “sticks with boobs” as a poster below claimed.

      It’s really not one or the other or a battle between the two. The world would be a much better place for women if we all accept the fact that both can be sexy, because that’s the truth.

  34. he y chunkster you might want to cancel your dinner date with Dan, any more food in you and you’ll tip over Danny boy.

  35. I think seeing a nicely voluptuous body in lingerie arouses people more than seeing sticks with large b❆❆bs (i.e. Victoria’s secret) honestly. I think we are so used to seeing rarely-natural or enhanced bodies on TV that seeing a sexy woman with natural curves like some kind of forbidden fruit. I guess if it goes against the media’s self hating agenda, they will just stamp it as too risque and not air it.

  36. Well, I’m not here to join the debate, I just want to say how HOT her body is! I’m overweight but I’ve got this poochy stomach that sticks out and wish I could have it flat. I don’t mind having the hips or the boobs, but the stomach is what kills me most and it’s the slowest to melt away. Ugh!

    But yeah, I like the womanly look. At the end of the day… to each their own 🙂

  37. this is bulls—! this ad is very similar to all those victoria’s secret ads. this is crazy. i think they’re all too racy for tv but to take a stand against the one with a plus size model? outrageous.

  38. First of all, I just wanted to say that VS girls are waaaay hotter then this girl. Face included. Plus, I didn’t like the direction of the shoot, and I think it looked cheap like a p— trailer (but it’s not ’cause she’s bigger, it’s cause of the director). VS is hotter, still more sophisticated, almost creating an art-like felling.

    Second: I think you’re criticizing the wrong thing: It’s not cause VS is less sexy. VS pays more for the ads and is a more valuable, recurrent client for FOX and ABC. Please understand I’m not saying I agree with this, but you gotta understand that setting a new standard for the market of lingerie isn’t interesting for broadcasting companies ’cause they may lose credibility from their clients like VS or Agent Provocateur. Besides, how powerful do you think the VS brand is? It’s easier to push the broadcasting companies into accepting their commercials with that amount of money and influence.

    That said, I can say I’m pissed off that the right to equal expression is being torn apart for market interests. Legally, and logically, there’s nothing wrong with this ad, if you take in consideration the VS commercials they put on air. And as cheappy the direction was, it was surely enough to pass the quality standard from ABC and FOX.

  39. A motivating discussion is definitely worth comment.

    I do think that you ought to publish more about this topic, it may not be a taboo subject but typically people don’t discuss these issues. To the next! Many thanks!!

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.