Victoria's Secret Doesn't Want To Be Associated With A Campaign About Respecting Women, Issues Takedown

from the no-respect dept

The EFF has a post up about how Victoria's Secret sent a legal nastygram to an ISP taking down a parody campaign by an anti-rape organization, FORCE, called Pink Loves Consent. The campaign was a parody designed to raise awareness of these issues, by mocking Victoria's Secret's "PINK" line of clothing, that includes underwear that says things like "sure thing" and "unwrap me." The parody campaign replaced those with things like "ask first" and "respect." The page showed what Victoria's Secret could have done to put forth a more positive, more respectful message... and the company's response was to go straight to the hosting company and demand the site be taken down (which it was, though they found a new host who was willing to put it back up). Parody is a key element of free speech -- and issuing a takedown over this seems like a pretty clear attempt to stifle free speech. And, really, it just makes Victoria's Secret look really, really obnoxious. Were its lawyers really so offended by positive messages, rather than pure sexual objectification?

Filed Under: lingerie, parody, respect, speech, threats, trademark, underwear

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 21 Dec 2012 @ 1:00am

    Re: Re: Parody?

    I don't think it's immoral to refuse dialogue with a group who just implied you promote rape by selling underwear with stuff written on it (which women voluntarily buy, I might add).

    See this is exactly the problem with feminism these days: they want to control what women want and do. Thousands of women will buy these underwear and not feel objectified (or maybe they like being objectified). Either way, women who want to buy these underwear should have the choice to buy them.

    But the group behind this 'parody' thinks they should get to make decisions for every women. They give themselves the moral right to condemn the decisions of women who buy these underwear, and they try to make production and sale of these underwear stop completely. On top of that, to do this, they'll argue the underwear somehow promote rape.

    And yet you think they have the moral high ground because VS sent lawyers at them?

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: I Invented Email
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.