As a husband of several years and a monogamous heterosexual male of many years before that I’ve been dragged along on my share of shopping expeditions.  As a man with very little interest in fashion there IS one thing I’ve learned…

Lane Bryant has the best looking mannequins.

They’ve got an hourglass going on, know what I mean?  And they’ve got an ass worth giving a grab.  They’ve got whole bodies!  Whole bodies have largely gone out of style with lots of mannequins being just for panties and just for tops.  And even the one’s for tops cut off the top of the heads.  What’s the point of that?  Victoria’s secret is the worst about these fragmented mannequins.  They go so far as to only have the front half the mannequin  and you have to tie the clothes in the back to take up the slack.

Some mannequins have ab muscle definition molded in, and I suppose it’s attractive, but give me those Lane Bryant curves anyday.

Apparently a little over 2 years ago there was some big deal made about the switch to “plus-size” mannequins.  Media, blahblah. Self-image yadayada. Increase sales? blah, blah.  I was completely unaware of this discussion at the time, but it seems sensible to me that the sizes of the mannequins in the store should be proportional to the sizes of the clothes sold from the store.

In conclusion:  Victoria’s Secret can bite me.  Give me a size 14 mannequin everytime.

(note I used the word mannequin a lot in this short article but “dummy” “model” or “figure” didn’t seem to quite be the same thing.)


2 thoughts on “Mannequins

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s