The VS Collective
In June of 2021, Victoria’s Secret announced that they were rebranding themselves by creating “The VS Collective,” a group of diverse women who will be the new face of the brand, replacing the controversial “Angels” that once graced their store-fronts and walked in their fashion shows. This shift was interpreted by the public as a last-ditch effort by the company to modernize after decades of backlash proved harmful to their bottom line. The company’s carefully curated group of representatives is meant to showcase their new era of inclusivity and empowerment for women.
Some of the new members of the VS Collective. (Clockwise from top left: Valentina Sampaio, Adut Akech, Priyanka Chopra, Megan Rapinoe).
Image via.
But it begs the question: how is it possible for them to claim to fix something so inherently problematic? Victoria’s Secret has begun to brand itself as a company that sees women as drivers of change rather than ornaments to society, yet misogyny and heteronormativity are very much baked into the foundations of the company. Victoria’s Secret was literally created by men for other men to be able to shop for lingerie without feeling embarrassed (toxic masculinity fights toxic masculinity… nice). Not to mention the years of harassment reported by models, connections to pedophiles, and a stubborn refusal by its mostly-male management to include more realistic beauty standards.
The VS Collective operates in the same way as a female James Bond would, masking an inherently misogynist concept with a more inclusive, socially-acceptable image. Even its new name is an example of this. The neutral “VS” Collective operates like an advisory board within the larger company that still bears the sexist, euphemistic name. Yet, the company is trying to make it seem like it has completely overhauled its image, and more importantly, its history. This new group of women are being called “founders,” implying a fresh start for the company. But the “VS Collective” can only be understood by its connection to Victoria’s Secret and its harmful, sexist history.
Ultimately, this unconvincing new image further delegitimizes its efforts to create change that — coming from a more authentic place — could have been meaningful for people who don’t conform or don’t want to conform to conventional, misogynist, centuries-old beauty standards. If its management believed in empowerment or inclusivity or whatever point they think they are proving to the world, they would have realized that their company and its name carries too much damage. They would have understood that any attempt to change their image without a complete uproot of their foundations would be disingenuous and undermine the entire movement for greater representation in the fashion and beauty industry. And in an ideal world, they would have cared.
The success of this new venture will be a sign about what the future of the fashion industry will look like. If Victoria’s Secret’s simple, cliched rebranding succeeds it would suggest that fashion doesn’t really need to change — it just needs to appear like it is. However, if something deeper does come out of it or if there is a cultural rejection of the emptiness of the “brand,” there may be hope after all for a fashion industry that serves everyone, not just cisgender, heterosexual men.
Featured image via.
