Mumsnet Talk

Walking down Market Street in Manchester on Friday I saw a couple of guys taking pictures with their phones at a shop window. When I turned to see what they were photographing I found that there was a woman posing in sexy underwear in a window display. The shop was Ann Summers, although it had changed its name to ManSummers as a publicity thing to get guys to come into the shop and buy valentine gifts for their girlfriends. Now women buying vibrators and dressing up if they want is not a problem for me, although Ann Summers has always leant towards getting women to please men in my view, but sexual desire is never pc anyway so its a tricky subject. But this felt like it crossed a line.
If I'd been walking through town (it was the middle of the day) with my 2 boys, age 4 and 6, that is not what I want them to see. That a woman's role is to be placed on show like a piece of meat while men leer at her? (a group of guys were standing in front of the window laughing and staring, making comments). Is it just me or is this bloody degrading?

I have boys aged 4 and 2, and I wouldnt have a problem with them seeing this. Its a woman, in her underwear. Big deal. Its a shop selling underwear and other items. Much rather they use real models anyway. and disagree with degrading - the model was obviously happy to do it.

would you have minded so much if the model was in the front of M&S? Is it the Ann Summers thing that gets you? Gok Wan has put women half naked in shop windows on his show and I've never thought that degrading either.

YABU.

YANBU for all the reasons you said.

sorry this probably isn't useful, but can't see / think about ann summers without laughing. DH and I wandered into ann summers one day with DD (about 3) in a pushchair.
"what shop is this this mummy.....ooh, they sell nipples" and out we walked!!

how was she posing and was she surgically enhanced?! I would have no problem with my ds's seeing a woman in underwear.

I am sure she was a model who had been hired specifically for the purpose and was being paid well to stand there attracting attention.

No different to a shop dummy standing there dressed in underwear, and no different to if it had been a swimwear shop and she had been wearing a bikini.

Agent provocateur have them this week as well- they sent an email

Probably no different from tne people who demonstrate hoovers or veg choppers or perfume.

No, it's not degrading.

What would be so bad about children seeing a woman in her underware? Do they not see women in a bikini?

A human being. In underwear. In a shop which sells said underwear. Getting paid for being there. Presumably confident and not coerced into being there.

No, I don't see the problem, sorry.

YANBU

YANBU

It's all about context, surely?

No, I have no objection to my kids seeing women in underwear, or bikinis etc.

But this is literally putting women in a shop window, saying to men, this is what you'll get if you come buy stuff here.

Ok, so that's pretty much what all advertising does if it can get away with it, but for a shop that's meant to be about female empowerment, it's pretty naff

YABU- as a pp said, it's no different to a model wearing swimwear or M&S underwear.

And why is it suddenly not empowerment?

"But this is literally putting women in a shop window, saying to men, this is what you'll get if you come buy stuff here."

What, they'll get a woman standing in a shop window wearing underwear if they shop there?



No-one's putting the woman there, she walked into the window area of her own free will. She gets people talking, gets noticed and creates publicuty and sales for the shop. Any man who thinks that he's getting his other half to suddenly morph a dolly bird in her undies by virtue of popping into Ann Summers and buying a tub of chocolare body paint or a frilly thong has got to be a bit thick!

I don't see the problem either.

"...morph into...", sorry for the typo.

I'd be more embarressed if I was walking past with my 17 yo son

Is it the fact that Ann Summers is a specifically very sexual shop and you had your 2 children with you that is the issue??

other than that I don't see one, call me a crackpot but you go to the beach/swimming pool and countless women are walking around in bikini's which IAF are usually skimpier than underwear, do you object to that aswell tho OP?

Fair enough, seem to be in a minority here.

But I missed @squeakytoy saying that it's:

"No different to a shop dummy standing there dressed in underwear"

Really?

So there's no difference between a woman and a mannequin?

News to me...

Exactly Brummie. I would have a problem with this. It's like saying a shop dummy and a woman are interchangeable. In other words, objectifying a woman

YANBU, at all

as far as body image goes I would rather a real woman than a plastic mannequin thats been designed to someones ideals of how a woman should look, and there usually a size 8 tiny boobs, tiny waist, crazy make up etc. no variable usually.

just me probs

BrummieSeagull, you've got your head screwed on. You are right.

Really shocked at lack of anger. It's a REAL WOMAN in place of a PLASTIC DUMMY. ON SALE. in provocative underwear. The phrase piece of meat springs to mind. And no, I wouldn't like it if it was M&S either. I have no problem with sex shops and as was mentioned, selling vibrators etc can be empowering to women. But this? Please.

IIt's not the same, as Ann Summers or MAN Summers is there for sex.
Bikini's and underwear are there as beach wear and to be hygienic and support.
A women wearing a bikini in a window can demonstrate the use by enjoying the sun.What's the Ann Summers model going to do? It's about the intent. I go topless on the beach but that's non sexual. Topless in a bar is different.

IWhy is it still all about how a women looks rrather than what she has achieved (and multiple orgasims don't count)