To be annoyed by this meme regarding knickers?

[UnaCorda]

For the umpteenth time I have come across a photo of an underwear-clad woman seductively and suggestively pulling down the waistband of her pants. It's bad enough that photos of scantily-clad women are so ubiquitous, but this meme really raises my feminist hackles as it's so unnecessary. When do you ever see a picture of a man doing this?

We all know that a woman's vulva and vagina are underneath her pants and we're aware that an early stage of having sex tends to be the removal of said pants, so it's obvious where this choreographed come-hithering comes from, but for the love of Marks and Spencer's lingerie department is it really necessary to spell it out?

I think the women look more provocative than the men so it's not quite the same but I guess that sells more underwear.

You’re not familiar with the work of the rather lovely Mr Gandy then?

But this is to advertise sexy lingerie, which is different bro big standard pack of five cotton briefs, of course there will be a sexual element?

@zscaler sorry but the pic with the guy with the hat on is 😍

Also, the bikini cover for swimwear is not meant to be sexy - she is advertising swimwear! Yet if she pulled the bottoms down any further she'd be indecent (pretty indecent for a cover anywhere, actually)

I have just googled m and s knickers, which is everyday pants and they aren't advertised like this. That mag cover is not to sell anything to women, and isn't that a lads mag?

I have just googled m and s knickers, which is everyday pants and they aren't advertised like this. That mag cover is not to sell anything to women, and isn't that a lads mag?

Obviously not every single shot is like this, but it is quite prevalent.

Also, the bikini cover for swimwear is not meant to be sexy - she is advertising swimwear! Yet if she pulled the bottoms down any further she'd be indecent (pretty indecent for a cover anywhere, actually)

Exactly!

Why can't people in undergarments be portrayed as athletes, gymnasts, swimmers, etc. and asked to pose in a way that makes them look fit and strong, rather than sexual and provocative

It's UNDERWEAR not sportswear
Having someone running in nickers and bra on a trek would look stupider than perfume ads.

@Barabajagal

Does nothing.Absolutely zilch. I cannot see the appeal of that man.

Even when I look close up and zoom in.

A young Harrison Ford, on the other hand or Sam Shephard in his screenwriting days...

I love this thread and the chance to ogle half naked me that it provides.

Plus I like the word ogle.

@Stannisbaratheonsboxofmatches

Speak for yourself. I'm here for the discourse.

I think maybe the fingers in the knicks, sort of pulling them sideways highlights the models waist to hip ratio, which is deemed universally attractive and it's probably more that that the pose is highlighting than any suggestion she's about to drop them, esp for mainly female buyers... 🤷‍♀️

I love this thread and the chance to ogle half naked me that it provides.

Wouldn't a mirror provide that?

Just because a woman is being paid to be a model and advised to look a certain way doesn't mean it's not a choice. She could choose not to be a model, she could choose not to do underwear shoots and she could choose not to pose like that.
She is choosing to do what she wants to do with her body - and you have no right to say she shouldn't be allowed to. If you're offended by women's bodies or women being sexual then you don't belong in the 21st century.
If you have a problem with it then you have a right to not buy that underwear and a right not to become an underwear model. Beyond that, you're just trying to control other women and protect your own niche beliefs onto everyone.

Rape doesn’t happen because women wear or advertise sexy underwear. Rape happens because rapists decide to rape someone.

Well said 👏