Snag tights - WTF???

[AnnaQuayInTheUk]

Hi everyone

I posted on this board asking about an outfit and someone suggested I should buy some coloured tights from Snag.

I've just been onto their website and it's like a shop for fetishists. Some seriously weird stuff.

I'm not uptight or a prude, but I honestly thought this was a shop selling tights. I've seen a few ads pop up on FB showing different coloured tights. But there were loads of photos of other stuff which was outside the norm.

I appreciate that there's probably a continuum in underwear with opaque 80 Denier tights at one end and fetish stuff at the other, but wouldn't it make more sense to have these as two separate businesses? Or am I just being precious?

@ItGhoul People are overwhelmingly focusing on the glorification of violence against women and the pornified treatment of women. Not sure why you're so determined to make it about body size when many of us making these points about Snag have said, quite the opposite to what you claim, that a wider range of models is a good thing, and/or that some posters are overweight or bigger themselves.

Those who claim anyone objecting must be a teeny tiny are just being ridiculous. It's very clear what we are commenting on.

Strong contender for Hyperbole Of The Year there

Maybe consider before using this language that some people commenting on the thread might be recovering from an eating disorder. I am not a teeny tiny by any means but I had an ED in the past. This kind of rude snarking about body size is totally unnecessary.

I'm not sure Sandlers is the only one you should be directing this to.

I had a delightful poster tell me to "eat the giant chip on my shoulder" (that post now appears to have been deleted, thankfully). I was bulimic all through my teens and still struggle. There's a huge amount of snarking about body size on this thread; why is it only when it's directed at thin people that eating disorders are brought up?

It's a hard no from me as they believe that men with testicles and penises are actually women. And much of the imagery is deeply unpleasant, many of them look like Victorian grotesques.

Really...why?

No, you said ‘one’ person, but there are several, who clearly all feel it’s a problem and a couple of have made deeply unpleasant comments about other women’s bodies. That isn’t eclipsed by the fact that some other people have different concerns. Both groups of people can exist at the time and both are engaged in the discussion. Clearly large models isn’t the source of your horror, but that doesn’t mean your soapbox is higher than theirs.

FWIW, I think the people who are scared they might catch fat from the internet and the people who believe that black strappy underwear is glorifies violence against women are both talking shite.

As a survivor of very serious misogynist violence myself, I cannot begin to tell you how angry it’s making me to see people up that topic to try fo justify their dislike of a website selling sexy pants. To be brutally honest, some of the comments I’m seeing here, shaming women for their preferred aesthetic and sexual interests, are very much the kind of thing my abuser would have said. He didn’t like confident women who own their sexuality and dress flamboyantly either.

@iwentjasonwaterfalls I reported that comment about the chip as abusive. It was a disgusting thing for someone to say to you.

@iwentjasonwaterfalls I think I'm allowed to comment on the language that I personally found somewhat triggering, thanks so much. You and others can call out whatever bothers you. Don't tell me I'm not allowed to be bothered by posts that bother me.

@ItGhoul Putting aside your comments on the size of the models- which I disagree with- what do you think of the " Choke me" badges? Which seem to have unaccountably disappeared, though at the time Snag called anyone who objected to them a "kink shamer".

@ItGhoul You misread the interaction. One commenter was claiming that people were specifically interpreting fat women as fetishistic content. There was one very recent comment that was patently extremely unpleasant and negative about fat women, which arguably did give a vibe of genuine fat phobia. I don't agree that general discussion about model size was on par with that. I was disagreeing with the commenter I mentioned first (that the thread was overall conflating fatness with fetish), which is why I alluded to the single comment that seemed most offensive.

Again, you misread.

This.

I normally have to rip tights off the moment I walk through the door but not Snag tights - can wear them happily til bedtime

Their fishnets are brilliant. I fell over wearing some recently. I really badly grazed my knee but the tights were still intact.

I only found out last week about the rapey accessories they sell, glorifying choking etc. so I’m out

@iwentjasonwaterfalls Also the reason I called out the person I did was because the people criticising fat women have already been criticised for it, but no one had at that point addressed the vapid, offensive and lazy use of "teeny tinies" which doesn't even have any relevance to the main focus of the thread! If you see my comments, I've persistently said that I favour having a wide range of body types, and that that is not in any way part of my criticism of Snag.

I had the same, less articulated, reaction when I went on their site.

I had to remind myself of what the snags site looked like. Well, the pearls have been clutched.

Nah, they haven't really. All I see are normal women advertising clothing and underwear.

You can't deny that these photos are pornified
https://snagtights.com/products/80-denier-mock-garter-barbara
You can see this product photo just by scrolling down the home page and there are a few photos and links to the pornified mock garter photos.
Don't pretend this is just about fatphobia. Some of the comments on this thread are fatphohic but there are other understandable reasons to object to the marketing.

FWIW, I switched to Better Tights a while back and very happy with them.

You're not wrong. Both these screenshots are from this page:
https://snagtights.com/collections/snag-all-tights?page=3

They seem to be going for the sexy underwear market AND the kids tights market, but surely they should stick to one or the other?!

Argh, screenshots didn't post. Here they are. From same page (link in my previous post)

Wow. Snag need to pick a fucking lane, because having kids mixed up among that lot on their website is fucked up.

Yup

Mixed up with what?

The tights that are clearly not suitable for children. It’s a pretty fucked up product list to scroll through. Delineate them. Sell what you want, just have distinct areas. Kids or ‘not kids’.

They don’t sell them any more, as far as I know, and they never sold them on the same website as the tights. You couldn’t stumble across them and it was made clear that they were adult content. They certainly weren’t my thing and I think they were unwise to sell that particular badge, although I think the issue is a lot more complicated and nuanced than a lot of people understand. I completely see why people objected to them. I do think policing other women’s sexual fantasies, however, is a bad thing, and some of the criticism certainly did descend into that.

But that isn’t what the OP or anyone here is looking at and being offended by on the site today. I’m not defending that badge. I’m simply arguing that selling sexy underwear doesn’t suddenly become harmful or pornography or dangerous just because it’s got straps and buckles and isn’t pretty white lace.