What's Trans Got To Do With It: Victoria's Secret, Their Anti-Trans Stance, and the Battle Over Representation

Long gone are the days when fashion brands ruled with a tyrannical cisheteropatriarchal, consumerist hand, dictating their brands and their customer base on their subtle bias and outright prejudices.  While in the past, tales of behind-the-scenes discrimination would merely bruise an apparel company’s bottom line, the public is now speaking out and hitting companies right where it hurts: their business and profits.  Victoria’s Secret is the latest brand who has had their views about their brand’s exclusivity come back to bite them.

Victoria’s Secret is a lingerie brand that has always been about fulfilling a ‘fantasy.’  Founded in 1977, the brand formed as a response to the plain, unappealing, and unfashionable women’s undergarments being sold at the time.  Victoria’s Secret’s use of provocative imagery, as well as their goal of ‘enhancing’ the female figure, took the world by storm and catapulted the company to become not only a world renown brand but also a household name.  Victoria’s Secret became synonymous with sex appeal and female sexuality. As time grew on and societal views on sex, gender, and the female figure expanded, Victoria’s Secret’s brand identity stayed pretty much the same; celebrating and idolizing a certain archaic ideal of female form.  

The late 90s/2000s ushered in not only a new wave of sexual liberation and feminine celebration but also the normalization of different body types.  In 1995, Victoria’s Secret began throwing an annual fashion show, which was their celebration of not only their brand but also of their company’s ideal of the Victoria’s Secret woman.  As the years passed, it was quite evident that the Victoria’s Secret woman was not the ‘everywoman.’ As demonstrated by their choice of runway models, the Victoria’s Secret woman has been, for the most part, a thin white cisgender woman.  Even as the brand has tried hiring some women of color in its effort to be diverse, the brand’s anti-trans identity has remained constant.

This has flown under the radar until recently when the LGBT community started protesting the brands apparently blatant exclusion of trans women.  This was compounded by the fact that trans model Leyna Bloom (and before her, Carmen Carrera) had led an ultimately unsuccessful campaign to be the first trans model to walk their runway show.  Leyna Bloom’s crusade gained a following, as many argued that the brand needed to be more inclusive of all types of women. This issue was only compounded by the fact that the Chief Marketing Officer, Ed Razek, seemed to double down and stand firm in the belief that trans women were not only not their customer base, but were not a part of the “fantasy world” created by the brand for their runway show.  

Victoria’s Secret certainly isn’t the first company with its own “brand point of view.”  Tommy Hilfiger’s all-American brand, as well as the preppy Abercrombie & Fitch, have both been accused of being (subtly) racist; only catering to white people.  The difference between them and Victoria’s Secret is that they never came out and boldly confirmed their brand identity. The lulls of their prejudicial views became nothing more than long-standing rumors and urban legends.  Victoria’s Secret not only proclaimed the bias but also stood behind it.

There is nothing wrong with a company or brand having a certain aesthetic, brand identity, and consumer base.  These are essential to stand out in a crowded market. The problem lies when companies take it one step further and turn their aesthetic and brand views into bias.  A brand that is supposed to celebrate the female figure intentionally refusing to include trans women sends the dangerous message that trans women’s figures and bodies are not “female” and “womanly”, or to be celebrated.  

Victoria’s Secret has since (after much backlash) backtracked and apologized for Razek’s statements, but the damage has already been done.  As times change and visibility for all gender expressions increases, people want companies to be more inclusive in their brand identity. As the market continues to grow, many customers have abandoned Victoria’s Secret for more inclusive brands, such as Savage x Fenty and Chromat, which embrace and celebrate diversity and the inclusion of all women.  Victoria no longer has the reigns over the ideal female figure, and that’s no ‘Secret.’