'Stop portraying teens as sexual objects': Victoria's Secret sparks backlash from parents over 'Bright Young Things' slogan

A new Victoria's Secret slogan for its PINK line has sparked a backlash from parents who believe it is targeting teenagers rather than college age students.
The Bright Young Things campaign was launched to tie in with Spring Break, however many understood it to be a brand new collection aimed at tweens and teens.
Parents took to the Victoria's Secret Facebook page to complain, accusing the lingerie giant of 'sexualizing our daughters' and 'making it hard to raise wholesome children'.

Too sexy for teens? Victoria's Secret's Bright Young Things campaign for its PINK collection has sparked anger from parents who understand it to be for middle schoolers

There is even a petition demanding that the advertising campaign be withdrawn and that the Bright Young Things line not target teenagers at all.
This afternoon, Victoria's Secret responded to the complaints with a statement on its Facebook page, insisting that it has no plans to launch a line for college-age women.
'In response to questions we recently received, Victoria’s Secret PINK is a brand for college-aged women,' it read. 'Despite recent rumors, we have no plans to introduce a collection for younger women.

'"Bright Young Things" was a slogan used in conjunction with the college spring break tradition.'
The level of anger surrounding the rumored line was huge though, with hundreds of parents threatening to boycott the chain.
One commenter wrote: 'You are selling out a generation of young women to make a buck with your "Bright Young Things" line. It is irresponsible and disgusting to market that level of sexually suggestive items to girls. As an adult, I will no longer be shopping in your store.'

Promotional opportunity: The Bright Young Things campaign was launched to tie in with Spring Break

Another wrote: 'You already do enough to undermine real woman's and young ladies self esteem - now you want further sexualize our daughters [sic].'
And one women admitted to being a longtime fan of the brand, yet refuses to shop there any longer.
'I have shopped regularly at Victoria's Secret for a decade and will no longer be supporting your business,' she wrote. 'It's a shame because I love your product, but I cannot support a company that seeks to sexualize children.'

'I love your product, but I cannot support a company that seeks to sexualize children'

A petition also seeks to stop the lingerie giant targeting teens. In a letter on ForceChange.org to Victoria's Secret CEO Lori Greeley, it is accused of hiring 'younger looking teen models who are scantily clad and provocatively posed'.
It also objects to the slogan 'Bright Young Things' because it 'refers to young women as "things."'
It read: 'By choosing to target teenagers with your new line, you are condoning teen sexuality and portraying teens as sexual objects.'

While Victoria's Secret says that it targets college age women and above only, it does not deny that it appeals to a younger market.
Chief Financial Officer Stuart Burgdoerfer said at a conference recently: 'When somebody's 15 or 16 years old, what do they want to be? They want to be older, and they want to be cool like the girl in college, and that's part of the magic of what we do at Pink.'

Debate: The level of anger surrounding the rumored line was huge, with hundreds of parents threatening to boycott the chain on its Facebook page

And indeed some parents find the backlash ridiculous. Mother Marina Jones says that she chooses to buy her young girls Victoria's Secret, and that Justice underwear is far more inappropriate, with slogans such as 'Wild Thing' and 'Party Animal'.
'My kids, yes kids, wear your bras and underwear,' she wrote on the Victoria's Secret Facebook page.

'The fact that parents are letting their daughters shop at Victoria's Secret is not any fault of the store'

'Yes, this is my choice to put my 14 and 12 year old in undergarments that fit them! I buy the Pink age appropriate items. They have been in your undies for a few years now and I think it is ridiculous, that people are pitching a fix over your new line!'
And an Illinois-based employee of Victoria's Secret also defended the brand, adding that Bright Young Things is 'simply the slogan for the spring break line...it is not a line for middle schoolers.
She added that it was up to parents to decide whether their daughters shop at Victoria's Secret, and not the responsibility of the retailer.
'The fact that parents are letting their daughters shop at VS is not any fault of VS,' she wrote. 'Besides, not all of the items are risque... It's a matter of being a parent and making sure your daughter doesn't buy the underwear that says 'Feeling Lucky' on the butt when she's 12...'
Earlier this month, a conservative mommy blogger shocked fellow parents by admitting that she has no problem with her nine-year-old shopping at Victoria's Secret.

Sparking debate: Mommy blogger Jenny Erikson, from San Diego, California, wrote that she has no problem with daughter Hannah, nine, wearing Victoria's Secret underwear

Jenny Erikson, from San Diego, California, sparked fierce debate on parenting site The Stir, when wrote that she didn't want daughter Hannah 'to be the girl with the ugly underwear' at camp or slumber parties.
She later told Good Morning America: 'I don't think there's anything wrong with having cute panties and bras from the big girl store.'

But many other mothers took issue with her decision, arguing that the lingerie giant is 'too sexy', 'not intended for children', and that Mrs Erikson is at risk of oversexualizing the youngster at too young an age.
One commenter on the GMA website wrote: 'It's one thing to get your daughter cute, bright colored, fun underthings, but Victoria's Secret is geared for sexy, not cute.'
Another wrote on The Stir: 'Are you people serious? She is nine years old. I have four girls and as long as they are under my roof, I will not allow such clothing. Sexy is for ADULTS.'