Lane Bryant Lingerie Commercial Model Ashley Graham Speaks Out, Calls Fox And ABC Prejudiced (VIDEO)

WPIX caught up with plus-size model Ashley Graham, who stars in the much-talked-about Lane Bryant lingerie commercial that was reportedly banned from being aired on Fox and ABC. Graham called the networks' decision prejudiced, explaining "The Victoria's Secret girls can flaunt around their panties all day long. But when there's a bigger woman with a little bit extra, they snipped it out immediately." She called the entire situation sad. Fox has agreed to air the commercial in the last ten minutes of "American Idol."

WATCH:

Comments

[jlf1972]

11:12 PM on 04/26/2010

Ironically, it was ABC that aired at least one Grey's Anatomy episode showing Sara Ramirez, a gorgeous curvy actress, dancing around in her underwear. There's no consistency - it doesn't make any sense at all.

[Roger Thorland]

08:29 PM on 04/26/2010

What about Heidi Klum, Tyra Banks and Marisa Miller? They were Victoria's Secret models and had the same body types as this woman and made VS a household name. Unlike the emaciated skinny girls they have now: Miranda Kerr, Candace Swanepoel, and the others. Why Victoria's Secret has gone back to stick I'll never know.

Maybe because most men in the fashion industry abhor women with real bodies.

[cruzy]

06:06 PM on 04/26/2010

Other than the fact that this woman has large breasts, I am not sure what is supposedly so "plus-sized" about her? I've seen the ad in question, it has scenes flashing to her flat, muscular stomach and her trim arms, etc. I am not quite sure why this ad, which was not banned by the way (the network requested it be shown at 9:00 PM not 8:00 PM and Lane Bryant refused), is being held up as supposed discrimination against supposedly "plus-sized" woman? Unless, one thinks the dispute indicates some sort of discrimination against woman with large breasts (which I have yet to experience in my life), it seems that there are better and more appropriate targets to pick. I think Lane Bryant simply loves the free advertising it is getting from this manufactured "controversy," and the news channels are clearing suffering from slow news syndrome.

[LonosCurse]

12:14 PM on 04/26/2010

What's the prob? The woman is stunning.

[hereinmiami]

10:04 AM on 04/26/2010

Clearly, the tyranny of the ultra-thin image is bad for women and the recent rise of images of "plus-size" women is long overdue; and I hope that we are moving towards a culture in which there is no SINGLE image of beauty, but many shapes, sizes, and colors. However, realistically, this woman also represents an ideal that's unreachable for most of us. I might be her weight, but I am never going to be that gorgeous, even if I buy that bra! This is still advertising--its about producing aspirations in the viewer that they think will be achieved by buying a product. There's more of a chance of identification with this model for non-skinny girls than with victoria's secret models, but there's still that crucial gap between the average viewer and the model-the gap that you fill with buying things that might change you.

[njborne]

07:19 PM on 04/25/2010

Woww! She's gorgeous!

[BryanTheRegOps]

07:33 PM on 04/25/2010

x10000

[zeppelingirl89]

06:26 PM on 04/25/2010

She's attractive and I don't see why they didn't air the ad. It's pretty tame.

However, that being said, I don't think her physique represents the ideal for most women. Few women look as good as her with a few extra pounds or carry it as well as she does. Ideal size (health-wise and relative to their body frame) for most women is somewhere in between her and those Victoria's secret models. A woman who is 5'4 (average) probably looks best between 115-135 for example.
It is a fact that our society has more problems with obesity than with people being too skinny.

[IzzyIdol]

05:10 AM on 04/26/2010

I have been an athlete all my life. I earned my living in youth as a dancer. I am 5 feet 4 inches tall, medium to small frame, and I have muscles. I have not weighed 115 pounds since I was 15 years old. 135 pounds on me is too damn skinny. I am at my best at 140. Where did you ever get the idea that your weight range is healthy?

[zeppelingirl89]

06:43 PM on 04/26/2010

It is healthy because those weights produce optimal BMIs. There are granted to be exceptions like yourself however. People carry their weight differently. Women who have hourglass shapes carry it best, but most women don't have that shape.
I am 5'4 and have weighed around 120-130 most of my life. I'm a long-distance runner so I have a good deal of muscle too. I came up with that range as healthy because I start to get out of shape once I got over 140 (Got there after gaining the freshman 20 haha) I started to get really winded after exercise at that point. Having lost the weight I feel/look/perform much better.
I just posted a general range, there are bound to be exceptions though, but those exceptions don't mean that what I said is inaccurate.

[bleubunny]

10:20 AM on 04/27/2010

If our society offered us better foods to eat then we probably wouldn't find it so impossible to get to the ideal weight ranges.

I just know that McDonalds with all their money could make us healthy inexpensive food.

[jensthoughts]

03:22 PM on 04/25/2010

She's right. As long as this socity has a double standard like this than we will have eating disorders and females with low self-esteeme

[Two Cents]

07:55 AM on 04/25/2010

. . . frankly, I like her *way* better than the two barbie "discussants" on the O'Rielly's (sp?) program (she's intelligent)--and, if it matters, she's expoentially more attractive.

[Daniela Smith]

02:17 AM on 04/25/2010

This woman is far from fat, she's just got some serious ta-ta's which means lots of cleavage...tasteful cleavage tho. So I'm not sure why ABC had a prob with that. I guess if she was about 50 lbs lighter it would've been all good, huh?

[Leniere Miley]

11:05 PM on 04/24/2010

I think it's funny that ABC was concerned about the amount of cleavage in an ad that was to air during DWTS. The show features women dancing in skimpy outfits with virtually everything swinging to and fro. But those women tend to be thin...so it's OK I guess.

Plus size is not shorthand for unhealthy. Some woman...some people...are naturally big. Obviously the ideal is for people to be as healthy as possible, but for those who are overweight or simply big, should they be required to wear granny panties simply because TV execs are scared of seeing a stomach or big boobs? Actually big boobs are OK as long as they belong to a skinny woman.

Big woman are customers. They wear clothing. You have to advertise to them. It is mind numbingly frustrating that ads constantly show men and women who are not largely reflective of America, but when you show a woman who is reflective of the population, it's offensive. Well I'm offended by commercials that feature 25 yr women selling wrinkle creme.

And for those international Huff Po posters who see this as an opportunity to bash FAT Americans, carry your narrow arse back home and don't look back. No country has cornered the market on beauty, and every country has some "stuff" they need to work out.

[BabaLou7]

09:47 PM on 04/25/2010

THANK YOU!!!

[bleubunny]

10:21 AM on 04/27/2010

ABC obviously only wants thin women to watch their shows. I know I don't watch ABC.

Most women are not super duper thin. ABC needs to get real.

[GirlFriday123]

10:12 PM on 04/24/2010

Which ad would Marilyn Monroe or Jane Russell have been in? Victoria Secriet or Lane Bryant?

[lostgirl04]

12:44 AM on 04/25/2010

Victoria's Secret hun. She may not have been as skinny as them, but it is a common misconception that Monroe was plus-sized due to the fact that clothing sizes have come to mean different things in these past 40-50 years. A size whatever she was then is not the same as today's.

[GirlFriday123]

10:33 AM on 04/25/2010

Not so fast. I don't know if you've ever seen Some Like it Hot, but Monroe was downright rubenesque in that and many of her pinups.

She weighed up to 145# at some times, and somehow she was a sex symbol. Sizes have changed, but so have standards of beauty.

If she had walked in to a modeling agency in 2010, she'd have been sent down the hall to the plus-size agency.

[Natasha Thomas]

05:10 PM on 04/24/2010

She is a true beauty and that ad was showing real beauty unlike the Victoria's Secret ads does which show fantasy beauty. This is why our young girls and women have issues with their bodies, thinking if they have fat on their bodies, they're ugly and they start developing eating disorders or end up like Heidi with all the plastic surgeries. I have a 1-year-old daughter and don't want her growing up thinking a size 0 is considered beautiful. True beauty comes from the inside and ABC and FOX should be ashamed of themselves!!!

[lostgirl04]

12:45 AM on 04/25/2010

Too bad you'll teach her size 0 isn't beautiful considering that there are plenty of woman who are NATURALLY that size. So ironic isn't it?

[Manda Kelley]

02:06 PM on 04/24/2010

I'm ringing the Bullsh*t bell on ABC and Fox. They air Victoria Secret ads all the time (have you caught the new Nude Lingerie campaign?) and it shows more skin in the Victoria Secret ad than this one at all. Give me a break. They just didn't like the plus size idea. Badly played ABC and Fox.

[skybar]

12:40 PM on 04/24/2010

This is a "controversy"? Has the whole world gone insane while I was sleeping?