Department store Target has just released their latest Christmas catalogue and a lot of Australian women are thrilled with the results.
The catalogue features their new range of summer bikinis being modelled by women of varying sizes and body shapes as well as differing ages.
An image from the Target catalogue Source: Facebook
Many were quick to notice and commend the store for showing “real women”. By last night the images had been shared hundreds of times and thousands of people had commented online to show their support and delight.
Their Facebook page has been inundated with people applauding the retail giant’s decision. It is clear this is something many people would like to see taken up by other retailers.
Target has been promoting the Every Body campaign since August this year, with the introduction of size 16 mannequins in stores and women of all shapes and sizes across their TV, digital and print campaigns.
But it’s not just women of various body types getting a run in Target’s new advertising, men of different shapes and sizes are also appearing in their pages.
So far people have praised the retail giant which will hopefully inspire other Australian retailers to follow their lead.
Watch this inspiring Ted Talk by “plus size” model Ashley Graham…
Top Comments
Sorry, but to earn kudos, the shop has to take it on properly - catalogues, mannequins, etc. In the whole Target catalogue, that's the ONLY picture that shows realistic people. The rest are the normal advertising size.
And their sizings are no longer inclusive either. They have significantly cut the range and variety of goods available of larger sizings considerably. Try finding a pair of PJ shorts for over size 20.
If I can trust anything on the internet, a size 20 is somewhere north of 100+ kg's and nearly 1m around the waist. Objectively speaking, that's quite large. At what size do you think it's reasonable to stop catering for?
So, large people don't deserve nice clothes? Are you planning to narrow the provision of clothing as a weight-loss strategy?
Larger people pay for clothes, often more than other people. It is stupid for a chain like Target to reject the $$$$$, especially when they once carried quite a range for up to size 26. Their loss. Our $$$.
I don't believe I said or implied that large people didn't deserve nice clothes. You say that it's stupid for a chain like Target to reject the money and that larger people often pay more than other people, except that target prices all items of one style the same - a size 20 costs the same as a size 10. As you go up and down the size scale beyond the average toward the extremes, the number of potential customers decline to a point where the financial viability becomes questionable. Catering to all sizes just isn't realistic business, which is why you have clothing stores which tend to cater toward one particular part of the spectrum.
My point was more one toward discouraging such lifestyles. By making clothes readily available and cheap it implies that it's an ok or acceptable lifestyle. Now I am a firm believer in people doing and living however they please so long as they're happy, up until the point where their actions or lifestyles begin to affect others. Now as I said in my previous post, a size 20 is nearly 1m around the waist. A person that size would not be able to occupy a single seat without either using some of the seat next to them or blocking the aisle (such as on a bus or tram) - both of which are selfish, and the latter being a hazard for other passengers. That's just one example, however there's a million others such as the burden on the healthcare system, aeroplane seats, etc etc
It's a clothing catalog. It's a low to middle priced clothing catalog.
Is it really that important that a catalog you throw out each week in the recycling bin with the local paper, pizza menus and real estate ads along with the rest of the junk mail now has different body shapes.