Review: SKIMS
If you've detected increased sexiness in the atmosphere, you can thank Kim Kardashian and her lingerie brand SKIMS.

In April, the reality TV mogul and aspiring lawyer Kim Kardashian debuted a new collection of her lingerie/shapewear brand, SKIMS, via an ad campaign featuring a flock of former Victoria's Secret angels.
In a little under three years since launching the brand, Kardashian has pocketed a cool $1 billion while marketing lingerie that "fits everybody" and comes in a wider array of skin tones than that industry has traditionally offered—similar to Rihanna's Fenty Beauty line, which was lauded by black beauty industry watchers (among others) for debuting with a whopping 40 different shades of foundation.
SKIMS has unseated the reigning lingerie industry titan Victoria's Secret—savagely stealing its iconic angels—by making a superior product. (Well, that plus the founder's fame and marketing prowess.) SKIMS offers bras that are far more comfortable than most competitors while catering to a greater range of cup and band sizes. Ditto for its shapewear line, which more directly competes with brands like Spanx; for women who like to wear tight dresses a la Kim, the catsuits, bodysuits, waist trainers, and slips come in all cuts and necklines, allowing more customized sculpting base layers than Spanx ever offered.
Victoria's Secret's dominant push-up bras are a one-note bombshell-ism that flatters only women with select assets. In SKIMS' world, women swan around in skin-tight, floor-length loungewear dresses, or don shimmer leggings, or perhaps high-waisted cozy knit pants; they can emphasize or hide the most and least flattering parts of their bodies with booty- and belly-sculpting shapewear. If you've detected an ambient increased sexiness in the atmosphere, thank Kardashian's daring competition against the formerly indomitable lingerie titans.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Reason???
Markets responding to what customers want, without centrally-planned government getting in the way? Also, links and more pics, please. Asking for a friend.
Also, links and more pics, please. Asking for a friend.
Here you go. (SFW)
Seriously, I give the SKIMS brand another ~20 min. before it folds faster than a Trump hotel/casino.
Here you go. (SFW)
Fucking magazine: https://www.target.com/s/control+top+womens+underwear
TIWTAKLW
Stop divulging the mysterious secrets of their delectable craft. This is like a magician showing us how the trick works.
It looks like stuff out of the Sears catalog from 50 yrs. ago. Even that occasionally had some lacy edges on it.
Also, if you go to magic shows because you want to believe magic is real rather than appreciating an artist performing his/her craft regardless of whether it's real, some would suggest you grow the fuck up. Seriously, if you're looking for good illusions, there are way better tricks taking place at your local strip club.
...there are way better tricks
taking placebeing turned at your local strip club.Fixed that for you.
For once, I think "how the sausage is made" is an apt metaphor.
Reasom is just turning into a paid article site.
And not even a good paid article site.
But do SKIMs glorify the lady penis?
Stunning reporting. Articles like this are exactly how the best-informed libertarians stay up on the truly important events.
Who'd have thought being peed on by R Kelly could make a person a billionaire?
This is like the shit ENB used to write for Bustle
Chicks in Their Underwear
Danskin on line 2 all the way from 1983 ...
Victoria's Secret ruined themselves by choosing to feature fatties in their ads, thus making them look ridiculous. Soon we'll see if the feminazis manage to pressure the new company into the same stupid mistake. If they can, it deserves to go broke too.
It's always fat, floppy girls we're supposed to call beautiful. Never guys with beer guts and man tits.
I know right? Laugh at a Chris Farley Chippendales sketch and it's a classic. Laugh at an Old Navy Commrecial and everybody acts like you just took a shit in the middle of the room.
Sexy? I mean, I guess some people find it sexy to wrap women in saran wrap.
Testing something out