The Victoria’s Secret Angel: A Body Type That Defined an Era

Victoria’s Secret launched in the late 1970s as a lingerie brand, originally designed to sell products in a male-friendly environment. By the 1990s, it had evolved into a cultural phenomenon. The brand no longer sold just underwear. It began selling an idea of who lingerie was for and what kind of body was meant to wear it.

This shift changed how beauty was defined. Victoria’s Secret moved from mirroring existing standards to actively shaping them. Through catalogues, advertising and televised events, the brand turned a single body into the baseline for desirability: tall, extremely thin and highly toned. Confidence, success and sexual appeal were visually attached to that silhouette over and over again.

When this body type was presented as the norm, it stopped feeling like fantasy and started feeling like expectation. Over time, we were trained to measure ourselves against a standard that was not widely attainable.

The Supermodel as a Standard

The models chosen to represent the brand followed a very strict template. Height, weight, proportion, muscle tone and facial symmetry were tightly controlled. These bodies were not presented as one version of beauty. They were presented as the version.

The term “supermodel” shifted from describing industry success to describing a very specific body type. When Victoria’s Secret labelled this body type as the “Angel”, it transformed a physical ideal into a brand. Wings, elaborate costumes and global media exposure elevated these models into symbols rather than people.

During the late 1990s and early 2000s, figures such as Adriana Lima, Alessandra Ambrosio and Heidi Klum became globally recognisable through their association with the brand. They became household names, appearing on magazine covers, talk shows and billboards. The Victoria’s Secret runway became a gateway to mainstream celebrity. Media coverage often focused on the models’ training schedules, diets and routines, making the Angel body feel achievable if the same discipline was followed. Their bodies became culturally unavoidable, teaching audiences to associate confidence and desirability with a single body type.

Anyone who deviated from that ideal was positioned as an exception. Even models slightly larger than the Angel standard were labelled by the industry as “plus size”, despite being smaller than the average woman. This categorisation reinforced a hierarchy, signalling that the Angel body was the norm and everything else a deviation.

Categorisation sets comparison in motion. When one body is framed as standard and others are framed as alternatives, self-evaluation becomes automatic. People learned where they “sat” in relation to the ideal, often without choosing to.

How The Victoria's Secret Ideal Was Sold

Catalogues, billboards, TV ads and in-store imagery all centred the body rather than the product. Lighting, posing and retouching exaggerated long limbs, flat stomachs and toned muscles. The result was a body that looked polished, controlled and effortless.

The most powerful marketing tool was the Victoria’s Secret fashion show. Televised as global events, they combined music, celebrity appearances and spectacle. Lingerie was displayed on bodies treated as simultaneously aspirational and untouchable.

Presenting the same body type on a global stage turned comparison into a shared cultural experience. The shows didn’t tell viewers to compare themselves. Repeated exposure did that work quietly, teaching audiences what kinds of bodies were meant to be seen, celebrated and rewarded. Wrapped in glamour and entertainment, these messages often slipped past scrutiny, embedding standards subtly but powerfully.

How Things Have Changed (or Not)

In recent years, Victoria’s Secret has attempted to broaden its image. Campaigns now feature more body types, and the 2025 fashion show included the most diverse lineup the brand has ever presented. The Angel branding has been softened and messaging around inclusion has increased.

These changes matter, but they do not erase the cultural baseline built over decades. The standard was repeated long enough to become internalised. Comparison, self-monitoring and body checking persist even when imagery changes. Once a narrow ideal is normalised, its influence continues through memory, habit and learned comparison. The mental health impact continues, even in the absence of active reinforcement.

At Index:MH™, we don’t blame individual brands or people. This is about understanding how marketing, repetition and spectacle can turn a single body type into a measure of confidence and worth. Victoria’s Secret is just one example of a system that did this at scale.

Looking back is not about nostalgia or outrage. It’s about recognising patterns. When we name how standards were built, circulated and protected, they become easier to spot elsewhere and design out. Tracing how these ideals were built helps explain why body scrutiny still feels automatic today. It also shows that the system could have been designed differently.

Help us show the industry that all bodies deserve visibility, celebration and respect, not just the supermodel standard.