Macrida Patterson, age 52, is suing Victoria’s Secret, claiming that because of a design problem, a decorative metallic piece affixed to her thong became airborne and struck her in the eye as she was attempting to put on the garment, according to The Smoking Gun. The thong is called a “low-rise v-string” from their “Sexy Little Thing” line (pictured left). The injury has supposedly caused damage to her cornea, causing her to miss work and “will be affecting her the rest of her life.” Details, inside…
The article says,
Patterson’s lawyer, Jason Buccat, told TSG that a “design problem” caused the decorative piece to come loose and strike Patterson in the eye, causing damage to her cornea. He added that the eye injury, which caused Patterson to miss a few days of work, will be “affecting her the rest of her life.” Patterson is a traffic officer with L.A.’s Department of Transportation. Prior to the lawsuit’s filing, Victoria’s Secret officials asked to examine the garment and the decorative piece, but that request was rejected by Patterson’s counsel. For those unfamiliar with “v-strings,” the undergarment is the Victoria’s Secret variant on the “g-string,” which has long been favored in the battle against visible panty lines.
In the future we hope that Victoria’s Secret offers some sexy OSHA-approved safety glasses to go with their projectile underwear.
Dinged By A G-String? [The Smoking Gun]
More From Consumerist
-
Daughter Of Breast-Cancer Survivor Petitions Victoria’s Secret To Create Nice Bras For Women With Mastectomies
-
Has Victoria’s Secret Already Pulled Controversial Teen-Targeted Collection?
-
Victoria’s Secret Won’t Be Making A Mastectomy Bra Because It’s “Complicated”
-
Shopper Sues Neiman Marcus For Refusing To Take Back Expensive Gifts From Her Cheating Husband
-
Secret Santa From Missouri Hands Out $100 Bills To Hurricane Sandy Victims
@Clobberella: Thank you, and I went and peered at the Jezebel response article. After reading the article, the comments about it and perusing more of the site’s articles, I have to agree with you about liking some of the articles but will not comment there. I also noticed there is quite a bit of hypocrisy with some of the comments. I find it funny that people will bash someone about something, when they themselves have commited the same bash-worthy “crime”
@Clobberella: just thinking about “ageism” makes me wonder, who the hell considers 52 young? it’s at best middle aged. on average, it’s about 70% through an american life span. seriously, that IS old, it’s just probably not geriatric.
@Shaneniganz: well said.
@tessa: “offensive” is a subjective description. so choosing to battle “offensive” opinions and statements is a battle where everyone is alone on their own team in the long run. “attacking” those offensive statements is possibly the worst way to go about convincing someone to agree with you. if you are trying to get someone to see an issue in a different light, perhaps you shouldn’t trumpet your campaign with very overtly insulting terms such as “asshole.” being maligned for a differing opinion is completely different from having an opposing viewpoint stated eloquently in an attempt to refute the opinion.
ps – my mother’s 52, my boss is 52, so guess who i pictured in a thong when i read the age of this lady? the human mind goes towards familiar references when presented with any given set of facts. we’re sensual, tactile, visual creatures with pretty fantastic imaginations.
i am allowed to be skeeved out by the image of a 52 year old woman in a thong. i don’t track celebrity lives to know offhand which of them are in their 50s and looking oh so glorious in their golden years. if celebrities are your familiar references well then more power to you for picturing madonna or whatever in her underwear instead of the closest personal reference in that age group.
if you’re 52 and pissed off that people think that’s old, you should probably come to terms with the fact that you’re not getting any younger. none of us are. and someone will always be younger and older than you. ageism my butt. this isn’t a job interview, it’s a lady who snapped an elastic band on lingerie and wants money thrown at her booboo.
@Clobberella: @Shaneniganz: You know, I know not many people will be reading this because it’s been so long, and that’s probably a good thing because this thread doesn’t need anymore attention.
I wasn’t going to say anything because arguing on Consumerist is like talking to a wall, but your editor Alex suggested on Jezebel that if we (i.e. all of those people who commented that we hate Consumerist comments) want to improve discourse, which he acknowledges needs to be improved, we should feel welcome to contribute.
Anyway, I don’t think we’re being “drones” about this. What is at hand here, and what was at hand when an editor at Jezebel made a remark about a celebrity’s appearance, is that women have been consistently and maliciously judged by appearance time and again. Example: probably two of the most influential, intelligent, and proactive women today are Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama. How are they discussed? In the context of their suits and their dresses, the bags under their eyes and their toned arms.
Shit like that is insane. It’s insane that we pretend sexism doesn’t exist when people make the blatantly sexist jokes that appeared in this thread. Or when people make comments about how women are idiots for running out of gas and need to be slapped. Or when they say that a pregnant woman without health insurance needs to get an abortion, or marry some dude so her kid can have “a real father.” These comments have all been made on this site. You can say that they were made under the guise of irony, or simple humor, but sexism is sexism is sexism.
And as for our supposed hypocrisy? Actually, we would never say this type of shit about the woman in this case on Jezebel. There are better methods of discourse than saying “haha you’re fat and old.” We will, however, call you an asshole to your face if you say something offensive, unfunny, and stupid.
@tessa: Oh tessa. You are correct that there are several ugly comments about age and size here that are totally uncalled for. However, I didn’t make ugly comments about her age unbecoming wearing a thong, and nothing about her size. I do think that a 52 year old woman getting an injury from a piece of clothing typically worn on the opposite end of the torso to be… incredulous. A man getting similarly injured would almost be expected and end up on YouTube rather than a courtroom.
But come on. Boys will be boys, and if you mention something about a woman and a thong, you KNOW there will questions asked about her age. So her age is at least newsworthy, since lots of people will want to know. That is why it’s important for the article.
I’m curious as to why they refuse to allow VS to examine the alleged failed underwear. But that will get taken care of in discovery.
@RudyWaltz: So, if I were to say, do as others did on the Jezebel post and state my 50+ yr old mom is hot, that is okay with you? Seems kinda sexist to me. And also to describe my undergarment wearing habits or lack of such garments and how such habits contributed to my having or not having certain infections, that is okay by your standards? Or let’s see, I can just call people who say things that offend me profane names, and by your own statement, that is most certainly okay. But by your standards, to see the humor in a situation as is the wont of ALL human nature, is wrong. You say one thing but your actions contradict your statements, the statements of your co-commentors on the aforementioned post contradict you as well. Something you may wish to think about, as someone else(katylostherart) has already mentioned, ‘”attacking” those offensive statements is possibly the worst way to go about convincing someone to agree with you. if you are trying to get someone to see an issue in a different light, perhaps you shouldn’t trumpet your campaign with very overtly insulting terms such as “asshole.” ‘ At least if you insist on being so uptight about things and bashing people for seeing the lighter, laughable side of life, do it without resorting to profanity. When you resort to profanity, it really just kind of negates the message you are trying to send.
An eye injury serious enough to send her to the hospital is no small thing. It is humorous in the incident but the aftermath? I almost lost my left eye last year due to an idiotic maneuver with a bungee cord. Not laughing, definitely not laughing.
@alphafemale:
@serreca:
@tessa:
I am a woman and my first reaction was, “What in the world was she doing putting on a thong at her age?”
You cannot deny that there are age appropriate clothing. It is just odd for a 52 year-old woman to be in a thong. Just as it would be odd for a 50 year-old woman to be in a plaid mini skirt, bobby socks, and saddle shoes (Porn stars excluded). It would be odd for a 65 year-old man to be seen prancing around in a speedo (Europeans excluded).
Do I want to see Granny in a tube top? No! Do I want to see Gramps hanging with the homies in jeans hanging down past his butt? Good god no! He would look like a fool.
Are there exceptions to this? Yes. Are there hot, sexy 50 and 60 year-olds? Yes!! (Captain Picard = yummy) (Sofia Loren = divine)
However, for the most part, the average American is typically one big sloppy mess–and it only gets worse with age. Majority of American women don’t look like Michelle Pfeiffer neither at 53 nor did they at 33. They look more like Dame Judi Densch–who is in her 50′s and also inspires my gag reflex when I think of her in a thong. The thing is most women of any age don’t look good in a thong, let alone a woman of more advanced years.
So please don’t take offense to people displaying a natural “Ugh!” reaction. It is not a sexist thing. It is a realist thing. I would have the same reaction if the story read, “Jack Nicholson injured while putting on his Fruit of the Loom Bikini Briefs.” That visualization alone is enough for me to hurl myself off of a bridge.
@Shaneniganz: I’m pretty sure you didn’t actually read anything I wrote because that’s all explained in my original post. So whatever, done with you.
@luz: and @tessa: thank you! So sick of reading the idiot youth making assumptions based on age. It doesn’t matter what she looks like. There are men who believe it or not, LIKE this stuff on their wives/girlfriends/mistresses no matter what the age or size. I hate the break it to all of you, but Victoria’s Secret does not make clothing above the size of “large” so there’s no way this woman was huge anyway. GET OVER IT.
That being said, how stupid do you have to be to fling your panties in such a way that you launch pieces of metal across the room or into your own eye? That’s some violent panty usage.
Did any other woman here immediately think about the labia-wedgie when they said, “Thong Injury?”
OK, Victoria’s Secret makes fantastic plain panties and plain cotton panties. A pair I had for about 10 years now is finally ripping (These things have always been thrown in the machine on the normal setting as well). I only buy new panties every few years.
Lace may look hot, but it’s kind of itchy. You only wear lace if you’re expecting that crap to come off in about 4-5 hours.
To be fair, when the eventual “middle-aged guy loses an eye getting smacked in the face with his own bling while attempting to break-dance to 50 Cent” lawsuit comes along, he will be ridiculed just the same.
@hexychick: Isn’t saying “the idiot youth” making assumptions based on age?
Jezebel sucks – those recommending it and screaming about sexism in the comments here should take a look at some of the misandristic crap that’s posted there by those “smart, well-spoken” individuals.
I think a lot of people in this thread would be quite surprised to take a few sales calls for victoria’s secret– A really decent chunk of the clientèle is in the older demographics.
Panty lines are just not in fashion, whether you’re 20 or 60. So the idea that older people shouldn’t wear thongs is just ridiculous. And some people just think they’re comfortable– Not my personal style but I am all for what you consider comfortable!
Also I find it terribly interesting that people seem to think all Victoria’s Secret sells is crotchless panties and cutout bras– I’d make a guess that at least half of our catalogs, if not more, are actually clothing like tops and pants and dresses.
For what it’s worth there’s no chance it’s the same set pictured here– That does not have any charms, just bows. For the life of me I can’t think of anything in the current Sexy Little Things line that *had* a charm, so this is quite interesting. I wonder how old that thong was, which could account for any loose stitching…