In Gilbert, Arizona, various potbanging types protested a Victoria’s Secret outlet for its advertising banner.

Bras, panties and the models pictured wearing them touched a nerve in the Gilbert community this week, sparking debate over sexy advertising and what’s in good taste.

A small yet vocal group of patrons swayed the developer of Gilbert’s new SanTan Village outdoor mall to pursue switching out multiple large pictures of scantily clad women found outside the Victoria’s Secret lingerie store.

Apparently Vicki Parry, 47, had her eyes assaulted by the image, explaining, “There it was, bigger than life. These breasts towering over me.”

Shock! Horror! Big breasts? Disgusting!

Ironically, the first thing Vicki seemed to notice was the breasts. I assume she was bottle-fed as an infant.

Now correct me if I’m wrong: if advertisements of this type are truly hurtful to women, then most women would probably vote with their dollars and never have started shopping at Victoria’s Secret in the first place. Just maybe. Am I nuts for thinking that? Or did VS manage to sell $3 billion worth of stuff last year to self-hating, broken-minded women?

So the issue is: Would it be a good strategy for Victoria’s Secret to recalibrate its advertising by accomodating the insecurities of the most hypersensitive Mennonite who walks-by?

It’s a tough question and the nearest gender-kommissar had to be consulted to explain, in trademark unsmiling fashion, the Party Line that racy billboards for panties are worse than racy TV ads for panties… or even worse than the vagina-themed artwork of feminist Judy Chicago for that matter.

In the style of a true gender-Stalinist, comrade Colangelo of the local NOW office has taken-up this cause and does not disappoint us:

While some argue that provocative images can be seen daily on television and the Internet, others counter that parents are able to monitor televisions and computers.

“You have a choice with television. But here in a public shopping mall where families go?” said Marie Colangelo, a board member with the Phoenix/Scottsdale chapter of the National Organization for Women.

There you have it. Parents have plenty of control over what their kids see on TV, but no influence over what their kids see at the mall. Fifty dollars says that Ms. Colangelo is childless.

For some reason, this news item reminded me of an old comedy bit in which George Carlin was running a news-stand. A teenage kid came-up and started browsing the pornographic magazines. Carlin rushes-over and says “No, kid! Don’t look at Playboy, it’ll warp your mind! Here, read this issue of Guns And Ammo instead.”

Read more: Funny or Weird.