'Lad Mags Bags'

PiKe said:
No more than 10% flesh on show. There, concise.
Click to expand...

So a crotchless, nippleless burker it is :p

Hatter The Mad said:
Shrug, you know what I mean. I knew I couldn't articulate it well or in a way that would not attract the OcUK pedant squad, so I posted the images for contrast.

If you can't see the contrast or difference, then you need someone more intelligent and articular than me to carefully explain it to you and slowly walk you through it.
Click to expand...

It's too subjective. The rule at the moment is no sausage, no starfish, no pink bits. I think that's reasonable.
 
Last edited:
People are always twisting about unrealistic views of women being promoted by the media etc, but then they promote that plus sized models are fine and it's fine to be fat.

Well we don't have a normality epidemic in this country, but plenty of people sure seem to be scared of the obesity epidemic, so maybe those whiners should shut their traps and encourage young girls to be thin instead of saying it's unrealistic.
 
I just wish women would shut up about their gender. They behave as if they are always in the right and that any woman that doesn't agree is either not a proper woman or they have been brainwashed.

I saw a Gok Wan program the other day and it was all about looking sexy, feeling sexy, flashing some flesh. He is like womens guru and he is sexualising them but god forbid if men appreciate women. We fawn over people for their looks, their intellect, their sporting prowess but god forbid we should appreciate them simply for their body.

What feminists don't seem to realise is that 95% of men are fine. 95% of women are fine. The 5% is just what makes the headlines. The girls getting plastered on a night out in their underwear and the 2% of men on a night out who behave like chauvinist ****. You won't change them with token gestures and you wont change them by ****ing everyone else off.

I seriously have no problem with women doing whatever they like, go out naked if you want, put naked men on every single womens magazine cover, make lewd comments about mens bodies. I am getting to the point where feminism is starting to make me actually resent women who label themselves feminists. Hypocritical bunch of harpies that don't want equality in the slightest (in general). This is a view felt by a lot of women now as well I think. They are sick of idiotic, narrow minded young women telling the world how their whole gender feels.
 
Frightful Boar said:
People are always twisting about unrealistic views of women being promoted by the media etc, but then they promote that plus sized models are fine and it's fine to be fat.

Well we don't have a normality epidemic in this country, but plenty of people sure seem to be scared of the obesity epidemic, so maybe those whiners should shut their traps and encourage young girls to be thin instead of saying it's unrealistic.
Click to expand...

Whoa there, don't apply logic to the discussion. Even though most people are overweight and that is a huge issue, its people wanting to look like models and starving themselves that is the bigger issue of course. As with the education system now, its a race to the bottom. Shall we try and make people better or target people who are exceptional and pull them down.
 
Hatter The Mad said:
In general, yes.

Did this really need illustrating for you, or were you just goading me into posting pics of boobs? ;)
Click to expand...

I pointed out comparisons of women in scanty underwear. The majority of the pictures you posted in support of your argument were fully dressed women or women wearing a damn site more than underwear!

I bet on the other hand you just became everyones favourite poster!
 
This works until a publisher works out they can put a semi-naked model in landscape across the top :o
 
l9OrBUe.jpg


Notice how "Best" magazine (bottom left) features a women in her bikini on a beach?

So we've now reached a situation where you have to cover magazines up but only if they are men's ones. Women's mags can still use semi-naked women as front covers it seems.

Also, when you think about it, what is worse.... A woman who has agreed to be photographed and is being paid for it being shown, or one who was clearly on a private holiday and has had zero say in her nakedness being splashed across the front of a magazine?
 
Ahleckz said:
It's because of views like yours which prove that the feminist movement is still very much needed. The battle of equality hasn't been won if you consider it so wrong that women can go out and wear what they want.
Instead you want to dictate to women what they should wear and how they should behave. What gives you that right? What makes you better suited to determine what they should do?
If you even had a basic understanding of why rape happens then you'd know that your idea that clothing causes rape is so far off the mark. Rape is about power, not having sex with someone in a short skirt.
Click to expand...

I have never told a woman what to wear and I wouldn't, so don't go calling me sexist... you do know know me. I was merely pointing out that "feminism" does not seem to speak for the vast majority of women seen out on a Saturday night... they appear to WANT to be seen as sex objects and use their status as such to get free drinks and pretty much anything they want.

If a woman or a man wish to appear in such magazines and display their body for money then no one has the right to stop them.

The problem is that the feminists appear to be under the delusion that they speak for all women when in fact they do not. Equality is a great thing and Im all for the empowerment of women to be treated exactly the same as men, but feminist movements like the ones talked about today in the media want women to be treated more than equal... in fact some go as far to say that men can rape women while not even touching them but by LOOKING at them?!?!?! I mean how the hell do you even begin to talk to and negotiate with people that demented.

Lads mags should be top shelf if only to prevent kids seeing them... end of discussion.

And if they cared about it then the feminists should be in town on a sat night telling all their "sisters" just how wrong they are, im sure the reaction would be interesting!

Footnote: I am single again after being cheated on by my partner ( long story and no need for it ) so I have decided to pop onto a few dating sites and get back out there as it were...

.......and I have noticed a little something odd...

Nearly all the women who make comments about "I am more than my boobs" or "yes I have boobs don't be such pigs" and other similar comments usually have profile pictures that contain large amounts of, can you guess?.... yes that's right... boobs!

I simply cannot understand the logic behind why women seem to make an issue of it while at the same time consciously making sure they show off every square inch?

I think its just so they can start ranting and raving when a man points this out?

:confused::confused::confused:
 
Last edited:
HecFam said:
With big Dave blocking all the porn on the web, and shops covering mags. Its going to lead to some very frustrated teenagers.
Click to expand...

Its all right give it a few years and Sharia law will be commonplace and if she can't find 4 witnesses then the rapes never happened...

Anyway as to covers, I'd have rather a blank packaging for cigarettes as a health measure prior to stopping teenagers jerking off.
What is circulation of these lads mags now, is zoo and nuts a weekly affair or monthly?
I would have thought trade in such things would have faded over time.
 
estebanrey said:
l9OrBUe.jpg


Notice how "Best" magazine (bottom left) features a women in her bikini on a beach?

So we've now reached a situation where you have to cover magazines up but only if they are men's ones. Women's mags can still use semi-naked women as front covers it seems.

Also, when you think about it, what is worse.... A woman who has agreed to be photographed and is being paid for it being shown, or one who was clearly on a private holiday and has had zero say in her nakedness being splashed across the front of a magazine?
Click to expand...
Why are you belittling the argument by being wilfully ignorant?

There is a difference between a woman and a man walking on a beach in swimming wear in a candid pose vs highly sexualised, provocative modelling shoots in lingerie or les'ing over each other when it comes to 'what will encourage the objectification of people in the minds of children when exposed to it casually'.

Hikari Kisugi said:
prior to stopping teenagers jerking off
Click to expand...
Again, you're missing the point. This isn't about preventing kids from buying or accessing pornography or these magazines - it is about a parent that should very reasonably expect to be able to take their child to a day to day place, like a shop, without exposing their children to casual objectification of people (mostly women, as that is most common).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom