'Lad Mags Bags'

[estebanrey]

Why are you belittling the argument by being wilfully ignorant/

I'm doing nothing of sort. I'm asking why this unproven damage being done to children's minds by seeing models is seen as something we need to cover up, but telling kids that privacy isn't important is OK.

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'.

And that difference is? In terms of the effect you think it will have on society?

 

[Hatter The Mad]

I'm doing nothing of sort.

You're comparing a candid shot of a couple in swimwear on a beach, to this:

So, you sort of are.

 

[Destination]

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'.


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).

Oh I am sorry, but given that porn mags have existed on top shelves for 50 years, have we been wrong for generations, are the kids of today ruined by the fact we didn't nanny state 50 years ago?
Are you being sarcastic or serious?

 

[Destination]

I don't quite understand the co-op campaign anyway, or their deadline or their demand.
They are clearly happy to make profit from selling porn, but instead of displaying it, they want to hide it away like their dirty little secret, and continue to make profit from selling it.
If they are that upset, just remove the magazines.

 

[Nexus]

Oh I am sorry, but given that porn mags have existed on top shelves for 50 years, have we been wrong for generations, are the kids of today ruined by the fact we didn't nanny state 50 years ago?
Are you being sarcastic or serious?

Porn Mags may have existed high on the top shelf for decades you are right....

The likes of Zoo and Nuts though are less than 10 years old; these are magazines touting as much pornographic content as possible while being allowed to remain on the prime mid-shelf spot, rather than put out of reach and view. Publishers are smart and have pushed the boundaries where they can to sell as many magazines as possible.

 

[estebanrey]

You're comparing a candid shot of a couple in swimwear on a beach, to this:

So, you sort of are.

I'm comparing them to women's magazines and asking what the actual outcome is. Why for example is the image you've shown "objectifying" women but the likes of Heat magazine (which aren't being covered up) not?

...and men (of course kids seeing a bloke's pubes is fine)...

Either you have one set of rules that applies to everyone, or you don't.

 

[Destination]

Porn Mags may have existed high on the top shelf for decades you are right....

The likes of Zoo and Nuts though are less than 10 years old; these are magazines touting as much pornographic content as possible while being allowed to remain on the prime mid-shelf spot, rather than put out of reach and view. Publishers are smart and have pushed the boundaries where they can to sell as many magazines as possible.

It would zoo and nuts are on that top shelf, right where they belong, right beside gardeners world....

 

[Nexus]

It would zoo and nuts are on that top shelf, right where they belong, right beside gardeners world....

There is absolutely no scale to the image you are commenting on. The fact that gardening and food magazines are also on the top shelf suggests that its a low height magazine rack, which you would typically find in a supermarket and technically makes a lot more sense than the ones in a traditional newsagents.

 

[Danthus]

Cover the magazines in giant condoms, it doesn't get any safer.

 

[Efour]

You're comparing a candid shot of a couple in swimwear on a beach, to this:

So, you sort of are.

Just so its here twice

 

[marc2003]

^eurgh. not even stevie wonder wants to look at pics of jodie marsh.

 

[V F]

In general, yes.

Tasteful:

Not absurd or too far out of reality (i.e. down at the beach):

Generally fine:

Looking at all those thumbs... I've never really thought about it until now. Just thinking how so many people buy all that. Is it daily/weekly releases? just thinking about it how so many people are obsessed with celebrity lifestyle and mostly the gossip. Yes, I know people are obsessed with celebrities but seeing it listed like that. It seems worse than I imagined. God, I can't even imagine thinking about it at times. The fact some people are so obsessed and dwell on it. Plus the fact this is so many peoples occupation. Legal stalking and it sells.

I wonder what thats like seeing a mass of people reading this stuff for years and seeing how their personalities change. Seeing before and after.

 

[Janesy B]

You're on to something there...

and it's very apt that one of the roads in Kilburn is called 'shoot-up hill' because that's what many of it's fine residents do on a regular basis.

 

[Angilion]

I think you'll find women's magazines to have a far more damaging effect on younger women than you would with a young lad reading a lad's mag. Just look at the celebrity culture that these younger girls are exposed to.. They look up to these celebs and strive to be like them, it's not healthy at all. You'll find many young women will go under the knife or starve themselves etc just to look like their airbrushed heroes.

Yes, but it's harder to blame men for that and the main goal is to blame men, dehumanise men (as violent animals) and promote fear and hatred of men amongst women. That's perfect feminism - more division, more sexism and more easily manipulated women means more power for feminists.

 

[Janesy B]

Yes, but it's harder to blame men for that and the main goal is to blame men, dehumanise men (as violent animals) and promote fear and hatred of men amongst women. That's perfect feminism - more division, more sexism and more easily manipulated women means more power for feminists.

Or the commonly acceptable portrayal of men as utterly useless idiots.

 

[Xordium]

Not one to read the magazines but let me get this right:

1) You can't have plain packaging for cigarettes that are known to kill you.
2) You can however cover up scantly clad women to protect the poor children.
3) Breast feeding is best.

Hmmmm

 

[Angilion]

[..] 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.

Forget "now". It's been that way even before the word "feminism" existed (the ideology came before the word for it), but a determined minority can easily rule a majority.

 

[Angilion]

Also, what's all this babble about objects?

When I look a picture of a woman in a sexual context, I see a woman in a sexual context.

I don't see an object.

I think that the people campaigning against "objectification" of women (and only women, of course, as these people are always profoundly sexist) are either lying for power or projecting their own warped view of women onto other people.

 

[opstrat]

The co-op have got bigger problems than looking out for our younger generation.

there shops are ridiculously over priced.

the three around my local area and my work have loads of staff in them, far too much for the size of the shop, and yet every time you go in there is one person on the till with another 4 empty checkouts and a Que a mile long.

 

['Harry]

Prudes need to **** off back to their cave.