Loaded, Nuts, etc.

Galvasean

Nerin wrote: »

Yup. Aswell as that shes twisting peoples words to villify them. Meh. Its all very trollish. A reasonable debate is well able to flourish on tLL,without all the drama.

Y'know I've been trying to suppress the urge to do this since page one but...

Puddleduck

hippiechickie wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

No its not..you just tacked that bit on at the end...

Dudess

partyguinness wrote: »

Alot of models are highly intelligent and are just playing the game to make a living for themselves..you might not like that but that is their choice....generalising 18 yr old models as airheads is unfortunate and unnecessary.

But I didn't. There is absolutely no indication that I did, and there was certainly no intention to do so. I'm aware everything you say is true.

ntlbell

I haven't even seen a lads mag for about 12 years or more and I don't go out of my way to avoid them.

OP surely if they offend you so much they couldn't be that hard to ignore?

The Recliner

taconnol wrote: »

Edit: Dudess, page 3 can be considered pornographic as it is a display of sexual matter with the aim of exciting the reader - well that's the definition of pornography.

And not dissimilar from every advert on television as was pointed by Bill Hicks many moons ago one of his gigs is on paramount this weekend and stuff he was saying 14 years ago is still relevant today

Most of these adverts are viewable by children younger than 13

ntlbell

Dudess wrote: »

But I didn't. There is absolutely no indication that I did, and there was certainly no intention to do so. I'm aware everything you say is true.

Lets take that at face value.

Can you please explain why in your example you chose an 18yr old air head who's only worth is that of her breasts?

Dragan

ntlbell wrote: »

I'm not starting an argument, She was clearly generalising against naked models why bother mention lack of education or how they see their self worth for this one "hypothetical" example why bring it up what has it got to do with it if not a generalisation?

Because, as you said yourself, not all models are morons. In fact the vast majority of the models that i know are all very, very smart people, male and female.

So, rather than say "models", which would imply all models, she made the differentiation based on her own value of intelligence in the she would much rather go through the day with a degree of intelligence about her than be stupid, but maybe a bit better looking and maybe a bit richer.

No? I didn't see the word "all" or "every" used, so calling generalisation is abit of a reach, rather, it was very much the specification.

Stupid people annoy me, is it a crime to say that?

Galvasean

Hagar wrote: »

I find the worse thing about these "top shelf" magazines is there callous disregard for the sensibilities of sections of our society. I mean who could not help but be moved by the anguish of a midget pervert who can't reach them.

You've been reading my posts again haven't you? :pac:

partyguinness wrote: »

People can I get a comment on this post from women...as I went to alot of effort to write it...:(

I taught you made a very good point.

partyguinness

Dudess wrote: »

But I didn't. There is absolutely no indication that I did, and there was certainly no intention to do so. I'm aware everything you say is true.

I was nt directing that at you specifically:)

LolaLuv

hippiechickie wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

This is the last time I respond to you because I'll get banned.

I never said hardcore. Stop saying that, it makes you sound like a (crazy) broken record.

At some point you're going to have to acknowledge that your children (like all HUMANS) are sexual beings. The more you try to repress it, the more it's going to backfire. They will either become total whores to rebel against you or feel ashamed about enjoying sex, both of which are equally bad, imo.

You don't get to decide what's proper for the rest of the world, and you don't get to judge me for MY views on sexuality. All you can do is force your prudish, tainted views of sexuality on your own kids and hope for the best. Don't try to push them on me.

John Mason

partyguinness wrote: »

People can I get a comment on this post from women...as I went to alot of effort to write it...:(

well, i said the same thing 5 pages back, so there is no point in me commenting

ntlbell

Dragan wrote: »

Because, as you said yourself, not all models are morons. In fact the vast majority of the models that i know are all very, very smart people, male and female.

So, rather than say "models", which would imply all models, she made the differentiation based on her own value of intelligence in the she would much rather go through the day with a degree of intelligence about her than be stupid, but maybe a bit better looking and maybe a bit richer.

No? I didn't see the word "all" or "every" used, so calling generalisation is abit of a reach, rather, it was very much the specification.

Stupid people annoy me, is it a crime to say that?

No, but she wasn't saying they annoyed her she said she didn't mind what people did and if someone wants to be on page 3 that's their buisness that was her point you don't need to add to that their level of education or their lack of self worth etc to give that point the point could of been made very clear without IMPLYING that all models are air heads with no self worth.

There was no need to bring it up unless you wanted to imply something.

As far as I know they don't print their educational details on page 3 maybe they do now I haven't seen one for a while

hippiechickie

This post has been deleted.

LolaLuv

hippiechickie wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Your obsession with me saying I watched porn when I was 13 would indicate otherwise. Stop (mis)quoting me and it'll all be good.

Macha

The Recliner wrote: »

And not dissimilar from every advert on television as was pointed by Bill Hicks many moons ago one of his gigs is on paramount this weekend and stuff he was saying 14 years ago is still relevant today

Most of these adverts are viewable by children younger than 13

Again, the point that I would make is that nudity in different contexts is different. So I would have no problem bringing my (yet-to-be-born) 13-year old son to a nude beach in Spain .But the images in these magazines constitute one type of beauty and one type of sexuality, ie. the male as the viewer and the woman as the object of desire. Also, these magazines are accompanied by a certain rhetoric that I don't agree with.
Similarly, Cosmo etc teach women how to be better objects of desire and only in recent years have started to depict men as objects of women's desire.

But yeah, I take your point-it's all just advertising and partyguinness you're right that at least adverts on the TV are honest about what they're doing, whereas these magazines are incredibly disingenuous, not to mention contradictory and confusing for young readers.

partyguinness

I would like to throw an interesting thought out there...in Japan pretty much anything goes in terms of pornography..rape can be depicted, female sexual organs as longs as no pubic hair for some reason, virtually child porn, incest, animals...etc

all completely unregulated..you name it you can get it...even vending machines where you can buy used schoolgirls knickers from...

Interestingly Japan has the lowest rates of rape and sexual offences (against men and women) in the world...go figure that one.

Snowie

partyguinness wrote: »

I would like to throw an interesting thought out there...in Japan pretty much anything goes in terms of pornography..rape can be depicted, female sexual organs as longs as no pubic hair for some reason, virtually child porn, incest, animals...etc

all completely unregulated..you name it you can get it...even vending machines where you can buy used schoolgirls knickers from...

Interestingly Japan has the lowest rates of rape and sexual offences (against men and women) in the world...go figure that one.

true but they have suicide clubs

partyguinness

To be honest hippiechick I was also under the impression that you had a 13 year old child...not that it matters ultimately.

g'em

partyguinness wrote: »

Taking this topic on another direction, I find womens magazines demeaning to women and actually far worse than mens magazines. Its just womens mags are more subtle and like to dress up as someting else...

Why the frick is this demeaning?

I'm a highly educated, intelligent individual. So what if I want to spend a few quid each month to buy something that will allow me a little bit of escapism in the form of girly-fluff? It's my equivalent of a comic or a bubble bath or a mug of hot cocoa. I could just as easily find your assumption that I take these things to heart or the assumption that I take them seriously demeaning.

partyguinness wrote:

far more dangerous becuase of their subconscienous messages an pressures they put on women. Worryingly I know women who buy these mags religiously and swear by them as if they were the bible itself..that concernes me.

Jeebus, some people, men and women alike, will believe anything. Literally anything. Some guys will believe the girls on the front of their Loaded magazine really does look like that all the time and will spend his life trying to find a carbon copy of her. Some girls really do believe that since their moon is in Jupiter and Venus is in the second quartile of Saturn seventh moon that they shouldn't in fact, go on holidays this month and should instead break up with their bf and move to India because the stars dictate that a new beginning is on the horizon.

And then there are those of us who have our own minds that we like to control all by our little pretty ol' selves. And I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that I don't think we're in the minority. I'm damned if I'm going to have my monthly indulgence demonised

Galvasean

partyguinness wrote: »

Interestingly Japan has the lowest rates of rape and sexual offences (against men and women) in the world...go figure that one.

Probably because nothing is considered an illegal sexual offense?

Macha

partyguinness wrote: »

I would like to throw an interesting thought out there...in Japan pretty much anything goes in terms of pornography..rape can be depicted, female sexual organs as longs as no pubic hair for some reason, virtually child porn, incest, animals...etc

all completely unregulated..you name it you can get it...even vending machines where you can buy used schoolgirls knickers from...

Interestingly Japan has the lowest rates of rape and sexual offences (against men and women) in the world...go figure that one.

Japan also has one of the most sexist cultures on this planet - it's seriously a huge problem over there.

Do you have stats for the rape/sexual offences and what about other crime? Is crime generally lower there?

Dragan

ntlbell wrote: »

As far as I know they don't print their educational details on page 3 maybe they do now I haven't seen one for a while

You're better off dude!

partyguinness

If people want to join suicide clube let them at it...are you suggesting their is a link between unregulated porn and suicide clubs...

I would have put it down to the price of living in Japan to be honest..:D

hippiechickie

This post has been deleted.

g'em

hippiechickie wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

If you have a problem with posts on the forum, report them. You haven't done that yet so I can only assume you don't have any major issue with what's being said.

What you have done, however, is serially mis-quote people, taken posts out of context and blanket accuse the male posters of being bullies and the female posters of not having their own voice/ being too weak to pipe up with their beliefs. Frankly I'm amazed at how refrained people are being when responding to you.

Edit: I should also say that when posts are reported it is up to the Moderators of the forum to decide if anything will be done about the content of the report. We will, of course, consider every post brought to our attention.

partyguinness

g'em wrote: »

Why the frick is this demeaning?

I'm a highly educated, intelligent individual. So what if I want to spend a few quid each month to buy something that will allow me a little bit of escapism in the form of girly-fluff? It's my equivalent of a comic or a bubble bath or a mug of hot cocoa. I could just as easily find your assumption that I take these things to heart or the assumption that I take them seriously demeaning.

Jeebus, some people, men and women alike, will believe anything. Literally anything. Some guys will believe the girls on the front of their Loaded magazine really does look like that all the time and will spend his life trying to find a carbon copy of her. Some girls really do believe that since their moon is in Jupiter and Venus is in the second quartile of Saturn seventh moon that they shouldn't in fact, go on holidays this month and should instead break up with their bf and move to India because the stars dictate that a new beginning is on the horizon.

And then there are those of us who have our own minds that we like to control all by our little pretty ol' selves. And I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that I don't think we're in the minority. I'm damned if I'm going to have my monthly indulgence demonised

Off with you..

One of my points is that some women should not be so quick to jump down the throats of mens mags as a vehicle for demeaning women when the dangers..IMO..are far closer to home..assuming you buy glossy womens mags and take the high moral ground against mens mags...:)

partyguinness

hippiechickie wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I have no idea what age you are and as I said it doesnt matter anyway..:)

hippiechickie

This post has been deleted.

ntlbell

hippiechickie wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

all imo of course.

1) It depends on the child every child is different it shouldn't come down to age but the maturity of the child regardless of age and how it is presented to the child.

2) "society" is very restricted in what it can do, I stumbled across my first mag which was in what should of been a very safe place out of the way but society nor my friends parents could stop my curiosity.

We have the internet now which is just about impossible to police if not impossible in most circumstances.

Have you any suggestions on what could be done?

Macha

Good questions hippiechick. The important distinction to make is adults reading these magazines for a bit of fun and 13-year olds who have yet to fully develop their critical thinking faculties. There's a reason we don't let 13-year olds vote..they are still children.

The sexualisation of young women in the media has been shown to have a negative impact on young girls:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6376421.stm