Lads mags

CDfm

taconnol wrote: »

Hardly. The competition was entirely in keeping with the sort of nasty messages of these magazines.

I didnt see the competition - but it does seem like a ruse to increase circulation.

But we're not talking about pornography - are we? I have zero problem with pornography. I do have a problem with mainstream mags that send out terribly misogynistic messages about women (and anyone else for that matter).

What type of messages

Oh lovely. This reminds me of when women didn't vote for Palin and they were told they were just "jealous". No, I'm genuinely just tired of the constant conversation and catering to what men do and don't find attractive in women physically. I'm tired of it.

Huge jump to Palins election campaign. Womens magazines define what women view as attractive. Anorexic chic.

As for guys defining women by some porn pigs in a lads mag, did you see some of the responses to the size 14 woman who posed in Glamour? The outpouring of disgust and outrage by many men was simply shocking. I'll show you a few choice extracts:

Hang on -you are selecting shock comments and isnt Glamour a womans magazine and not a lads mag.

But your back to saying that mens magazines define how women look - ever heard about free choice.

Macha

CDfm wrote: »

I didnt see the competition - but it does seem like a ruse to increase circulation.

Of course it was, just like any competition, but that doesn't remove the main point which is that it was disgusting.

CDfm wrote: »

What type of messages

The portrayal of women as nothing more that sexual objects. Personally, I think they also send out crappy messages about musclular "alpha" males and obsessions with gadgets.

CDfm wrote: »

Huge jump to Palins election campaign. Womens magazines define what women view as attractive. Anorexic chic.

My point was that when I complained about our fixation on what men find attractive, you actually tried to pin that complaint on my own insecurities - something that was also tried on by the Republicans to deflect criticism of Palin.

CDfm wrote: »

Hang on -you are selecting shock comments and isnt Glamour a womans magazine and not a lads mag.

Glamour is a woman's magazine but those comments were from the Guardian website that were posted after the Guardian reported on the shock waves caused by the photo of a woman appearing in a mainstream magazine that wasn't photoshopped to hell!

CDfm wrote: »

But your back to saying that mens magazines define how women look - ever heard about free choice.

I didn't say they define how women look, I'm saying they help create unreasonable expectations in the minds of some of the men who read them. They also don't do much good for the women who have to see them in magazine racks in every supermarket and newsagent in the country. The message is not just an unrealistic image of what women should look like but also part of the general fixation with women's appearance in general. ie, where are all the half-naked buffed up men for ME to look at?!

CDfm

taconnol wrote: »

Of course it was, just like any competition, but that doesn't remove the main point which is that it was disgusting.

so you are against breast enlargement/augmentation surgery. I mean the only women I know of who have had them done are celebreties. Jordan and Posh Spice.

I mean they are mainstream media personalities

The portrayal of women as nothing more that sexual objects. Personally, I think they also send out crappy messages about musclular "alpha" males and obsessions with gadgets.

The women who sell their photos to the magazines - what do you think of them.

My point was that when I complained about our fixation on what men find attractive, you actually tried to pin that complaint on my own insecurities - something that was also tried on by the Republicans to deflect criticism of Palin.

How do you know what men find attractives. Glossy photos in a glossy magazine or real women in real life.

Glamour is a woman's magazine but those comments were from the Guardian website that were posted after the Guardian reported on the shock waves caused by the photo of a woman appearing in a mainstream magazine that wasn't photoshopped to hell

I like women and have never felt moved to post comments or even ask a girl could I post pics of her on line.

This photoshopping is in womens magazines that women buy into. Kate Moss is not a pin -up.

I didn't say they define how women look, I'm saying they help create unreasonable expectations in the minds of some of the men who read them. They also don't do much good for the women who have to see them in magazine racks in every supermarket and newsagent in the country. The message is not just an unrealistic image of what women should look like but also part of the general fixation with women's appearance in general. ie, where are all the half-naked buffed up men for ME to look at?!

OK - a guy is born has a mother, goes to school has women teachers, has female classmates, buys in shops with women shop assistants, goes to a doctor who may be a woman, goes to college on a bus with women passengers, has women lecturers.

Now how are his expectations of women unrealistic.

And if you want guy pics I am sure you can access them in the internet and in magazines.

Thought Bubble

*Iz a girl throwing her 2cents in*.

I could never justify spending my hard earned spandusals on the tripe that are zeleb mags like Heat, OK and Hello etc etc. But back in the day I used to really enjoy reading my Ex's FHM's and Playboys (yes I READ PLAYBOY for the articles). Playboy in particular used to have some phenomenal people writing articles like Tom Wolfe, Norman Mailer and Gore Vidal. It's been a while since I've went top shelf, but I imagine the standards are slipping a bit.

What there doesn't seem to be are any gender neutral mags. As in little of that 'Brangelina are adopting another child isn't Posh so skinny' bullsh*t of the zeleb mags and less of that 'i'm a hard man that's shagged his wife, her sister and am eyeing up the ma' cr*p'.

You could still keep the Highstreet Honies, as long as there's some High Street Hotties (menz that is!). No harm showing that REAL people can be hot without airbrushing and photoshopping! And get some intresting / relevant special guest authors. And gadgets! Keep the gadgets! As well as fashion and anything else people find as relevant.

Am thinking maybe a mag version of boards. You know, a 'well rounded' discussion with lots of intresting and informative contributors peppered with the right amount of controversey and tasteless jokes

Any takers???

CDfm

Thought Bubble wrote: »

*Iz a girl throwing her 2cents in*.

That was at least 5 euro worth;)

Thought Bubble

CDfm wrote: »

That was at least 5 euro worth;)

Well, I'd like my future readers to get their monies worth!

* Is a rambler! *