OK! magazine.

[Trixxie89]

I was sitting down with my son watching television and an advert for OK! magazine comes on, I'd usually change the channel as I despise the magazine but today for whatever reason I didn't... I wish I did. One of the girls from The Only Way Is Essex is telling her story of how she aborted her ex-boyfriend's baby. I'm still furious, how can a magazine think that is a good story to tell? Why would anyone want to tell that kind of story? I know the magazine usually sells out on most people but surely that is not the sort of story you'd choose to represent the kind of company you are?

[Yeni]

Dirty Desmond doesn't care what sort of company it is.

[AMumInScotland]

Unfortunately, they probably know their market, and people will actually buy it to read that story, whether to tut at how awful it is, or to think she's brave for being so honest. Or just because she's "famous" enough that they'd happily read about what she had for breakfast...

[DontCallMeFrothyDragon]

What teaspoons said.

[teafanatic003]

I saw that too, I'm furious at the magazine I felt sick tbh ,
Its foul thats she basically had an abortion and put it on a mag cover to spite her her ex,

thats what stuck in my gut the whole thing makes me feel ill.

[GetOrfMo1Land]

I would say it is referring to the second part of your sentence, teaspoons.

[teafanatic003]

Why would you say that ??

[DontCallMeFrothyDragon]

teafanatic, what makes you so sure it was to spite her ex? How about the possibility that she wanted women to know it's ok to have abortions, it doesn't make you a bad person?

[theothersparticus]

I haven't read the article in question, but only glanced at the cover. I don't like the fact OK! is glamourising (sp?) the fact that her boyfriend wanted to ban what the interview from being published, it's a sensitive subject for both men and women and he may be having trouble coming to terms with it.

But if the article is about letting other women know that you're not an evil person for doing this then it's good. If it is as someone said above and she's trying to rub her ex-boyfriend's nose in it to spite him that's hardly going to help the pro-choice cause in the eyes of their usual readers. I can't really judge either way as I couln't bring myself to read something from OK!

[DontCallMeFrothyDragon]

Sparticus, I'm not too clued up on the whole thing... Don't watch TOWIE, watch my TV online, and avoid OK like the plague. But yes, I do feel like the article is a sensitive subject, and perhaps shouldn't have been published with the boyfriend still feeling raw about it.

There is a certain element of me that wonders how much of this was implemented by the editor (Dirty Desmond?) as a bit of sensational tat, thus exploiting the woman in question.

[teafanatic003]

teafanatic, what makes you so sure it was to spite her ex? How about the possibility that she wanted women to know it's ok to have abortions, it doesn't make you a bad person?


probably the crass and insensitive way she is presenting it,

[minipie]

In what way is it crass and insensitive?

[DontCallMeFrothyDragon]

But it's not the way she's presenting it. It's the way OK are presenting it.

[swallowedAfly]

i'm a bit lost as to what the feminist element of this is for you OP?

[Prolesworth]

I caught a glimpse of the OK cover today in the newsagent. Basically you've got a cover photo of Lauren (from TOWIE) doing a sort of sexy smirk with the headline "I ABORTED MARK'S BABY" (or something similar to that - can't remember the exact wording).

You know, I very much doubt that she wrote that headline and nor would she have chosen the photo to go with it. Clearly the magazine's editor(s) want to give the impression that Lauren TOWIE is a heartless btch. I don't know if Lauren TOWIE went along with that or even knew what spin OK were going to put on her story. It's the misogyny in that kind of portrayal of women (heartless btches merrily having abortions to spite their exes) that's the problem from a feminist perspective, I would've thought.

[LeBOF]

I think Prolesworth has nailed it.

[bibbitybobbityhat]

From a feminist perspective you would object to OK magazine (and their ilk) full stop.

[GetOrfMo1Land]

Prolesworth, you are always so clever, I agree with what you have said.

God knows what Lauren wanted to say, it could well be that the abortion was 'teased' out of her. In any case I don't think the woman should be judged on what an OK headline says about her, those magazines manipulate both their customers and interviewees imo, and the headlines are notoriously misleading.

Whatever happens, I don't think a woman should be judged for having an abortion and feeling not at all guilty about it, however I have flogged this particular horse on MN before so shan't labour the point.

[DontCallMeFrothyDragon]

I did deliberate over picking up an issue today, in Morrisons... Couldn't justify even looking at it, even if it was for feminist analysis. But Prolesworth has nailed it.

[Catitainahatita]

There was a great piece on twitter the other day about a journalist who tried to write a story for the Daily Mail: her piece was edited and edited into a story about how evil women were to leave their children and go and do war-reproting (or something). She resisted the editing until the Mail dropped the piece (and hence she wrote a blog post about it; I suppose she had to get some mileage out of the time she had put into the article. I shall have a google and see if I can find it.

All of which leads to assume that the "story angle" will come direct from the editors and not from the interviewee. If anything is clear from reading the blog post I mention is that when newspapers/magazines have adopted a line (misogyny in the DM for example) they will edit any story to fit.

[GetOrfMo1Land]

I can't think of a mainstream magazine which you could view as being positive from a feminist angle.

It breaks my heart - Cosmopolitan in the early 90s (when Marcelle d'Argy Smith edited it) was a triumph, I was 13 when I started buying it, it had excellent articles which encouraged girls to aspire. Now cosmo is just the same fashion/sleb/make up/sex SHITE.

Women's Journal was also good, for a different age group though.

Now, they are all the same. Especially the lowest common denominator shit, OK, Hello, Closer, Now. All obsessed with how thin you are and how good you look.

My daughter gets very, very bored of my ranting about this subject.

[Catitainahatita]

Can't find it and my head is hurting after googling "Daily Mail" mothers. Such venom in all the stories....

[DontCallMeFrothyDragon]

Company occassionally has an article which makes me think "Thank FUCK, someone gets it". But at other times, they miss the mark completely. And the rest of the mag undoes all the hardwork that goes into the occassional article they do get right. That's the only mag I can think of which has any brand of feminism, ever.

[carernotasaint]

I absolutely HATE these celebrity weeklies and never buy them. I read Red and Psychologies.
There was a magazine called Scarlet which was discontinued last year.It was a raunchy mag that had a naughty short stories section in the middle called Cliterature. It had plenty of articles on feminism including how you can choose to be a SAHM and still be a feminist. Scarlet was a monthly too.
Its original editor Sarah Hedley also launched a campaign against fattism in the media after Heat magazine gave away free stickers,one of which was a sticker of Katie Prices son Harvey having a dig at his weight by insinuating that hes greedy. i cant remember the actual phrase used on the sticker but it was distasteful disgusting and sick.
Says a lot about our society though that Scarlet was cancelled because it wasnt selling enough copies and yet these awful celeb mags are still going strong.