As I'm sure you all know, The Reg Bailey Review has recommended putting lad's mags on the top shelf or in plain paper bags, as they 'sexualize' children who may glance at them.
Whether there is any evidence that they are harmful, and I know many here are anti-porn so see these mags as the thin end of the wedge - when you actually look at what appears on the covers of lad's mags (girls in bikinis usually) vs what appears on mass market women's weeklies (stories of rape, incest and murder by family members usually) which do you think it better for children not to see? Which are the ones left around the house in millions of homes? Or are in doctors waiting rooms? And why did neither Reg or Anna Richardson before him notice any of this?
Here's a blog I found that compares lad mag covers to women's magazine covers. Maybe the writer is being a little selective in which ones he's shown, but I think he's generally got it right.
Thoughts please
thebockingfordkid.wordpress.com/
Please or to access all these features
Please
or
to access all these features
News
Lads mag covers vs gals mag covers - which are worse for kids to see?
32 replies
Catmilk · 08/06/2011 16:29
OP posts:
Don’t want to miss threads like this?
Weekly
Sign up to our weekly round up and get all the best threads sent straight to your inbox!
Log in to update your newsletter preferences.
You've subscribed!
Please create an account
To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.