Are women's magazines worse than mens?(22 Posts)
whenever there is a headline saying "Look how badly X has aged", I think they should also put a photo of the reporter next to it, so we can judge whether the celebrity has aged better that the reporter.
Depends. If you think attacking your own audience is a special kind of evil, then women's magazines are worse.
But if you judge them on the overall harm they do, then the magazines that teach men to be misogynists are worse.
The fight against lads mags has been over for 4 years. They have been in sealed bags on the top shelves of supermarkets since then.
This is about the women's chat mags. They continue to publish a relentless weekly stream of graphic rape-and-torture stories.
Supermarkets display these magazines on low shelves with disturbing headlines visible to children of all ages.
How is this considered OK for children to see or read?
Chat: August 2013
- BLOODBATH. 331 wounds in a crazed knife frenzy
- BLINDED BY EVIL EX
- My evil ex broke in and RAPED me
- HACKED TO BITS in the bath
I used to read FHM and loaded when they first came out.
I never found them pornographic, semi naked women and the odd pair of boobs never offended me, and there wasn't even any sexual suggestion over them (that I picked up on), just admiration. It always seemed to be "from afar" as well, knowing that most of the readers and writers would never have a chance!
They were humorous, poked fun at themselves. Not unlike Viz.
Of course they may have changed in the last 20 years.
In comparison the women mags were all make up, clothes I couldn't afford, and articles on how to please your man, get a man, keep a man, cook for a man, buy presents for a man, dress for a man, shave/wax for a man... And adverts. I once counted the number of adverts in cosmopolitan or Elle, and there were twice as many pages with ads than with actual content. All for perfume, clothes, and how to look pretty. FHM and the like were at least funny and entertaining, and gave me a much better insight into what men were like.
Tbh, back then More! was about as pornographic as you got. Position of the fortnight? With the drawing, and the two page spread interviewing couples who'd tried it? And that was aimed at teens.
@annandale Meanwhile, they continue to poison our society with these sick stories.
In 2015, 8 out of the top 20 best selling weekly magazines were "chat mags" each one averaging a circulation of around 2.5 million.
There are only a few organisations that want these chat mags controlled include Child’s Eye Line UK, campaigning to protect children from sexualisation and commercialisation.
There seems to be no control over their content, resulting in front pages headlines about rape, murder, death, torture, incest, cannibalism, child abuse and pedophiles - turning the topics to light entertainment to make a profit.
Having worked in the magazine industry for ten months long ago, there aren't many i would willingly use to line a pet cage.
In some ways, words are worse. Consider sitting down in front of your children and reading some of those headlines out loud to them. If you're not prepared to do that, then ask yourself... why not? If they're not suitable, why are they right there on the bottom shelves, next to the comics?
Real People: ("100% True") August 2013
CANNIBAL SON FEASTED ON OUR NEIGHBOURS
MAGGOTS burrowed into my HEAD
Chat (The Very Best Of) August 2013
TORTURED BY MY LOVER with a meat cleaver
Why I shot my dad dead
Love It: January 2017
I'LL TORTURE YOUR NANA UNTIL SHE BEGS TO DIE!
Love It: May 2017
HORROR MURDER: Fed to PIGS by his mum and dad
I'm surprised some Lad's Mags got away with being classed as normal mags for so long. Can't see the quantitative difference between them and traditional porn mags. Modesty bags were not that unreasonable a request.
Some magazines or newspapers may have graphic words written on their fronts but I think that is a different type of consideration than near-nudity.
In 2013, the campaign "Lost The Lads Mags" suceeded in their objectives and what's left of them are now only found on the top shelf, classed as pornography and displayed in sealed modesty bags.
Four years later....
May 2017: Sex abuse, incest, corpse disposal, paedos, granny killers, rapists, dead babies and an axe through the skull.
Just some of the subjects on the front pages of the May 2017 crop of women's chat magazines - displayed at child-height on the shelves in an Asda Store.
I stopped reading womens mags in my early 20s. I was sick of this attitude that a) women - be empowered and get your career on track v b) how to be more attractive to men.
Took me till my 20's to get this.
Never read a men's mag.
I get a free mag on the tube. I'm now in my late 40's. I'm laughing at the recommendations to make my skin more this, my hair more that and the feminist bit is the bit about some actress is who is drop dead beautiful, completely into her career, and completely into taking her clothes off her very honed body.
Doesn't represent me. I'm in my late 40's but still a woman.
The headlines on misery mags are truely awful and having well within DD2's reading abilty at 6.
Words like Dad, mum, killed are going to jump out at small DCs.
I certainly wold prefer they weren't on the till.
While i agree with some of what you say (i prefer mags like Psychologies but their sales have dropped by 45% in the last year according to ABC circulation figures) it is not women who have abused me in the street in the past because of my size (i used to be a size 28 then dropped to a 14 , am now a 20) it is MEN who have shouted out all sorts of nasty mysogynistic sizeist comments in the street and i really dont think they have been reading Glamour.
I was on a rare night out a while ago with a friend and a bloke commented on the size of her chest. She is slim and small His comment “Blimey you are hardly Nuts material are you?
THIS is why i would prefer the lads mags to go first and then we can start tackling the celebrity rags.
Oooooo I hate those graphic real life headlines now mine can all read.
I would say that the womens 'celebrity ' magazines are far more detrimental than 'lad' mags. Women and young girls being subjected to the constant 'look at how fat/thin/ugly she is, look how fast she has lost her baby weight bollocks do not see these celebrities in everyday life. They do not know what they look like when not plastered in makeup or under their clothes. I would think womens mags have a far more detrimental effect on young peoples' states of mind than the lads mags. even though I don't believe they should be in eyesight of children either.
Just wanting to add to the consensus about women's mags, I'd like to add that on the (very) rare occasions that Mrs. Pants has bought one of these magazines I was disgusted at the forensic level of detail they went into to reveal blemishes in the bodies of 'celebrities'. Photos of several stars crow's feet, cellulite and even sweat marks were enlarged and pored over with such schadenfreude that I found the whole premise to be absolutely disgusting.
Whilst I don't pretend to be an expert in such matters, I can't help thinking that if the average reader were to judge their own bodies to the same standards as the celebrities within these mags, and in such forensic detail, it would hardly be surprising to find issues such as body dysmorphia to be problematic within society.
I don't mean to let lads mags off the hook here but, taken in the round, women's mags must be just as corrosive.
Lke Onesleep I too loathe those mags like Chat that are displayed at checkout counters at child-eye height. They should not be there. They shouldn't exist at all, but certainly not displayed at checkout counters where they are very hard to avoid.
I think they are about equal, they do damage in different ways.
You're right in many ways. I've seen titles along the lines of 'Raped by my daddy' and 'killed my baby' and just been amazed they are on full display at children's height. I'm also amazed people pay for the misery fest, but that's another matter.
And I agree with your basic sentiment btw- women's magazines are more damaging than GQ, Loaded et al.
Womens/girls mags can equally salacious. They're simply more surreptitious about it - shots of semi naked blokes, for example, tend to be centre fold rather than front page.
Because they're not semi-pornographic.
That's simply the earnest answer. I actually agree with you that women's magazines can have a negative effect of girl's and women's self-esteem and the way they think about their own and other women's bodies.
Lads’ mags will not be sold in thousands of Co-operative stores after the company said publishers refused to meet requests to put them in sealed “modesty” bags. This is supposedly not a publicity stunt but an attempt to make the stores "family friendly". I'm not a fan of lads mags at all but I don't think children really notice them - they pay far more attention to the unhealthy sweets and chocolate that presumably the co-op will still sell in their "family friendly" store. I think the women's magazines that attack celebrity bodies, drone on about diets and have horrifically graphic "real life" stories on their front cover are far more damaging! Why isn't anyone asking them to cover up?!!!
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.