Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Why does 'Loose Women' make me want to smoke crack?

60 replies

tethersend · 13/04/2010 13:06

...I can't put my finger on it.

I know it is a travesty for all of humanity, but I would be interested to hear your views as to why.

Or perhaps you disagree?

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
banned861 · 17/03/2013 11:21

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

AvrilHeytch · 14/04/2010 10:35

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Original poster
tethersend · 14/04/2010 10:18

As long as they saved a seat on the panel for Colleen Rooney, Seth.

OP posts:
SethStarkaddersMum · 14/04/2010 09:56

of course, if LW were not filling the 'women discussing stuff' slot there would definitely be a programme featuring Joan Bakewell and Helena Kennedy and Germaine Greer talking about intelligent stuff instead. Wouldn't there?

southeastastra · 13/04/2010 22:09

don't you remember pebble mill? that was just as bad, though i suppose they had singers on that

MrsPixie · 13/04/2010 22:08

Snuff movies -infinately prefferable to lw

Original poster
tethersend · 13/04/2010 21:40

Actually, if channel 4 were showing snuff movies of a lunchtime, I'd watch those instead.

OP posts:
Original poster
tethersend · 13/04/2010 21:38

"surely you lot who don't like it don't watch it so why the moaning?"

Same reason you're on this thread I suppose sea

TBH, if they were showing snuff movies on channel 4 of a lunchtime, I might have issues with that too- well, I would if I wasn't in a crack-fuelled haze- I'm not sure I'd just switch over with a 'ho-hum, that's not for me' IYSWIM.

I object to the fact that LW is being broadcast at all.

OP posts:
HerBeatitude · 13/04/2010 21:19

Yes Southeast, but is there some kind of TV law which dictates that a lunchtime show with women in it has to be really very stupid?

There's a programme called Working Lunch on at the same time on the BBC and it's not stupid. Dull, perhaps, but not stupid. There's no law that says that lunchtime viewing has to be thick, is there, or is there, if women front it?

beeny · 13/04/2010 21:03

Agree with anyfucker it is awful

clam · 13/04/2010 21:00

Originally, it was on every day for a few weeks, followed by a break of a couple of months. Think they tried it at teatime once also, but moved it back to lunchtime.

StewieGriffinsMom · 13/04/2010 20:58

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

southeastastra · 13/04/2010 20:47

fgs it's just a midday talk show it's not meant to be anything other than what it is. surely you lot who don't like it don't watch it so why the moaning? shouldn't you all be listening to the archers at that time instead.

noddyholder · 13/04/2010 20:41

Has it always been on every day?Seems excessive

LadyBlaBlah · 13/04/2010 20:38

LOL @ BOF

I'm off it til tomorrow at 12.30

HerBeatitude · 13/04/2010 20:27

Yes tethers, we're all assumed to be very very stupid.

BitOfFun · 13/04/2010 20:27

I'm smoking crack right now, and I've only read this thread.

Original poster
tethersend · 13/04/2010 20:26

But they won't commission a programme with Germaine Greer, Anna Raeburn and Joan Bakewell, because Jane MacDonald, Carol McGiffin and Colleen Nolan have already ticked the 'programme for women' box.

I am getting closer to finding out why it makes me so angry- cheers you lot!

OP posts:
EggyAllenPoe · 13/04/2010 20:22

i think giving Nell Mcandrew a hard time about extended BF ing (as far as 15mths?) was totally out of line, especially as they were saying 'doesn't he have to go everywhere with you??' as though she would necessarily consider that to be a bad thing...

they were probs just jealous of her boobs. I know I am.

HerBeatitude · 13/04/2010 20:16

I've watched it about five times in my life and each time I've been amazed by how utterly uninformed and stupid they all seem. I think my objection to it is that they obviously don't have any serious research into any of the ishoos they cover and none of them are well informed enough to provide any real insight into anything they discuss. It's just utterly mindless.

Now if it were Germaine Greer, Anna Raeburn and Joan Bakewell, the discusssions would actually be based on some knowledge of the subject matter. The reason that they choose the older women they do, is because they are so utterly ignorant and so don't threaten all the viewers who are assumed to be as ignorant as the presenters.

It is just piss poor really

clam · 13/04/2010 20:14

I used to quite like it when Kaye Adams chaired it in its early days. She managed to keep it reasonably intelligent. Since then, however, it's become unwatchable.
Try having it on in another room and it accentuates its true colours. All you can hear is shrieking canned laughter as various panellists make some obvious double entendre about their sex life - or lack of it.

That crack is beginning to sound good.

SethStarkaddersMum · 13/04/2010 20:13

gosh SEA - my MIL would be shocked by Loose Women. And she's only seventy.

feminists are often bitches to other women, just like other women are often bitches to other women. Not being a bitch is in no way a qualification for being a feminist.

mrsruffallo · 13/04/2010 20:12

It is crap.
There are men who are idiots and women who are idiots.
That's equality

APassionateWoman · 13/04/2010 20:05

Put it this way. If my choices were:

a) spend an hour stuck in a lift with Carol McGiffin

b) spend an hour smoking crack down a dark alley

I would choose b) every time

southeastastra · 13/04/2010 20:01

i know what you mean, but to me it's a show that sort of aimed at the retired. younger women usually have cable or the internet or lots of other things to do. people like my mil watch it and she's 80