Extreme images of violence against women. "Moral and edgy" or vile misogynist cliche?

I didn't know that about Brian May either. Though always thought he was a good egg since he finished off his PhD despite being an internationally famous rock star

Those Britain's Got Talent acts look vile and depressing.

I wasn't aware the freddie mercury had a lot of parties featuring hordes of naked women

I did see some footage of one of his parties once, and there were lots of people in their underwear/very tight revealing clothing. They definitely weren't women though

I did not know that about Brian May. Good on him.

I did not know that about Brian May. Good on him.

Had no idea about the Steve Jobs thing. It reminds me of Brian May who apparently disapproved of the naked women covers/parties Queen had, on the basis that it was degrading to women. Lone voice, but a good one.

Aye I agree to some extent. Although I would rather DD's used the laptop in the sitting room. Am more concerned about MSN and Facebook really.

But it reminded me of a documentary about the American Film Board of Classification which decides what certificate to put on films.

It views sex, nudity and swearing as far more deserving of a box-office killing 18-rating than extreme violence which is more likely to be considered family viewing and given a lower rating.

Anyway ...off subject

What tends to boggle me about this sort of thing is how much time some people spend insisting that violent porn looked at by perverts is to blame for all the horrors in society (by which the worst bucketheads usually mean very stagey, ritualised BDSM stuff or manga ie cartoons) and completely ignoring how much violent misogyny features in prime time entertainment. Someone who is sexually aroused by the thought of women being chopped up or whatever doesn't need to join a secret cult society of rich snuff movie producers in snuff-movie peddling rings to get his kicks when he can pick up a box set of CSI or the Hostel films in the pound shop.

Re the Ipad thing- surely it has the Internet though, which provides an infinite amout of porn.

If Apple don't want to sell porn apps then fair enough -but how far does it go? Because it seems rather puritanical to me. Are they going down the Facebook route of no nudity? Does that include art? Breastfeeding? Someone's bum?

I'msonot you are so right. I, too, have started channelling Mary Whitehouse. As has Joan Bakewell.

Links

blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/edwest/100041836/as-joan-bakewell-now-admits-mary-whitehouse-was-right-ab out-a-lot-of-things/

and here

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/7791737/Dame-Joan-Bakewell-admits-Mary-Whitehouse-was-right-to-fear- sexual-liberation.html

I can't watch TV dramas these days. Like you say, the woman (or girl) is abused/murdered but it turns out OK as the flawed but ultimately ok DC catches him in the end.

No, that doesn't make it OK.

Now if I'd known that I wouldn't have become a crackberry adict.

Evening all. I would say I've enjoyed reading this thread but that would be wrong. I feel less of a screaming harpy certainly and will be carefully paraphrasing your cleverness in my next ahem Letter of Complaint. I am currently in correspondence with Sainsburys re their shelving heights and M&S re their soft porn advertising strategy so one more won't hurt now who to choose who to choose?

Seth - yes, that was the article that I read. Stupid man (Arthur) and props to Jobs. As you say, Arthur apparently cannot comprehend that Jobs might be doing this because he actually understands people's concerns about the proliferation of porn. It's almost enough to get me to buy an iPhone (if one of you lot is prepared to give me the money)

Great thread.

I googled Charles Arthur and the I-Pad porn-free thing Policy mentioned and got this.
Apologies for deviating from the subject of this thread, but I thought this was interesting: 'It is not clear where this thread of Puritanism comes from within Apple....The only clue is in another email sent to Tate, who threw down the challenge: "I don't want 'freedom from porn'. Porn is just fine! And I think my wife would agree."

Even though it was past 1.30am, Jobs shot back within minutes: "You might care more about porn when you have kids . . ."'

However Arthur considers that, 'it seems unlikely he would manipulate the entire content strategy of a $240bn corporation simply to ease his home life'

In other words, it doesn't seem to occur to Arthur that maybe Jobs doesn't want porn on the I-Pad because he is actually anti-porn! Even though that is what Jobs is basically saying.

I saw an episode of BBC's Luther where a taxi driver was killing prostitutes.

It obviously fancies itself as edgy and features idris Elba from The Wire.

It's interesting comparing the two series. IMO the long- drawn-out grisly scene where he breaks down a door with his toolkit- knife, axe, drill - while the 'prostitute' screams in terror next to a plastic wrapped corpse was unspeakably horrific. It played into the whole 'woman as prey' narrative which pervades cop dramas.

THe Wire featured many strong/flawed female characters- who were allowed to be characters and not just ciphers- but I never once saw it lapse into that Luther shit.

I agree - it's not that it's there as a one off, it's that it normalises violence against women.

I don't watch much TV drama but am shocked by the level of violence when I do. If you are a woman, you are either a victim, a lipstick lesbian or a fat funny one it seems.

I know I am channeling mary whitehouse, and I never thought I'd say that.

Thing is I dont' object to a lot of this stuff per se, it's an appropriateness thing, a time and a place thing.

Don't know if I am in the mood for googling obscene publications. I do know you're not allowed to show an erect penis and my question has always been why the fuck not? If you can see all these women with their legs spread? Pah.

You can, quite lawfully, go into newsagents and cover up the mags with paper bags, or turn them around. You just have to leave if when the manager asks you to. Object do 'feminist Friday' actions in which a bunch of them all go into a shop and do this. WHSmith is a particular target because it's always been so resistant to self-regulation of any kind.

Eleison, it was the latter (libertarian pornophile masturbators' den, otherwise known as the comments under my blog post on LibCon). I might well copy and paste your extremely clear thinking the next time around...

ISNT, I think there are actually laws about 'top shelf' pornography - certain titles are designated as 18+ only and have to go on the top shelf by law. Don't know how the law is phrased or why things like Zoo/Nuts/Sport don't qualify - would be interesting to look into that. Obscene Publications Act presumably.

Can't remember whether it was this thread or a different one on which someone said they'd found themselves thinking 'Mary Whitehouse was right' [obviously 'right' only in a few rather specific circumstances].