Cover of latest GQ magazine unsuitable for 7 year old child

[BrightonSteve]

I've just had 2 big arguments with my wife about the cover of this months GQ magazine that features Rhianna. She says the magazine should not be on the coffee table or with other magazines because the cover is unsuitable for my 7 year old son.

The cover can be seen here:
www.gq-magazine.co.uk/magazine
(this is not an advert by the way)

My view is that my son has absolutely no interest in this kind of thing and the fact she is wearing fishnet tights means nothing. I do not think that at his age he would even notice her. He'd probaly take more notice if she was wearing a pair of yellow and pink flares (or a santa hat).

Now, I agree that the content of GQ may not be suitable (especially the sex Q&A they feature each month) but he would never pick up and read the magazine.

If I really thought that this magazine was corrupting my son in any way I wouldnt even bring it in the house.

Whats your view?

www.gq-magazine.co.uk/magazine

Thanks Littlefish for posting an actual link. I'm totally new here so didnt realise.

I agree with your wife.

Do you have pictures of your wife on the wall in the same poses and outfits?

Would he be perfectly ok and indifferent with your wife walking him to school like that?

If the answers yes then yanbu.

No I don't think I would want this on my coffee table either! Soz.
Why don't you just keep it in your bedroom out of the way?

X post little fish

Fair enough Littlefish. I'm intrested in your opinion. No I dont have pics on the wall obviously. But its just an outfit and im sure he sees all sorts when going WH Smith for example.

Is it really worth two big arguments? Your wife obviously feels uncomfortable with it where it is.

I agree that if my son was a bit older (10 or so) then I wouldnt have the magazine in the house but as he is 7 he doesnt even notice.

Yes and those mags arent suitable either

Stroppy mares like me make a point of turning them over

I think most MNers will agree with your wife

Yeah scruffybird, it probably isnt worth 2 arguments. But sometimes areguments happen over the smallest things.

The cover doesn't bother me TOO much but the shot of her in the mag with her gusset on display isn't what I want my dd to aspire to.

But it's not just an outfit, is it. By having it in freely on view in your house, you are condoning this view of women.

My dh used to subscribe to a lads mag, but stopped as soon as dd was born.

As scruffybird says, your dw is clearly unhappy about it, so put it away.

It wouldn't bother me if my DC came across that cover. They've seen much more in RL and those tights are almost like leggings so I can't see the problem really.

Haven't seen what's inside though.

Would a copy of Cosmopolitan be OK in the house with a strapline like "17 things to do with a naked man"

are you a journalist out for a story?

the cover isn't too different to most women's lifestyle magazines imo

I agree about the inside. I'm talking about the cover only.

Would a copy of Cosmopolitan be OK in the house with a strapline like "17 things to do with a naked man"

I can only think of two

Cosmo is also something I don't want my dd to aspire to so that wouldn't be in house either.

And are you a journo as you were asked earlier?

No, Im not out for a story. I just wanted some other opinion on this. I'm just a dh (whatever that is).

"17 things to do with a naked man"

Perhaps we should make this into a post in its own right.
Who can think of 17?

Im sorry but im totally new here. Im just a 37 year old married man with a 7 year old son.

This idea about being a journalist: is that because journalists fish on here?

Yes Brighton, they do. But welcome to the bunfight

How can you be so sure that your ds won't open it up and look at the contents?

FWIW - I wouldn't have Cosmo in the house either.