Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Cover of latest GQ magazine unsuitable for 7 year old child

95 replies

BrightonSteve · 12/12/2010 20:16

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?

OP posts:
AnyFuleSno · 12/12/2010 20:49

You are being unreasonable for reading GQ. It's lies they are peddling to you Steve. LIES.

Original poster
BrightonSteve · 12/12/2010 20:50

AnyFuleSno, I've been lied to all my life! ;-)

OP posts:
Dolanette · 12/12/2010 20:51

Thank you goblinchild

ShiningWit · 12/12/2010 21:01

The thing is Steve, at what point do you decide that your son is becoming more interested in, let's assume, women as sexual beings? Is it on the day he turns 10? That's the day you'll start putting this magazine somewhere more discreet, or not having it in the house at all is it? What if it's when he's 9 and a half? You don't know, and clearly there isn't one single date when a switch is flicked from off to on.

By letting him see these images now, you are letting him think that this is how women are, how they present themselves, or what women might aspire to look like.

he's getting this into his head now as a normalised image without even realising it, because it's in a safe domestic environment where he lives with his mum and dad, so it must be good and normal and safe and everyday, mustn't it...? Men like to look at women dressed like this, women like to dress up for men like this, women who don't do this allow men to look at women dressed like this ... all of this is what he learns by your coffee table magazine.

So yes, YABU and your wife is not. I would suggest that you respect her discomfort with this and move the magazine now.

sethstarkaddersmum · 12/12/2010 21:05

'To be honest though, Ive seen more overtly sexual outfits and behaviour on Strictly Come Dancing (and I'm not going to ban Saturfay night TV)'

I know what you mean..... but that's not an argument for or against this particular magazine being ok.
you judge each thing on its merits; there will always be worse things out there that you can do nothing about, but you can still limit the amount of exposure to stuff that is going to be bad for him.

tinierclanger · 12/12/2010 21:09

I'm afraid I agree with your wife. it's the normalisation of women as objects that bothers me. so if stuff like this is routinely around, it presents that as being ok.

Maylee · 12/12/2010 21:11

I think I'm with you BrightonSteve.

As long as you and your wife teach your son to respect women, then you can't really shelter him from reality.

Rihanna is a grown(very successful) woman. She has chosen to dress and pose like that. By hiding it, it's almost like saying that it is something to be ashamed of. When actually, it shouldn't be. It's her choice.

Original poster
BrightonSteve · 12/12/2010 21:16

tinierclanger? What would you rather her be wearing so that she didnt appear objectified?

Twin Set and Pearls perhaps?

OP posts:
Original poster
BrightonSteve · 12/12/2010 21:19

Thanks Maylee Sun. I also dont think its something to be ashamed.

At what level of dress (or undress) does someone become objectified?

OP posts:
Maylee · 12/12/2010 21:20

A Boden tea dress of course Xmas Grin

Maylee · 12/12/2010 21:22

Sorry - the Boden comment was in response to your question to tinierclanger.

I think it's less about the dress (or undress) and more about the context to be honest.

sethstarkaddersmum · 12/12/2010 21:28

objectification isn't just about how much flesh you show, it's about the pose, the style, the context....

sethstarkaddersmum · 12/12/2010 21:29

it's perfectly possible for something to be unsuitable for children without it being something to be ashamed of.

AliceWorld · 12/12/2010 21:31

You've had two big arguments with your wife about this Hmm

Why not just respect her opinion and not put it on the coffee table?

Why come online and ask random people what they think?

It upsets your wife. Respect your wife's views. Don't argue about things that don't matter. Arguing a point is more important that your wife's feelings Hmm Its a magazine on a coffee table ffs

BeenBeta · 12/12/2010 21:31

BrightonSteve - I am a bloke (yes there a tiny few of us on MN and you are welcome to join) and yes I agree with your wife. I wouldn't have the magazine in my house.

Maybe its me, maybe its my age (47) but to be honest dont you think that sticking yet another scantily clad woman on the front cover of a magazine aimed at blokes is a all a bit well insulting to my/your and our respective son's intelligence?

Don't get me wrong, she is an attractive woman and all that. I like attractive women. I am married to one. Riannah would still be attractive and a great singer and everything else if she had all her clothes on though.

Frankly, I am bored with having women's bodies shoved at me from every media channel and advertising hoarding. Its not reality but it is what modern life is and not much we can do about it but at least we maybe temper the message with our own children.

Maybe that is what your wife is saying?

Maylee · 12/12/2010 21:36

But then what makes it unsuitable? Genuine question.

PinkyBurgerhead · 12/12/2010 21:38

Beenbeta, may I just say how refreshing I found your post. So often men are portrayed as slaves to their own hormones, boys will be boys etc. It's good to think that, in fact, men will think this through.

Original poster
BrightonSteve · 12/12/2010 21:47

I did respect my wifes view and the magazine was removed to my "office".

However, I still dont think the cover image was unsuitable for a seven year old.

AliceWorld, isnt the point of this forum to discuss matters with random people. I've enjoyed reading all the posts here and its been an education.

OP posts:
corlan · 12/12/2010 21:48
Original poster
BrightonSteve · 12/12/2010 21:51
OP posts:
corlan · 12/12/2010 21:52

You're welcome - helps with the stirring Xmas Smile

bitsyandbetty · 12/12/2010 21:56

I didnt think 7 year olds were the target market.

Original poster
BrightonSteve · 12/12/2010 21:56

Ah I see. Dont mean to stir. Ive heard arguments that sit on both sides of the fence. Although admittedly there are many more posts against my view. Thanks to all who gave their input.

OP posts:
bitsyandbetty · 12/12/2010 21:57

My DH has the Frankie Boyle book and my DS (10) removed the cover and threw it away because he did not approve. Of course I did try and stop him (not).

GroovyGretel · 12/12/2010 21:58

I think for me, at least,it is the fact is that the photo is designed to arouse some sexual desire. It makes me feel uncomfortable as a parent.

Whilst I agree that it is not necessarily the clothing that she wears that is the problem (after all, I don't care about principal boys wearing tights and knee high boots), I do feel that your wife is correct on this one.

I'm glad that it has disappeared into your office!

Swipe left for the next trending thread