to object to the term 'glamour model?'

[clam]

OK, I'm aware I'm probably going to sound like a Daily Mail ranting version of my mother, but I'm becoming increasingly irritated by this term being bandied about. Isn't it just soft porn, basically? Glamorised, to make it sound like a desirable ambition for girls without too much up top - that'll be up top in the brains department, not the boobs.

Bah!

At least theyve got a fucking job and pay their taxes.

"Oh my god, a pair of tits out on display - THE WORLD HAS LOST ALL RESPECT!!! COVER THAT POOR GIRL UP!!!"

You silly fuckers. It's a job, it doesn't harm anyone, it gives some blokes a perk to their day, so who gives a shit?

Lets face it - its because theyve got a better pair of tits than you...

I did work my way up in hairdressing, being an assistant manager at a large salon and them managing a small salon. It was still full time hours for not much money and meant I had to claim benefits to pay for full time childcare whilst rarely seeing my young son, because by the time I finished work and got him home and bathed, it was bedtime.

I never got any disrespect from people who knew me, nor with those I worked with. I was quite honest about what I did for a living, and my reasons for doing so and those who knew me then and know me now know what sort of person I am and judgeme by that, not a chosen carrer or job when I was younger. People weren't always 'looking at my tits', the work I did equally involved wearing lingerie or clothes as it did taking them off, but even if they were, so what?! What difference did it make to me? It didn't affect my everday life in any way or make any difference to me.

The thing I find depressing about these so called models is that you don't really have to do very much to be one.
Basically you need big boobs which is a genetic lottery or be prepared to have surgery to get big boobs. Then you take your clothes off. You also have to spend a lot of time primping yourself.

Any woman really can do this and it involves no real effort of any sort.

It also encourages men to think of women as objects, that all women want sex all the time and only pretty girls are valid, and boobs are somehow a public commodity.

I also hate the "it makes good money" argument.

Yes, but you could make a lot of money by dealing drugs, stealing and the slave trade. But this is not a reason to do any of those things.

It is sad that so much money is paid to women to become objects.
But then TV presenters are paid a lot of money and their net worth and contribution to society is very small.

And then people who really contribute to the world and help people like care workers get shit money.

I think it shows we have screwed value sets and we should complain.

'now,get to fuck.'

LOL.

oooo, how unpleasant.

tell people they're unpleasant for expressing an opinion about these women and then tell them to fuck off.

you're a piece of work.

you're now being abusive, thesecond. first, you accuse people who don't agree with you of stalking. then you get abusive with them.

keep going! you're on a roll now.

"It also encourages men to think of women as objects, that all women want sex all the time and only pretty girls are valid, and boobs are somehow a public commodity."

Are you really that stupid? Or do you just think all men are chimpanfuckingzees?

What about all the girlie teen mags on the shelves, stuffed from cover to cover with pictures of half naked filmstars, rockstars, footballers, "torso of the week" etc etc.

Now go and burn your bra somewhere else - oh no, better not - that would mean getting your tits out...

The tone and aggro of people who are trying to defend this industry really says it all, IMO.

You're distrubed, thesecond. You really come across as having an anger management problem.

I hope you get the professional help you so obviously need to deal with your anger issues.

From now on, I'm going to ignore you, as there is no ignore function on this board.

Feel free to continue spewing and I will carry on expressing my opinion.

Bye now.

I only wish we could avoid Jordan in papers like the Guardian as was suggested a couple of pages back. All the broadsheets seem to be fixated on running "Jordan - is she actually a feminist icon?" articles to show that they're down with the kids.

Eh, it looks like a silly, tacky old business. "Glamour" is not the word I would use, if only because few of them look very glamorous. Jordan especially seems to look like she's been dragged through a hedge backwards these days, horrid drawn-on angry eyebrows and a veneer of orange gloop, and always slinging dirty laundry about like a fishwife. not exactly Audrey Hepburn or Sophia Loren "glamorous"...

tbh I find that kind of "selling every half-fabricated minute of one's life and the lives of one's children" industry much more tacky and worrying than just page 3 girls per se. Still, it would be nice to walk into the newsagent and not be greeted with shelf upon shelf of topless women, as if it was normal to have what is, yes, basically soft porn, wallpapering our lives wherever we go.

"Basically you need big boobs which is a genetic lottery or be prepared to have surgery to get big boobs."

more mis-information from people who have no idea what they are talking about...

Not all glamour models have big bobs. I was an A cup when I was working as one.

Exactly, Blanchet. Sadly, it's hard to avoid seeing sad Jordan's face everywhere in the press. She's looking pretty haggard, though.

Confident??!

Crikey - Jordan is synonymous with neediness, and low self-esteem. How can anyone seriously not think that? I felt really sorry for when she was in I'm A Celeb, watching her desperation to be liked and validated, whilst at the same time being more and more humiliated. I had to stop watching as it was all too pathetic. Confident? Seriously?!

And as for glamour modelling not affecting anyone else... Do people seriously think it doesn't impact at all...?

You have young girls thinking that that's what it takes to make boys like them. The generic body type of white but perma-tanned, hair extensions, usually blonde, fake nails, big boobs, Brazilians - it really doesn't give other body types a look in, does it? And young boys are programmed to think this is the epitome of desirable.

Dismissing girls because they have non-pneumatic, normal-shaped boobs, and perhaps a little extra fat in places. As for girls from other ethnicities, well, they barely get a look in.

If you're not sexually available you're clearly a prude - girls who are getting younger and younger are expected to put out, and do all sorts to keep the lads entertained - faux bi-sexuality, anyone? Even that's passe these days.

Strip clubs and lap dancing clubs are the norm, and again you're a prude if you don't like the idea of your boyfriend or husband going to one.

The WAG lifestyle is to be envied rather than pitied (who really wants to be in John Terry's wife's shoes right now?).

All this is part and parcel of the glamour modelling lifestyle which has become utterly normalised in the last decade or so.

How can you honestly say that it has no impact on anyone else? If and when I have a daughter, I would be absolutely gutted if she saw this as an aspirational 'career'.

For heaven's sake - you don't see boys getting their kit off for the girls, faux pouting and preening all over the place, and playing all kinds of dirty to marry rich sportwomen and be kept men, a la most WAGS. Why? Honestly - why do they not do this, in the way girls/women do?

Glamour modelling and all of that - one small step for an individual woman maybe, but a HUGE leap backward for womenkind.

And as for the "you're all just jealous" chestnut - oh God, please - I am losing the will to live...!

"Lets face it - its because theyve got a better pair of tits than you..."

Ah but any one of us could have that if we were prepared to have the surgery.

Nothing glamerous about it at all IMO. But hey if you want to make money as wank fodder then go for it. Just don't expect people to respect you for doing it.

I am intreagued though as to whether those defending the "industry" have daughters and whether they would be happy for their daughters to do this for a living. I don't but if I did I certainly wouldn't, and I equally wouldn't be happy about my son paying to see it.

Thesecondcoming quite the charmer, aren't you? so when people don't say what you want to hear you resort to personal insults. Hardly inteligent, is it? But then given you mix with the likes of Katy price it's hardly surprising...

see this to me is sot porn

this is glamour

Putting the arguments to one side for a moment, I am stunned at the suggestion that anyone who is offended by or opposed to female nudity in the mainstream press must be unattractive or jealous.

It's a feeble argument, especially here on the internet where no-one can see what anyone loks like

TSC if you posted after SM, how exactly is she 'shadowing' you? surely that would be you shadowing her? just a thought.

As for the OP, totally agree with Ziggurat, who put it better than I could!

ImSoNotTelling... ah, but that's not what I said, is it?! I said some women... unlike others who think all glamour models must be thick and are surgically enhanced... I don't make sweeping generalisations, you see...

My comment wasn't aimed at you midori

I see this argument has degenerated - with lots of different people arguing about different things. Pornification of society is a different argument to whether "glamour modelling" is a bad trade to get into for the women and so on. It is a very complicated area.

I stand by my opening gambit that agreed with the OP that the term "glamour modelling" when used to describe posing for topless/nude photographs is a misnomer.

When you do nude modelling for people painting pictures it's called life modelling isn't it.

Maybe that would be a better term.

Midori - I have a lot respect for you as you have defended your point without resorting to mudslinging. You are obviously an intelligent woman - my feeling is that it is a shame that you spent your prime years of youth doing a job where you would have been letched over (not necessarily by the people who photographed you or whatever, but by the people who looked at your pictures).

I just do not think it is something that should be lauded as a good choice for young girls as a career, fair enough yu had more time with your little boy, but screw that for a choice. It just really goes against everything I believe in. I think it is such a dangerous industry to dip your toe in, yes you were savvy enough not to get pulled down into the mire, but not so many other girls will be able to resist the siren call of the porn industry.