Lads Mags - new guidelines

[ChaCha]

What do you think? How do you feel about it and will the new guidelines make any difference?

All 'top shelf' material?

Personally glad of the new guidelines. Dreading having to explain magazine covers to my son when he starts asking questions that are almost in reach!

{http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4843808.stm\ladsmags}

That's interesting expat. My MIL a practising Christian was just telling me that women used to cover their heads years ago to go to church and I was quite astonished.

Yeah, Catholics used to do that.

It's all just stripping for money to me.

This is really interesting. It's happening in tandem with the Home Office \link{http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/consent-campaign/\consent campaign}. Click on the campaign posters links to see them.

No its not airbabe, you get your kit off for money, just for mens pleasure

Youre prosituting yourself

they really dont bother me and anyway womens mags may not have half naked men on cover but cosmo has them inside! and has just as many articles on sex should this be classed as the same as fhm etc and has anyone picked up a teenage girl magazine recently? sugar more bliss all read by average 14 year olds and all contain detailed sex articles

good. The covers of Nuts, Zoo and the others are worse than the normal porn magazines. Really don't think they should be on display. Sexual content inside magazines is different - the reader chooses to buy that publication.

I still think there is something dangerous about the attitude to women promoted by these lads mags - it represents a culture in which rape isn't seen as a crime because all women are gagging for it. Given that most of their readers are teenage boys, it's frightening.

Yes excellent, very glad to see this trash out of sight - sick to death of having boobs staring us in the face - I pity men being sooooo governed by their trousers lol

They are soft porn, they airbrush bits out/cover bits up to the absolute minium to stay within guidelines. As long as you don't show nipples you get away with showing a totally but naked female.

I recently discovered 'female porn' and it is very different from male porn - so much so I no longer consider myself 'anti-porn' but anti 'male porn' and feel quite enlightened about the whole discovery! Romantic porn! Surely not! LOL

We are not 'allowed' to see any men's bits, yet every day women are faced with offensive material like that on the lads mags (i recently saw one with a 'lesbian dvd' on it!)...even when just going for a pint of milk.

And I've just thought why this is...men are often soooo paranoid about the size of their tackle they don't want to be reminded of the competition in daily life hahaha (although this is exactly what we women have to put up with!)

Glad to see this move and I'm off to sign the petition right now. About bloomin time!

...and its not just Lads Mags - computer magazines, bike and car mags, photography mags...but women on mags sell, even women's magazines have women on them and the teenage girls' mags are jaw dropping sometimes !!!

cant ban all magazines though!

Women's and girls magazines are sometimes just as bad, but in different ways. And a naked man on any cover makes no difference, men and women don't objectify the male body in the same way they both do the female body. Yet, why does a teenage magazine choose to have Paris Hilton on it's cover as an aspirational figure when she is, to all intents and purposes, a porn star?

Has anyone looked at the consent posters? I'm doing an essay on them and it would be good to hear some opinions.

Do you mean the ones the Home Office is putting in lads mags? Saw one with a shot of some woman's knickers with something like a no entry sign on. Good that they are trying to make young men understand that consent has to be freely given, not assumed. And a striking image can get that across very effectively.

\link{http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/consent-campaign/\here it is Edam}

I was wondering why women of the same age range were being targeted. I think young (and lets face it, some older, women) don't know the difference either.

It dichotomizes the sexes again too - an us against them - message when they're trying to advocate greater communication. If men who do this kind of thing are predominantly angry at women, I don't see how this is going to change their mindset.

Those posters are incredibly simplistic - I find it hard to believe that there are potential rapists who'll now think oh yes, better remember to check she actually wants to shag me first.

I agree that educating young women to give them the confidence to make their views clear is much more important.

Does this stuff get taught in schools much these days? (it deffo wasn't at my Catholic comp ).

It's important to communicate the change in the law to young men who are surrounded by the lads mags 'gerr em off' culture. So any attempt to do that has to be a good thing, surely?

from what I have seen on the covers, the culture of 'gerr em off' is helped along by women aka 'fit birds on the street' or 'girl nextdoor' etc. who send in their photos.

There ARE women out there who are like that, but by being immersed in these mags are the 'lads' lead to believe that we are all like that.

And no, obv you can't ban all magazines...but there can be some restraint on the covers! what does a woman in a bikini have to do with computer mags????

Young beautiful women objectify themselves.

And I agree Edam, I think it's a step in the right direction. There's one in this weeks Nuts (I bought it as part of my research into context) opposite a page of girls getting their kits off in nightclubs for the Nuts team. A very mixed message.

I think the adds have to be simplistic though. They're going to be in men's loo's and so the majority of lads will be pissed when they see them. I can imagine the knickers with a no go sign on them coming back to haunt them in a drunken clinch.

well, let's hope so. I just don't think a pic of a woman in her grottiest granny knickers is going to help men remember that wonderbras and lacy g-strings don't always equal gagging-for-it.

Am really glad about these guidelines - I complained a while back to the sales assistant in my local Spar about the eye-level T&A and "hot lesbian action" and she just scoffed and said she read Zoo and Nuts herself and couldn't see what the fuss was about. Glad to see I'm not the only prude .

I also think it may just add to the negative belief that women just cry wolf with rape - especially the mixed message just described.

...here lads look at us getting our kits off for ya, but look over to that side of the magazine cos it doesn't mean I wanna sleep with you....

While this is a woman's right, it seems to make a mockery of it as well which I know many males then think is a load of rubbish - living up to the 'she says no but really means yes' idea?

I can't really explain what I mean :(

...and you are not a prude!

As I said earlier, I have delved into the female porn industry and been pleasantly surprised at the love and romanticism that is on some sites...but I still hate the way women are portrayed (and we portray ourselves) with Lads Mags.

It makes me sick when I see my little 4 year old prostrating herself around the room mimicking sexy poses

Of course it does, but how do you combat that? Is it media induced?