Petition to stop Tesco's selling lads' mags

[SkaterGrrrrl]

www.gopetition.com/online/34857.html

I don't see too much of a problem with the mags themselves. Put them up near the top shelf where they belong, otherwise I can't see that they are any worse than countless other things you see. For a country that still has 'newspapers' with naked women in, one of which is considered to be a key player, it's all a bit pointless to petition against these.

No, but I'd rather they tackle the newspapers first, newspapers which are lying around in people's houses, read on trains etc. These are far more accessible to children than magazines which they'd have to tear their eyes away from the latest Glittery Sparkle or Fluffy Cute Pets magazine to see.

Rockbird - There is a campaign against page 3
www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=85555267501&ref=ts
turnyourbackonpage3.wordpress.co m/

There is a big debate about 'choice' and the choices young women make to appear in lads mags. For instance, if a young working class woman feels her choice is either to break into glamour modeling, or work in a factory/at tescos, is that a fair choice? And, on top of that, if she feels that she has to do a number of shoots for free to get some work experience, is that a fair choice for her to make?

And then if she takes part in the lads mags recruiting drives like Babes on the Bed (Nuts) where women in nightclubs were recruited to perform 'in a competition' (read: for free) semi-naked on a bed while the men watched, with the hope of winning a photo shoot. Or put up photos of herself, in sexual poses, semi-naked, online, again for free, so that men can rate them and they can 'win' a photoshoot.

The website actually says
"Girls, upload sexy photos of yourself in this section. The most popular girls will win a photo shoot in a future issue of Nuts magazine.
Guys, you can help to choose who wins by voting for the sexiest photos and making friends with the girls."

So the 'guys' get to make friends with the girls too. That's a bonus. So the "girls" need to make sure they are chatty and talking to the men as well, to get the votes.

LoulouH - As for men channelling their leery eyes onto these women instead of the (reluctant) real women around them in real life, I think it is more likely that they will leer and objectify real women, say in a nightclub, if they do it personally with pictures of women.

Rockbird - I agree about newspapers like the Sport. I hate them. But I think they all need tackling. It's not an either/or situation.

"I don't really see that magazines such as FHM, Loaded etc are that bad. We have equivalents to them. Nuts/Zoom whatever they are called fair enough, but last time I checked FHM was okay."

ShinyandNew, I recommend you look at "Lads Mags uncovered", highlighting the offensive language and imagery used about women. Don't forget these magazines are read by young men, and teach young men that its okay to talk about or think about women in this derogatory way.

"If the women featuring in the magazines are happy to do so, why do other women feel they should stop it? I don't see any harm in it, sorry. Also is it not better that lads buy these mags and leer over the contact rather than letching on other women that are not willing to be objectified."

Magazines are not read in isolation. A young men who reads lads mags and gets comfortable viewing women as objects for his gratification and delight is not going to halt that thinking when viewing women in the real world.

I've signed it.

I have no problem with porn mags. I have no problem with porn. Well, I have a problem with people who are abused, or pressured or forced into things due to vulnerability, but not with someone who chooses to be involved in porn. (whole other discussion, I know!)

However, I have a massive problem with taking my children to a supermarket or newsagents and seeing these mags right above Ben10, or Gormiti. If adults want to go and buy such mags, then fine. But they have no place on the main magazine rack, to be absorbed by young children. - kids see everything! Who really thinks that they don't notice these mags just because they have to look up?!

I read your link, but most of the stuff featured was from Zoo/Nuts/The Sport.

I'd have no problem in stopping those sorts adverts being printed. Or even those particular publications. The last time I read FHM it was mainly about cars/blood and guts/computers etc. Yes there were women posing in evocative ways in just undies and having interviews about who their ideal partner would be, but Cosmo have the same sort of things starring males.

I also think it's fairly naive and insulting to men in general to believe that reading this rubbish will make them think differently about women. When we are growing up our behaviors are modelled on those around us not what we read or what pictures we see.

A normal, well balanced man is not going to turn into a rapist or sex fiend just because he reads something in a magazine.

I dont think it turns men into rapists, I think it encourages men to view women as less than human - as objects.

But fair enough point - my link did not address FHM.

If the petition was specifically targeting named mags/papers like those mentioned in the link I think it would be more effective. I think banning all lads mags is unfeasible and unnecessary.

'I also think it's fairly naive and insulting to men in general to believe that reading this rubbish will make them think differently about women. When we are growing up our behaviors are modelled on those around us not what we read or what pictures we see.' - I completely disagree with this. There are many, many studies showing that people's (men AND women's) perceptions of women, particularly in a sexual context, change greatly after prolonged exposure to porn (which is definitely how I'd class Zoo, Nuts etc). One study showed that people who had been shown a lot of porn were much less likely to view sympathetically a woman making an accusation of rape.

Have signed. Porn on show does not stop letching - it encourages the viewing of women as constantly available sex bunnies and therefore encourages it.

Re modelling our behaviour on what we see around us rather than pictures - but you don't tend to see what your mum and dad get up to in the bedroom do you? So in the area of sex, images are going to have a disproportionate influence.
You also don't tend to see that many normal naked women (if you're a boy) so it's not surprising teenage boys are getting an unrealistic idea of what normal women look like.
(There was a brilliant - and quite shocking tv programme - a while back where they asked a class of teenage boys to pick out which were the real vaginas, breasts etc, and they almost universally thought it was the ones that were actually fake.)

anyway the petition is not to ban them full stop. It is to stop selling them in Tescos.

I'm with JustMyTwoPenceWorth here. If people want to look at this stuff it's up to them but I don't want it in my face. I would like the choice not to have to see it.

I mean, would you feel more comfortable walking into a room full of men watching a programme about seagulls, or a room full of men watching soft porn? By your logic LouLouH it would be the seagull room, because they would be mad keen to letch over your womanly form as a nice change from seabirds. I think most people would find the porn room less comfortable though, as the eyes turned from ogling a screen full of naked women fondling each other to you, a live specimen within touching distance.

Why would we really want men going around the shops with a constant semi from titty pics anyway?

Media must influence the way we think, or advertisers wouldn't fork out millins of pounds to sway our habits.

I also believe language shapes thought at much as thought shapes language.... Call someone a certain name long enough and you will start to think of them in that light.

Frequently consume media that refers to women as 'horny sluts' must affect your though processes about women, how could it not?

consuming

But what sort of men read those magazines to begin with? My DH was brought up well and is respectfull towards women. He has no interest in magazines such as Nuts etc. Nor did his father.

My own Dads relationship with his father was much less than ideal. He has an unhealthy interest in porn and does view women as objects.

The magazines aren't creating the problem. They are a symptom of it.

The media reacts to what is going on in society.

I won't sign because I don't agree with all the wording however I don't agree they should be on view in a family supermarket or newsagent. Children have the right to be protected from such images and form their opinions and attitudes towards the opposite sex by talking to their parents/guardians/teachers and observing how those influential people in their lives treat eachother. Adults on the other hand have a right to a) pose for these mags, b)buy them, c)leer at them, whatever they want.

Don't mind FHM but don't know any of the others so can't comment on them.

It's a 2 way conversation Shiny - sociey informs media and media informs society.

66% of children and young people say that they find out about sex, love and relationships through the media (Institute of Education 2003). As Object puts it, do we want young people who are shaping their sexual identities to be learning about sexuality from magazines like Maxim (2006) who advised male readers that "most women fantasize about being raped" and that "it?s a myth that women like soft sex"?

As for who reads these magazines, they seem to be aimed at teenagers. The Home Office recommends that lad mags be age restricted becaause magazines offering soft porn at pocket-money prices are part of a "drip, drip" media landscape that is sexualising boys and girls at an increasingly early age.

Source here

But Shiny I thought I just saw on the other thread that he calls you a fucking lazy cow or some such? Doesn't sound respectful to me.

What was it about the wording scardypants?

Hi EAM,

Whilst I agree with most of it as I said in my last post I just don't agree that educated grown men can be swayed in their opinion of women just because of pictures in a magazine. If a man is to have such a low opinion of women and a bad attitude towards them then I imagine it's less to do with a magazine and more that he is an ill-educated, ignorant, sexist bollox.

I am however reading this thread with great interest and reserve the right to alter my view having read and digested a broad range of opinions and facts. Tis a womans perogative isn't it

But it only says that they "encourage" a negative view of women, not that it will change people's minds if they are dead set against objectification etc. Most people IMO aren't dead set against it. The people who buy it buy it for something to read, and the naked ladies are part of what makes them enjoy it.

What do you think of my seagull/porn comparison above?

No he is not respectfull in the slightest to me. My job is look after the house, the children and him. I should put that above all my own needs, just as his mother did when he was small.

He does not view any woman as a sex object though. A servent, yes. But not a sex object.

The point I am trying to make is the one that Scardypants has just posted in much clearer way than I have managed thus far.

If this were about pornographic images I'd agree. I'd be happy to see those sealed and covered.

But this seems to be about objecting to what other women do for a living and what other people like to read. You could always speak to the models directly and tell them to get back to working in tesco where they belong.

I do think the trashy things people read these days are mostly a waste of a good tree, but each to their own.