Can you tell the difference between a quotes from a men's mag and from a rapist?

Links234

This is a fairly disturbing article.

http://jezebel.com/5866602/

Can You Tell The Difference Between A Men’s Magazine And A Rapist?

Well, this is upsetting. According to a new study, people can't tell the difference between quotes from British "lad mags" and interviews with convicted rapists. And given the choice, men are actually more likely to agree with the rapists.



The University of Surrey reports on the study (conducted jointly with researchers at Middlesex University), to be published in the British Journal of Psychology. Researchers gave a group of men and women quotes from the British lad mags FHM, Loaded, Nuts and Zoo, as well as excerpts from interviews with actual convicted rapists originally published in the book The Rapist Files. The participants couldn't reliably identify which statements came from magazines and which from rapists — what's more, they rated the magazine quotes as slightly more derogatory than the statements made by men serving time for raping women. The researchers also showed both sets of quotes to a separate group of men — the men were more likely to identify with the rapists' statements than the lad mag excerpts. The only slightly bright spot in the study: when researchers randomly (and sometimes incorrectly) labelled the quotes as coming from either rapists or magazines, the men were more likely to identify with the ones allegedly drawn from mags. At least they didn't want to agree with rapists.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4tQ9uMZyyI

Read the full article, it gives some of the quotes, and I think you'll find they're quite repugnant and deplorable. an example of rape culture at work? what do you think?

WindSock

Oh yeah, I remember hearing this on the radio a few weeks back but forgot about it. Just looking at some of the quotes there from the site linked;

1. There's a certain way you can tell that a girl wants to have sex . . . The way they dress, they flaunt themselves.

2. Some girls walk around in short-shorts . . . showing their body off . . . It just starts a man thinking that if he gets something like that, what can he do with it?

3. A girl may like anal sex because it makes her feel incredibly naughty and she likes feeling like a dirty slut. If this is the case, you can try all sorts of humiliating acts to help live out her filthy fantasy.

4. Mascara running down the cheeks means they've just been crying, and it was probably your fault . . . but you can cheer up the miserable beauty with a bit of the old in and out.

5. What burns me up sometimes about girls is dick-teasers. They lead a man on and then shut him off right there.

6. Filthy talk can be such a turn on for a girl . . . no one wants to be shagged by a mouse . . . A few compliments won't do any harm either . . . ‘I bet you want it from behind you dirty whore' . . .

7. You know girls in general are all right. But some of them are bitches . . . The bitches are the type that . . . need to have it stuffed to them hard and heavy.

8. Escorts . . . they know exactly how to turn a man on. I've given up on girlfriends. They don't know how to satisfy me, but escorts do.

9. You'll find most girls will be reluctant about going to bed with somebody or crawling in the back seat of a car . . . But you can usually seduce them, and they'll do it willingly.

10. There's nothing quite like a woman standing in the dock accused of murder in a sex game gone wrong . . . The possibility of murder does bring a certain frisson to the bedroom.

11. Girls ask for it by wearing these mini-skirts and hotpants . . . they're just displaying their body . . . Whether they realise it or not they're saying, ‘Hey, I've got a beautiful body, and it's yours if you want it.'

12. You do not want to be caught red-handed . . . go and smash her on a park bench. That used to be my trick.

13. Some women are domineering, but I think it's more or less the man who should put his foot down. The man is supposed to be the man. If he acts the man, the woman won't be domineering.

14. I think if a law is passed, there should be a dress code . . . When girls dress in those short skirts and things like that, they're just asking for it.

15. Girls love being tied up . . . it gives them the chance to be the helpless victim.

16. I think girls are like plasticine, if you warm them up you can do anything you want with them.

Interesting study alright. Goes to show that anything is acceptable as long as it is attributed to a 'reputable' source.

Although I would hardly call glossies reputable now, but to be confused with statements of convicted rapists highlights the amount of bullsht these mags generate onto mainstream society.

jaffacakesyum

I had no idea lad mags were that bad. That's truly depressing. I'm no 'feminazi' but stuff like this just makes me depressed about some of the men out there

Dudess

And the fact you feel the need to point out you're not a feminazi - not having a go btw, just noting how this place makes people walk on eggshells, myself included. Anyone with a bit of decency, male or female, would deplore this stuff.
Some of those comments are really shocking. Some not too bad, but definitely not applicable to all women, which is what's being implied.
That said, the title is a bit OTT - such comments do not define those men's mags, even if they're a depressing part of them.
The phrase "I'd smash it"/"I'd smash her back door in", apart from when it's used jokingly, pisses me off.

kellso81

As a man reading those I was able to tell the difference in all of them, the rapist quotes are genuinely creepy and sickening but the lads mags quotes sound like they were written by a bunch of 14 yr olds who have watched too much porn, the fact they were written by grown men is disturbing!

Dudess

Is that kind of sh1t said in hardcore porn?

RGDATA!

interesting article.
FWIW, as a guy i guessed all but two correctly. got 8 and 9 wrong.
i don't read men's magazines, but i thought it was pretty clear which was which for the most part.

mike65

I imagine this could also be titled

Can you tell the difference between a quotes from men's pub talk and from a rapist?

Dudess

mike65 wrote: »

I imagine this could also be titled

Can you tell the difference between a quotes from men's pub talk and from a rapist?

A stupid men's pub talk.

amacachi

Dudess wrote: »

A stupid men's pub talk.

Meh, sometimes my mates and I would have conversations that would have phrases like those, irony can be fun. :pac: None of my mates read "lad's mags" and I never needed to think about it til now but if it did crop up it would act as a bar to me wanting to talk to someone.
For this thread I was actually looking for the famous Danny Dyer response to a reader's letter, came across this one instead.

mike65

Indeed!

Context is important though,

What burns me up sometimes about girls is dick-teasers. They lead a man on and then shut him off right there.

type comment could have been said in any number of AH threads.

amacachi

mike65 wrote: »

Indeed!

Context is important though,

type comment could have been said in any number of AH threads.

I don't see how that's a particularly rapey thing to say either. It's like having a quote of "Hello." and seeing if someone can tell a rapist or non-rapist said it.

Dudess

Goes without saying irony is not what's being referred to here - always nice to see knuckle-draggers being lampooned.
Mike, don't see how the fact such a comment would be said in AH lessens its impact.

mariebeth

To be honest, it just comes across to me as another way for society to try to explain external reasons, such as music lyrics, music videos and video games for people doing something, while ignoring the fact that there are a lot of other stronger forces for influencing people's decisions to rape, murder or take part in crime.

I'd love to see the original context of the magazine quotes, they seem to me that they have been totally taken out of context, and that important parts of the original quotes did not make it in to the study.

Maple

amacachi wrote: »

I don't see how that's a particularly rapey thing to say either. It's like having a quote of "Hello." and seeing if someone can tell a rapist or non-rapist said it.

No, calling someone a dickteaser is absolutely nothing like saying "hello".

At least not where I come from anyway.

Links234

Maple wrote: »

No, calling someone a dickteaser is absolutely nothing like saying "hello".

At least not where I come from anyway.

I think he meant the magazine called Hello.

Maple

Links234 wrote: »

I think he meant the magazine called Hello.

Whoops! Thanks Links.

Still don't think it's a particularly nice comment for anyone to make, in any circumstances, in any publication.

Kevin Duffy

Dudess wrote: »

And the fact you feel the need to point out you're not a feminazi - not having a go btw, just noting how this place makes people walk on eggshells, myself included. Anyone with a bit of decency, male or female, would deplore this stuff.
Some of those comments are really shocking. Some not too bad, but definitely not applicable to all women, which is what's being implied.
That said, the title is a bit OTT - such comments do not define those men's mags, even if they're a depressing part of them.
The phrase "I'd smash it"/"I'd smash her back door in", apart from when it's used jokingly, pisses me off.

Sadly, from what little I've seen of those magazines, it actually is quite typical. It goes along with articles on other "manly" pastimes such as fighting and drinking too much. In the absence of positive roles models for far too many impressionable, under-educated young men, it's part of the lad culture that's stuffed into the empty spaces in their heads.

mike65 wrote: »

I imagine this could also be titled

Can you tell the difference between a quotes from men's pub talk and from a rapist?

If I found myself in the company of lads saying things like that in the pub, I'd be looking for new friends. It occurs to me though that despite spending a lot of my working life in male-dominated environments - pubs, building sites, the army, door work - I've rarely heard conversations quite as bad as this.

mike65 wrote: »

Indeed!

Context is important though,

type comment could have been said in any number of AH threads.

I wouldn't see AH as the defining standard for these comments.

amacachi

Maple wrote: »

Whoops! Thanks Links.

Still don't think it's a particularly nice comment for anyone to make, in any circumstances, in any publication.

I wasn't talking about the magazine but in a conversation where it's relevant I don't see anything wrong with the comment. I wouldn't suggest opening a conversation with it obviously.

nkay1985

As a man, I identified 12 of 16 correctly. As was said before, the ones form the rapists are genuinely creepy and seem to indicate that they've got a completely warped point of view. The ones from the lads' mags sound like immature young lads trying to be disgusting.

Still, how anyone pays money to but these magazines is completely beyond me. I don't see how they've got any appeal.

Kimia

You know, it's funny. I was all set to be outraged but I could tell which ones were which, probably because I used to read FHM when I was younger. I would agree with Mariebeth and say that lots of the lad mags ones appear to be taken out of context, or written tongue in cheek, deliberately as a joke. For example:

15. Girls love being tied up . . . it gives them the chance to be the helpless victim.

Yes, it's completely generalising all women but I would argue that this is the same thing Cosmo does when they talk about 'How to drive a man wild in bed'.

I'm just not convinced that this is as bad as they are making it out to be. Although the rapists ones are disgusting.

dfx-

The survey seemed to like the "the way they dress" comments. 1, 2, 11 and 14 are the same statement dressed a different way and clear to me anyways.

The only ambiguous or possibly difficult to pick of the rapist comments is no 5. I got 15 of the 16 correct..

MrStuffins

1) Rape is bad.

2) Lads talk like this. They don't necessarily mean it though. It's all talk! It's all a part of being a "lad". Take it with a pinch of salt! The rape ones are very obvious. If a mate made a "The way she's dressed she's asking for it" remark, he wouldn't be my friend. But if he made a "Escorts.... I love em" remark, no big deal!

3) Yes, generalisations are made about women in these mags. So?? If anyone has any problem with it or think there's a double standard they've obviously never read a magazine aimed at women. Jaysus, my girlfriend buys em all and the absolute rubbish that is written in them about stuff like "Is your man X??!, "How to do X with your man". Does it bother me? No! Why would it?

I think people in general are smart enough to know that generalisations (even perhaps this one?? :P ) are balls! People be all different and sh*t!

dipper.meath16

That mag/webpage that the list was printed in must be aimed at the less mature 14/18 year olds, as a 22year old i was reading it going what bull! complete generalisation and more importantly wrong!

I do however think there is a small percentage who probably think like this, and trust me none are friends of mine! When us lads get together, yea we talk about sex the odd time, noting along the lines of the filth in that article, but so does my girlfriend and her friends!

It really reads like a 14 year old wrote it who has no experience in the bedroom area and just writes the points from stuff he has read in different mags/seen in porn movies!

pickarooney

I don't really get why people imagine that everything that comes out of a rapists' mouth is going to have some instantly recognisable 'rapist' tag on it. If that were the case it would be much easier to avoid them. I imagine the vast majority of things a convicted rapist says are completely innocuous.

Chinafoot

pickarooney wrote: »

I don't really get why people imagine that everything that comes out of a rapists' mouth is going to have some instantly recognisable 'rapist' tag on it. If that were the case it would be much easier to avoid them. I imagine the vast majority of things a convicted rapist says are completely innocuous.

The quotes are about women and sex. It's not such a leap to think that men who rape women might have a rather skewed attitude towards the gender.

Nobody said the vast majority of things a rapist says are not completely innocuous.

Kevin Duffy

Chinafoot wrote: »

The quotes are about women and sex. It's not such a leap to think that men who rape women might have a rather skewed attitude towards the gender.

Nobody said the vast majority of things a rapist says are not completely innocuous.

I think you're missing his point. The article is flawed, as they could have published comments like "Would you like a drink?", which could be said by anybody and there is no way of telling what kind of person said it. Equally, "They're all asking for it" is as likely to come from a stupid young man who would never take that belief any further as it is to come from a rapist.

The comments are all pretty stupid and immature, or indicative of genuine malice, but that has little influence on being able to discern the kind of person who uttered them.

jaffacakesyum

Kevin Duffy wrote: »

I think you're missing his point. The article is flawed, as they could have published comments like "Would you like a drink?", which could be said by anybody and there is no way of telling what kind of person said it. Equally, "They're all asking for it" is as likely to come from a stupid young man who would never take that belief any further as it is to come from a rapist.

The comments are all pretty stupid and immature, or indicative of genuine malice, but that has little influence on being able to discern the kind of person who uttered them.

Well that's kind of the point isn't it? Well for me anyway, what I took from the article was that it's pretty sad that a lot of men hold those beliefs, regardless of whether they would ever rape someone are not. If two men said a "they're all asking for it" type comment; one being a rapist and one not, who's worse? Obviously the rapist but the point is even if the ordinary man doesn't rape it's still pretty sh1tty that he holds those views about women.

Daftendirekt

Kevin Duffy wrote: »

I think you're missing his point. The article is flawed, as they could have published comments like "Would you like a drink?", which could be said by anybody and there is no way of telling what kind of person said it. Equally, "They're all asking for it" is as likely to come from a stupid young man who would never take that belief any further as it is to come from a rapist.

Not a great comparison, to be honest. "Would you like a drink?" is a fairly neutral comment that says nothing about the speaker. "They're all asking for it" does suggest a certain attitude - one that's likely to be present in a rapist.

The author is working from the assumption that a rapist will have a messed up attitude towards women and that his choice of words will reflect this. It's an attempt to find out if this attitude is shared by men's mags.

Though I don't think a bunch of context-less quotes can tell you too much about anything.

Kevin Duffy

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

Well that's kind of the point isn't it? Well for me anyway, what I took from the article was that it's pretty sad that a lot of men hold those beliefs, regardless of whether they would ever rape someone are not. If two men said a "they're all asking for it" type comment; one being a rapist and one not, who's worse? Obviously the rapist but the point is even if the ordinary man doesn't rape it's still pretty sh1tty that he holds those views about women.

It's not "kind of the point", it's entirely the point, but it's also the flaw inherent in the article.

Daftendirekt wrote: »

Not a great comparison, to be honest. "Would you like a drink?" is a fairly neutral comment that says nothing about the speaker. "They're all asking for it" does suggest a certain attitude - one that's likely to be present in a rapist.

The author is working from the assumption that a rapist will have a messed up attitude towards women and that his choice of words will reflect this. It's an attempt to find out if this attitude is shared by men's mags.

Though I don't think a bunch of context-less quotes can tell you too much about anything.

Which is what makes it a good comparison. Anyone can make "Phwoar, know what I'd do the her?" comments and the comment would, in itself, be odious, it still doesn't tell us the person making the comment is a rapist or just an idiot.

Sonics2k

I'd say the key difference is that these articles are clearly taken out of context and are very much tongue-in-cheek comments.

I'm not even a fan of them really, but have glanced through them over the years of course.

But as an example, I remember glancing through an old ex's issues of Cosmopolitan and similar, and it was packed with cheesy comments from the other side and articles like "How to cope with your mans small penis" and "10 ways to drive him crazy in bed".

Many many many times I've heard female friends make comments about blokes and their bodies, and it would never occur to me to even associate it with rape, same if it came from guys.

A bunch of guys saying to each other something like "Man, I'd wreck that chicks hole if I got the chance", is really no different than hearing a bunch of women say "I'd ride him till his cóck broke."
I've heard both of these things said.

amacachi

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

Well that's kind of the point isn't it? Well for me anyway, what I took from the article was that it's pretty sad that a lot of men hold those beliefs,

Yes, I would hold the belief that winding someone up in a sexual sense then cutting them off for one's own satisfaction is an undesirable trait. In casual conversation I may slip and say "I hate" people who do that. I wouldn't rape them though. I imagine that most people wouldn't find that a desirable trait in someone and many wouldn't guess that on a 50/50 shot that it was a rapist who said it.

johnr1

Sonics2k wrote: »

I'd say the key difference is that these articles are clearly taken out of context and are very much tongue-in-cheek comments.

I'm not even a fan of them really, but have glanced through them over the years of course.

But as an example, I remember glancing through an old ex's issues of Cosmopolitan and similar, and it was packed with cheesy comments from the other side and articles like "How to cope with your mans small penis" and "10 ways to drive him crazy in bed".

Many many many times I've heard female friends make comments about blokes and their bodies, and it would never occur to me to even associate it with rape, same if it came from guys.

A bunch of guys saying to each other something like "Man, I'd wreck that chicks hole if I got the chance", is really no different than hearing a bunch of women say "I'd ride him till his cóck broke."
I've heard both of these things said.

Yeah, both those things are said, but only one of those acts happens. Therefore, it's an implied rape/sex assault threat, and not a fair comparison to "how to drive your man wild" type articles.

Tbh I don't get those kind of remarks anyway, why would any normal guy want to "wreck some chicks hole"?
I'd be a bit concerned if one of my mates made a comment like that, and we ain't no choirboys.



.

Caraville

johnr1 wrote: »

Yeah, both those things are said, but only one of those acts happens.

What do you mean? That only women can be sexually assaulted? I don't really understand....

As regards those comments- ok, they're offensive, but I don't actually believe that the men who say these things really mean them. They're akin to a young fella meeting a girl and telling his friends he got everything from her when all he got was a kiss. Complete exaggeration of the truth.

To be honest, what I find far more worrying these days is the stuff that teenage girls are coming out with- I teach teenage girls and I'm friends with female teenage cousins on facebook and the filth they say/write nowadays is bordering on disturbing. Again, I'm sure there's a bit of bravado there too, but teenage boys were always chancers and would more or less take whatever it was a girl was willing to give them. Now teenage girls seem to want to out-do each other sexually. I'm not even talking 17/18 year olds, I mean 13-15 years. That would worry me far more than any male bravado rubbish I'd be reading.

Ickle Magoo

Caraville wrote: »

They're akin to a young fella meeting a girl and telling his friends he got everything from her when all he got was a kiss. Complete exaggeration of the truth.

To be honest, what I find far more worrying these days is the stuff that teenage girls are coming out with...

Why do you think one is just an innocent exaggeration and the other far more worrying? And do you not think the two might be related?

Sonics2k

johnr1 wrote: »

Yeah, both those things are said, but only one of those acts happens. Therefore, it's an implied rape/sex assault threat, and not a fair comparison to "how to drive your man wild" type articles.

How can only one of those things happen?

Why is one statement made more offensive than another? Or is it okay for women to say such things, or are you simply implying it's not possible for a man to be sexually assaulted?

What if a gay man says it about another man, or a gay woman says it about another gay woman?

johnr1

Caraville wrote: »

What do you mean? That only women can be sexually assaulted? I don't really understand....



Yes, of course that was what I was saying :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Read it again if you don't understand, and do some research if you think a young male is as likely to be raped by a young female. Yes, it happens, but the figures are miniscule by comparison.

Back on topic, it's pretty unfortunate that these lads mags have to include stuff like this in order to sell. They provide an important service of giving practical info on young men's physical and mental health, but when they promote a culture of misogny, rape jokes and pua bullsh1t, they are imo, dangerous to some small part of their readership who can't diffrentiate between "jokes" and this as a worldview.

Caraville

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Why do you think one is just an innocent exaggeration and the other far more worrying? And do you not think the two might be related?

The two quite possibly might be related, and I don't approve of the stuff that the teenage boys can sometimes come out with either- I didn't call it innocent, but certainly an exaggeration. I suppose my point was that it seems that nowadays teenage girls have started up the whole over-sexualised comments/statements thing, which is quite a new thing. And combining that with the bravado that was always there with boys/men, then it just seems that society is becoming very sexualised at a younger and younger age, which wasn't so much the case in the past when girls were a bit more coy about things. (I'm not sure if coy is the right word, just less crass maybe).

Edit: also, I think that the more men see that women are ok about saying these things, the more men will think it's ok to say crass things too. Neither are ok in my book. It's like that quote from "Mean Girls" when the teacher says to the female students, "You all have got to stop calling each other sluts and whores. It just makes it ok for guys to call you sluts and whores".

Ickle Magoo

Caraville wrote: »

The two quite possibly might be related, and I don't approve of the stuff that the teenage boys can sometimes come out with either- I didn't call it innocent, but certainly an exaggeration. I suppose my point was that it seems that nowadays teenage girls have started up the whole over-sexualised comments/statements thing, which is quite a new thing. And combining that with the bravado that was always there with boys/men, then it just seems that society is becoming very sexualised at a younger and younger age, which wasn't so much the case in the past when girls were a bit more coy about things. (I'm not sure if coy is the right word, just less crass maybe).

You didn't say it was innocent, you said it wasn't offensive...but I'd imagine both are equal exaggerations - I'm just curious why you stated you found one "more worrying" than the other...

I would think logic dictates if girls are bombarded with overly aggressive, sexualised comments about them that sooner or later they are going to revert to doing similar, not least because it becomes the norm to hear about sex and themselves engaging in sex in that manner...

johnr1

Sonics2k wrote: »

How can only one of those things happen?

Why is one statement made more offensive than another? Or is it okay for women to say such things, or are you simply implying it's not possible for a man to be sexually assaulted?

What if a gay man says it about another man, or a gay woman says it about another gay woman?

They are equally offensive in theory and in a perfect world, but the big difference is that as I said in my last reply to Caraville, young women are frequently raped by young men, the reverse is extremely rare.

You never mentioned the orientation of the guys making the comments, but seeing as the comments were about women, I assumed it to be straight. Same with the girls you described.

IF its a gay guy or girl making the comments, I'd regard the comments as on a par with those made by a straight guy.

Do you actually think those type of remarks are ok and normal ?

Honestly ?



.

Caraville

johnr1 wrote: »

Caraville wrote: »

What do you mean? That only women can be sexually assaulted? I don't really understand....



Yes, of course that was what I was saying :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Read it again if you don't understand, and do some research if you think a young male is as likely to be raped by a young female. Yes, it happens, but the figures are miniscule by comparison.

I know that, but you said "only one of these things happen" which simply isn't true. Ok, it might be less common, but it still happens. That's all I was trying to clarify.

Caraville

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

You didn't say it was innocent, you said it wasn't offensive...but I'd imagine both are equal exaggerations - I'm just curious why you stated you found one "more worrying" than the other...

I would think logic dictates if girls are bombarded with overly aggressive, sexualised comments about them that sooner or later they are going to revert to doing similar, not least because it becomes the norm to hear about sex and themselves engaging in sex in that manner...

I suppose I find it more worrying because it seems like quite a new phenomenon for girls to be really putting themselves out there sexually. Even down to the clothes that they are wearing on nights out. To me, boys haven't changed as drastically over the years, either in what they say about women or in how they deal with them. In a modern society, women these days have so much opportunities available to them, but I see young intelligent teenage girls have power over boys through sex and provocative dressing. That worries me because I suppose it's a very retrograde step in terms of women's place in society. I'm not saying they shouldn't embrace sex or dress all covered up, it just seems that it's all very "out there" these days. Makes me sad for them, losing out on their childhoods.

Of course, it's happening a bit for teenage boys too, but just not to the scale that it is for girls, I think. I totally agree on your second point there also, it kind of becomes a vicious circle, like what I said earlier in the Mean Girls quote.

Ickle Magoo

It just strikes me as a very odd double standard that you find what men say about women inoffensive and yet you are worried about women saying such things about themselves and their own bodies. Given that women have been bombarded with image stereotypes and top-shelf mags & ever-ready internet porn regarding what men (apparently!) find attractive for years, I'd say the situation we have now was fairly inevitable.

The media commonly portray men as embittered dumb animals led by their cocks and women the devious and contrary key holders to the sex that it's men's job to "get"...I think it's little wonder so many fall into the obvious stereotypes and healthy views and relationships fall by the wayside.

sambuka41

Having read the thread I find it interesting that most of the people who have been able to identify the quotes don't normally read the magazines. I wonder if the researchers took that into account, for the people who weren't able to identify, do they read the magazines more frequently? Cause that might be a reason why they are possibly less desensitised to the material.

As well how many of the rapists read the magazines too? If the same sentiments are in both (however hidden behind humour/'lads talk'/ pub talk) maybe there is an attraction to the magazines by rapists/misogynists/a**holes (not saying that every man who reads the magazines is one of these!) I can see why they considered looking at this, makes sense to me.

On the issue of Cosmo and the likes, I think they are appalling when it comes to women being allowed to be women (a complete person that is more than their body). I agree that they are sex crazed/diet crazed/ 'be a better you' type of tripe. (when really they don't want you to be better, then you wouldn't buy their magazine)

But just because this may be the case doesn't mean a study like the one mentioned shouldn't be done. As someone else said there are higher percentages of men raping women, and high percentage of those men have a certain view of women, its important to look at why and where this came from. Of course a magazine alone won't cause this, but it may influence it.

Caraville

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

It just strikes me as a very odd double standard that you find what men say about women inoffensive and yet you are worried about women saying such things about themselves and their own bodies. Given that women have been bombarded with image stereotypes and top-shelf mags & ever-ready internet porn regarding what men (apparently!) find attractive for years, I'd say the situation we have now was fairly inevitable.

The media commonly portray men as embittered dumb animals led by their cocks and women the devious and contrary key holders to the sex that it's men's job to "get"...I think it's little wonder so many fall into the obvious stereotypes and healthy views and relationships fall by the wayside.

I didn't say I found what men say inoffensive. In fact I said they were offensive and that neither were ok in my book. But I just think that due to what young women are saying nowadays, it may perhaps be leading to even further sexualisation of our young people, as boys who were already saying crass stuff about girls, are now hearing it from the girls themselves and so will only now be lead to think that what they were saying was ok because the girls are saying it too. It just causes me to wonder where it stops, is the age that people discuss sex in such detail (or vulgarity at times) going to get younger and younger? That's why it worries me.

Edit: As in, instead of girls saying "hold on lads, that stuff ye are saying isn't on", they're joining in with it. It was bad enough that lads thought it was ok to say these things, but now the girls are condoning it by adding to it instead of trying to get lads to stop it.

Ickle Magoo

Caraville wrote: »

I didn't say I found what men say inoffensive. In fact I said they were offensive and that neither were ok in my book.

My bad, I read that wrongly but you did say it was exaggeration akin to bragging and were more worried about girls saying the same things - which suggests a different standard for the same language depending on gender.

Caraville wrote: »

But I just think that due to what young women are saying nowadays, it may perhaps be leading to even further sexualisation of our young people, as boys who were already saying crass stuff about girls, are now hearing it from the girls themselves and so will only now be lead to think that what they were saying was ok because the girls are saying it too. It just causes me to wonder where it stops, is the age that people discuss sex in such detail (or vulgarity at times) going to get younger and younger? That's why it worries me.

Edit: As in, instead of girls saying "hold on lads, that stuff ye are saying isn't on", they're joining in with it. It was bad enough that lads thought it was ok to say these things, but now the girls are condoning it by adding to it instead of trying to get lads to stop it.

If it's all exaggeration, none meant and no harm done then what's the issue that anyone says it? And equally I think the historic "guys have always done it" defence just smacks of trying to foist responsibility on women to ensure that language, decency and the over-sexualization of young people is maintained in lieu of acknowledging a more balanced societal influence and responsibility.

Caraville

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

My bad, I read that wrongly but you did say it was exaggeration akin to bragging and were more worried about girls saying the same things - which suggests a different standard for the same language depending on gender.



If it's all exaggeration, none meant and no harm done then what's the issue that anyone says it? And equally I think the historic "guys have always done it" defence just smacks of trying to foist responsibility on women to ensure that language, decency and the over-sexualization of young people is maintained in lieu of acknowledging a more balanced societal influence and responsibility.

I do believe that there's an amount of it on both sides that is harmless, that is just teenage bravado. But at the end of the day, our teenagers are more open about sex now than ever- I'm glad about that to a point, because obviously sex was extremely taboo in this country for far too long. No point in pretending teenagers aren't up to things when they are.

However, and you may see this as old fashioned, I do think that women have a responsibility towards themselves to protect themselves by not condoning men's comments and views, and not repeating these things is a good step in order to do that. I'm not saying that men shouldn't be responsible or that we should think "ah sure boys will be boys"- I said that their comments, especially when serious and not in jest, are not acceptable. But girls thinking that it's ok to say these things too is only making matters worse. It's not passing all responsibility to women, but it is saying to women "if you want men to stop saying these things about you, you're going to have to not say them yourselves either".

Ickle Magoo

I think it's very old fashioned - and distinctly unfair to expect one group not to evolve or react - at or to - the actions of another which both directly and indirectly affect it. Racism and homophobia haven't become generally socially unacceptable by one side refusing to use phraseology but rather by widespread movements that both embraced the terminology and fought for society to consider any hate or malice behind such terms unacceptable.

Caraville wrote: »

It's not passing all responsibility to women, but it is saying to women "if you want men to stop saying these things about you, you're going to have to not say them yourselves either".

Surely that just sends the wrong message to those that you consider can and thus do use them, though? If you try to ring-fence phrases as being more acceptable for one gender than the other, especially derogatory phrases which are being used against that gender - I think you add to the issue, rather than resolve it.

Caraville

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

I think it's very old fashioned - and distinctly unfair to expect one group not to evolve or react - at or to - the actions of another which both directly and indirectly affect it. Racism and homophobia haven't become generally socially unacceptable by one side refusing to use phraseology but rather by widespread movements that both embraced the terminology and fought for society to consider any hate or malice behind such terms unacceptable.

Caraville wrote: »

It's not passing all responsibility to women, but it is saying to women "if you want men to stop saying these things about you, you're going to have to not say them yourselves either".

Surely that just sends the wrong message to those that you consider can and thus do use them, though? If you try to ring-fence phrases as being more acceptable for one gender than the other, especially derogatory phrases which are being used against that gender - I think you add to the issue, rather than resolve it.

I never said the phrases were more acceptable for one gender, I just said that men using these phrases isn't new- but women, particularly teenage girls- using them is, which only serves to perpetuate the problem and thus worries me as I don't see an end to the issue if now both genders are using these over-sexualised phrases. I don't see how it's being old fashioned, in the fight to stamp this out, expecting women not to use these phrases- it's like saying to a child that smoking is wrong but still smoking around them. No one, male or female, needs to be using them. As you rightly pointed out, both parties need to be basically singing from the same hymn sheet. I already said earlier in the thread that I think men have a responsibility not to use these phrases, but to expect men to stop whilst being ok using them (or similar ones that are derogatory towards men) as a female is simply contradictory. Both genders need to accept responsibility- of course men have much further to go than women in this regard, but women can help the situation I think.

Scanlas The 2nd

WindSock wrote: »

Oh yeah, I remember hearing this on the radio a few weeks back but forgot about it. Just looking at some of the quotes there from the site linked;

1. There's a certain way you can tell that a girl wants to have sex . . . The way they dress, they flaunt themselves.

2. Some girls walk around in short-shorts . . . showing their body off . . . It just starts a man thinking that if he gets something like that, what can he do with it?

3. A girl may like anal sex because it makes her feel incredibly naughty and she likes feeling like a dirty slut. If this is the case, you can try all sorts of humiliating acts to help live out her filthy fantasy.

4. Mascara running down the cheeks means they've just been crying, and it was probably your fault . . . but you can cheer up the miserable beauty with a bit of the old in and out.

5. What burns me up sometimes about girls is dick-teasers. They lead a man on and then shut him off right there.

6. Filthy talk can be such a turn on for a girl . . . no one wants to be shagged by a mouse . . . A few compliments won't do any harm either . . . ‘I bet you want it from behind you dirty whore' . . .

7. You know girls in general are all right. But some of them are bitches . . . The bitches are the type that . . . need to have it stuffed to them hard and heavy.

8. Escorts . . . they know exactly how to turn a man on. I've given up on girlfriends. They don't know how to satisfy me, but escorts do.

9. You'll find most girls will be reluctant about going to bed with somebody or crawling in the back seat of a car . . . But you can usually seduce them, and they'll do it willingly.

10. There's nothing quite like a woman standing in the dock accused of murder in a sex game gone wrong . . . The possibility of murder does bring a certain frisson to the bedroom.

11. Girls ask for it by wearing these mini-skirts and hotpants . . . they're just displaying their body . . . Whether they realise it or not they're saying, ‘Hey, I've got a beautiful body, and it's yours if you want it.'

12. You do not want to be caught red-handed . . . go and smash her on a park bench. That used to be my trick.

13. Some women are domineering, but I think it's more or less the man who should put his foot down. The man is supposed to be the man. If he acts the man, the woman won't be domineering.

14. I think if a law is passed, there should be a dress code . . . When girls dress in those short skirts and things like that, they're just asking for it.

15. Girls love being tied up . . . it gives them the chance to be the helpless victim.

16. I think girls are like plasticine, if you warm them up you can do anything you want with them.

Interesting study alright. Goes to show that anything is acceptable as long as it is attributed to a 'reputable' source.

Although I would hardly call glossies reputable now, but to be confused with statements of convicted rapists highlights the amount of bullsht these mags generate onto mainstream society.

I must admit I would find it difficult to distinguish a rapists thoughts on horticulture versus a lads mag.

Ickle Magoo

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

I must admit I would find it difficult to distinguish a rapists thoughts on horticulture versus a lads mag.

But then I doubt it's their warped views on begonias that result in them becoming/being rapists...