London's first Muslim mayor bans "unrealistic body" ads on public transport.

The ad that apparently inspired it.

https://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2015/4/27/1430145597276/c8a82e1a-b160-45ee-9dfd-9557e67d5949-2060x1236.jpeg

I really think this is BS to be honest. We watch the Olympics and praise their physiques along with their skills. So either this is saying that being slim is wrong or being fit is wrong. Or wearing a bikini is wrong

Like a lot of others, I'm pretty sure this is about Islam. Myself and the girlfriend are going to an Islamic country next week on holiday and she's going to be dressing accordingly. Sounds like this mayor is doing what he can to instill those values in London.

Renegade Mechanic

That ad looks familiar.. Was it not banned before? I remember some brouhaha over something about being beach ready before.

At any rate that is not an unrealistic body.
I am not particularly good looking and I don't care. I'm also made of skin and fat, with bit's of gristle. And all the definition of a frankfurter.

Yet, for some inexplicable reason, whenever I see a person like that, I think "good on you". Instead of arguing against it, because I'd rather just selfishly drag people down to my level, than work myself up...

DEFTLEFTHAND

There's nothing 'unrealistic' about being in shape and having a good body. It's achievable for most people with hard work and dedication.

ScumLord

I don't think you can make that assertion. Unless he's come out and clearly said so. There are plenty of logical and social reasons for doing it. Lots of non-religious groups have been calling for the same thing.

The Backwards Man

Sounds like a good idea that has fcuk all to do with Islam and more to do with common sense to me

The Backwards Man

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

There's nothing 'unrealistic' about being in shape and having a good body. It's achievable for most people with hard work and dedication.

There's everything unrealistic about 'cheating' to achieve it though

Jim Bob Scratcher

I wouldn't mind having that body beside me in the leaba..

Robsweezie

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote:

There's nothing 'unrealistic' about being in shape and having a good body. It's achievable for most people with hard work and dedication.

It's a bit like banning medals from the sports day races so the last place kid doesn't feel bad.

unseenfootage

Waistline and thighs looks photoshopped to me.
Regular and plus sized women will be overjoyed.

The Backwards Man

The Backwards Man wrote: »

Sounds like a good idea that has fcuk all to do with Islam and more to do with common sense to me

How is it common sense? That woman is healthier than 99% of people. Why shouldn't she be allowed to be on the side of a bus?

And this is a ban on all images of any woman that could be called "hot". You think Ronaldo will be banned as well?

The Backwards Man

[Deleted User] wrote: »

How is it common sense? That woman is healthier than 99% of people. Why shouldn't she be allowed to be on the side of a bus?

And this is a ban on all images of any woman that could be called "hot". You think Ronaldo will be banned as well?

A woman who eats her spuds and can foot a hundred euro of sausage turf in a day is healthy. A woman who pops pills and arses about in a bikini all day is not

wakka12

Actually that muslim mayor seems like a really nice guy, very liberal and open minded by any standards not even just for a muslim. I doubt there was any misogynistic motives behind this.

wakka12

Deleted User wrote: »

How is it common sense? That woman is healthier than 99% of people. Why shouldn't she be allowed to be on the side of a bus?

And this is a ban on all images of any woman that could be called "hot". You think Ronaldo will be banned as well?

Really you have no idea whether she's healthy or not. Plenty of the geordie shore types do hard drinking and drugs several nights a week with **** diet but use lots of protein and creatine and stuff and tanning beds so appear healthy looking.

bodice ripper

unseenfootage wrote: »

Waistline and thighs looks photoshopped to me.
Regular and plus sized women will be overjoyed.

As a follow up - I am available for overjoying regular and particularly plus sized women. Group rates available.

Mellor

The Backwards Man wrote: »

A woman who eats her spuds and can foot a hundred euro of sausage turf in a day is healthy. A woman who pops pills and arses about in a bikini all day is not

Where or not the girl in that picture is healthy is not for you or I to say. we've no idea how she got there. But the majority of people (women and men) who "eat their spuds" are not healthy. The idea that it's healthy to carry excess meat fat on their bones is making excuses.

Its dead Jim

The pictures are always photo shopped anyway. If anyone thinks a picture of a person used in advertising is any way natural then I have some magic beans to sell you.

Renegade Mechanic wrote: »

That ad looks familiar.. Was it not banned before? I remember some brouhaha over something about being beach ready before.

At any rate that is not an unrealistic body.
I am not particularly good looking and I don't care. I'm also made of skin and fat, with bit's of gristle. And all the definition of a frankfurter.

Yet, for some inexplicable reason, whenever I see a person like that, I think "good on you". Instead of arguing against it, because I'd rather just selfishly drag people down to my level, than work myself up...

Not banned but it did come up before.

The Backwards Man

The Backwards Man wrote: »

A woman who eats her spuds and can foot a hundred euro of sausage turf in a day is healthy. A woman who pops pills and arses about in a bikini all day is not

It's so easy to pass backwards legislation that will lead to women not being allowed to show a pair of legs or her shoulders in an ad when people think looking good in a bikini is from taking diet pills.

Anyone who thinks this is about health is deluded. He's been in office a month and is banning inappropriate pictures of women.

The Backwards Man

Mellor wrote: »

Where or not the girl in that picture is healthy is not for you or I to say. we've no idea how she got there. But the majority of people (women and men) who "eat their spuds" are not healthy. The idea that it's healthy to carry excess meat fat on their bones is making excuses.

You'd be good for fcuk all in the bog with that attitude anyway

The Backwards Man

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It's so easy to pass backwards legislation that will lead to women not being allowed to show a pair of legs or her shoulders in an ad when people think looking good in a bikini is from taking diet pills.

Anyone who thinks this is about health is deluded. He's been in office a month and is banning inappropriate pictures of women.

I wish I could pass backwards legislation some days , by the hokey the world would be a lot better place with a lot less sh1te talk.

Mellor

The Backwards Man wrote: »

You'd be good for fcuk all in the bog with that attitude anyway

What attitude?
Little known fact, staying in good physical shape makes physical work a lot easier. :eek:
There's no point talking about hardwork in you can't bend down to put your boot.

The Backwards Man

Mellor wrote: »

What attitude?
Little known fact, staying in good physical shape makes physical work a lot easier. :eek:
There's no point talking about hardwork in you can't bend down to put your boot.

Yeah, and how good do you think the model in the photograph would be at a good day's hashing?

Fcuk all good, I have no doubt.

Healthy people don't need their health supplemented, unhealthy people do.

Stigura

Deleted User wrote: »

Anyone who thinks this is about health is deluded. He's been in office a month and is banning <What he and his cult consider> inappropriate pictures of women.

Yep.

Herb Powell

WAAAAH DE MUSLIMS ARE RUINING ME FREEDOM

Grayditch

INSANELY photoshopped, of course. The ban is right. F** this ****.

The Backwards Man

The Backwards Man wrote: »

I wish I could pass backwards legislation some days , by the hokey the world would be a lot better place with a lot less sh1te talk.

Something like 40% of Muslims in the UK want Sharia Law. That percentage will get higher with refugees. Ireland has had plenty of problems with religion influencing law and we also generally follow the UK.

They won't get it straight out but they will get bits and pieces of it like this. I refuse to believe one of his first acts in office is being done to cater to women's feelings and not the Muslim population.

Can't believe I'm alone in thinking It's terrible that Islam has resulted in bikinis not being allowed on London public transport.

The Backwards Man

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Something like 40% of Muslims in the UK want Sharia Law. That percentage will get higher with refugees. Ireland has had plenty of problems with religion influencing law and we also generally follow the UK.

They won't get it straight out but they will get bits and pieces of it like this. I refuse to believe one of his first acts in office is being done to cater to women's feelings and not the Muslim population.

Can't believe I'm alone in thinking It's terrible that Islam has resulted in bikinis not being allowed on London public transport.

Ah, this is just another Muslim bashing thread, I thought maybe it was highlighting the dangers of portraying unrealistic goals to impressionable kids, but na, just the same old sensationalist guff

I'm out then so. Sayonara

Grayditch

Deleted User wrote: »

Can't believe I'm alone in thinking It's terrible that Islam has resulted in bikinis not being allowed on London public transport.

Islam didn't do a thing, here.

Mellor

The Backwards Man wrote: »

Yeah, and how good do you think the model in the photograph would be at a good day's hashing? [
Fcuk all good, I have no doubt.

Probably not very good at all. But that's not her job. You'd be no good walking a tightrope, luckily that's no your job either.
None of that is relevant to health though.

Healthy people don't need their health supplemented, unhealthy people do.

And who are these healthy people? Certain not the "average person" these days.

The Backwards Man

The Backwards Man wrote: »

Ah, this is just another Muslim bashing thread, I thought maybe it was highlighting the dangers of portraying unrealistic goals to impressionable kids, but na, just the same old sensationalist guff

I'm out then so. Sayonara

What the hell? How am I bashing Muslims?

ceadaoin.

B

Deleted User wrote: »

It's so easy to pass backwards legislation that will lead to women not being allowed to show a pair of legs or her shoulders in an ad when people think looking good in a bikini is from taking diet pills.

Anyone who thinks this is about health is deluded. He's been in office a month and is banning inappropriate pictures of women.

This is what people wanted. Wasn't there a petition with thousands of signatures over this ad last year?

It just says images that promote unhealthy body image, nothing that says its specific to women. Although I don't think the body of the woman in that photo looks particularly unrealistic, clearly a lot of people do.

bodice ripper

Mellor wrote: »

And who are these healthy people? Certain not the "average person" these days.

I am sorry, I cannot hear this as it's entirely muffled by good big thighs.

Grayson

Deleted User wrote: »

Something like 40% of Muslims in the UK want Sharia Law. That percentage will get higher with refugees. Ireland has had plenty of problems with religion influencing law and we also generally follow the UK.

They won't get it straight out but they will get bits and pieces of it like this. I refuse to believe one of his first acts in office is being done to cater to women's feelings and not the Muslim population.

Can't believe I'm alone in thinking It's terrible that Islam has resulted in bikinis not being allowed on London public transport.

There's your problem.

Listen, you can have all the issues you want with Islam. I'm sure you've already feasted at the buffet of bigotry.

This however is not an Islamic issue. This is a secular liberal mayor who's implementing a liberal policy. The guys a tree hugging lefty. This is the type of policy that they implement.

And note that he's not banning partial nudity, he's banning unrealistic bodies. They are banning "ads which could reasonably be seen as likely to cause pressure to conform to an unrealistic or unhealthy body shape, or as likely to create body confidence issues, particularly among young people".

endacl

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

There's nothing 'unrealistic' about being in shape and having a good body. It's achievable for most people with hard work and dedication.

... and less chips. Don't forget the chips.

Grayditch

I have to point out that it's unrealistic to expect people to look at you as if your waist has clearly been photoshopped.

511

The Backwards Man wrote: »

A woman who eats her spuds and can foot a hundred euro of sausage turf in a day is healthy.

This is such an Irish bogger mentality, unscientific conjecture that was dreamt up by poorly educated farmers hundreds of years ago, but is still considered factual information in rural parts of Ireland, much like the way the Healy-Rae idiots believe God controls the weather.

Potatoes are loaded with carbohydrates and are therefore a good
source of energy, but if you don't burn off those carbs, your body will convert them to fat, which is obviously bad for your health. Potatoes are something you should eat before you exercise, not for your dinner when you're winding down for the day, hence the reason why there are so many fat farmers in this country.

Mellor

bodice ripper wrote: »

I am sorry, I cannot hear this as it's entirely muffled by good big thighs.

I assume you are talking about you own scraping off each other. :D:D

Mellor

511 wrote: »

Potatoes are something you should eat before you exercise, not for your dinner when you're winding down for the day,

That's not actually true.
It makes virtually no difference when in the day you eat your food. It's the total intake and output that matters, not the timing. Excess food makes you fat, regardless of timing.

the_syco

Grayson wrote: »

And note that he's not banning partial nudity, he's banning unrealistic bodies. They are banning "ads which could reasonably be seen as likely to cause pressure to conform to an unrealistic or unhealthy body shape, or as likely to create body confidence issues, particularly among young people".

If this is true, every poster about beauty products will also need to be banned, as they too are also photoshopped.

Dirty Dingus McGee

This is ****ing ridiculous.Idiocy of the highest order.

Dirty Dingus McGee

The Backwards Man wrote: »

Sounds like a good idea that has fcuk all to do with Islam and more to do with common sense to me

There is zero common sense to the idea.

Oryx

the_syco wrote: »

If this is true, every poster about beauty products will also need to be banned, as they too are also photoshopped.

I agree with this. I dont think this ban is about unrealistic body image. There are far bigger issues for a mayor to tackle during his first days in office yet he chooses this? He is making a clear statement of what he is about and what his priorities are. Banning the ad is not a major issue but its pointless when every womens magazine carries the same or worse. So why pick this particular fight?

Phoebas

Deleted User wrote: »

What the hell? How am I bashing Muslims?

In this post where you
a) misrepresent what is happening here, and
b) incorrectly blame it on Islam.

Deleted User wrote: »

Can't believe I'm alone in thinking It's terrible that Islam has resulted in bikinis not being allowed on London public transport.

Phoebas

Oryx wrote: »

I agree with this. I dont think this ban is about unrealistic body image. There are far bigger issues for a mayor to tackle during his first days in office yet he chooses this? He is making a clear statement of what he is about and what his priorities are. Banning the ad is not a major issue but its pointless when every womens magazine carries the same or worse. So why pick this particular fight?

Democratically elected mayor delivers on election promise.

bbc wrote:

As part of his mayoral election manifesto Sadiq Khan pledged to ban adverts
promoting "unhealthy or unrealistic" body images.

Phoebas

511 wrote: »

This is such an Irish bogger mentality, unscientific conjecture that was dreamt up by poorly educated farmers hundreds of years ago, but is still considered factual information in rural parts of Ireland, much like the way the Healy-Rae idiots believe God controls the weather.

Potatoes are loaded with carbohydrates and are therefore a good
source of energy, but if you don't burn off those carbs, your body will convert them to fat, which is obviously bad for your health. Potatoes are something you should eat before you exercise, not for your dinner when you're winding down for the day, hence the reason why there are so many fat farmers in this country.

Do you not know that the 'boggers' eat their dinner during the day?

Footing a hundred euro of sausage turf in a day will shift those carbs.

FTA69

Deleted User wrote: »

Something like 40% of Muslims in the UK want Sharia Law. That percentage will get higher with refugees. Ireland has had plenty of problems with religion influencing law and we also generally follow the UK.

They won't get it straight out but they will get bits and pieces of it like this. I refuse to believe one of his first acts in office is being done to cater to women's feelings and not the Muslim population.

Can't believe I'm alone in thinking It's terrible that Islam has resulted in bikinis not being allowed on London public transport.

This is stupid alarmist nonsense to be honest.

When that ad came out in London Underground it was the topic of huge controversy and debate. Feminist groups defaced a lot of the posters and the ad was the subject of running discussions and letters etc on the Tube free newspapers as well as becoming the totem for wider discussions on the issues. It was on the evening news more than once.

This ad and similar ones ones on the Tube were a debate being had long before Khan's election. If you're going to blame anything for their removal then look at pressure from feminists.

You insinuating that Khan is some sort of conservative extremist in disguise censoring posters for "de Muslims" is a load of sh*te that says a lot about your own prejudices.

genericguy

Another thread where we have to pretend to approve of the Islamic infection. Yay!

_Brian

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

There's nothing 'unrealistic' about being in shape and having a good body. It's achievable for most people with hard work and dedication.

Agreed, but in fairness that as isn't promoting working hard for a good shape it's selling some snake oil weight loss crap.

I think he was spot on. Care less about his religion.

MRnotlob606

unrealistic because some people are just lazy.Its wrong to fat shame but perfectly okay to berate people who are healthy or slim.

Lyaiera

I'd have much stricter regulations on advertising. And I'd probably ban all advertising directed at children.

stoplooklisten

MRnotlob606 wrote: »

unrealistic because some people are just lazy.Its wrong to fat shame but perfectly okay to berate people who are healthy or slim.

yes, we have to pander to those who are overweight, another protected class.

suicide_circus

Will there be corresponding legislation to ban images if overweight people in order to avoid promoting an unhealthy body type?

Or indeed a ban on religious ads promoting an unrealistic image of the nature of the universe?