Lads' mags.... from top shelf to every shelf.

panda100 · 28-02-2010 10:43PM #1

When I was growing up men's magazines of the soft porn nature were completly restricted to the top shelf. Now whatever shop you go into you can't help but be confronted with naked women's breasts,torso's and bums.

Personally when I walk to my local spar to pick up a paper and a pint of milk,Id prefer not to be confronted with Channelle, or whatever Big Bro wannabee is on the front cover this week, flaunting their over-inflated plastic tits.
The thing I find most offensive about Zoo,Nuts etc is not the nudity in itself but the obscene fakeness of that nudity and the effect it has on men and women.

The Home Office in the UK recently published a report calling for these magazines to be restricted to the top shelf to try and curb the sexualisation of Children. Whatver about the children, at what age is it ever right for women to be objectified in such a manner?
On top of this 'ordinary' women are made feel inadequate about their breatss when they are constantly bombarded with these completly cartoonish globes.

Linky: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/feb/25/lads-magazines-restricted-home-office-study

http://press.homeoffice.gov.uk/press-releases/sexualisation-young-people.html

Would Irish lads and lassies welcome a similar move to confine these mags to the top shelf?

RachPie · 28-02-2010 10:45PM

Definately should be confined to top shelf for children's sake - personally I take no notice of these publications as I am well in tune that they are the products of good "marketing" as it were - fake.

I know what boobs look like and they certainly don't defy gravity as well as "yer ones" on the cover of nuts...

Ickle Magoo · 28-02-2010 10:52PM

First of all I think there is a huge difference between lads mags and the sexualisation of children!! :eek:

Secondly, they don't really bother me. I had a flatmate with an obsession for porn and had heaps of mags lying about the place so I think I'm just immune at this stage. I've never really met anyone who thinks all women should look like they stepped out of a lads mag. That said, I try and avoid going into the newsagents with the kids in tow because I don't want to have to answer questions about why half naked ladies are in those mags, so yes, top shelf or in some kind of subtle sleeve would be great.

Wolflikeme · 28-02-2010 11:02PM

I think they should be confined to the top shelf. People that want them are hardly being put out by them being on the top shelf, whereas certainly, with children in tow it would be a concern for me.

And yes, most of the women on there are ridiculous looking however, if a woman is made to feel inadequate by a magazine cover then she already has her own insecurities to deal with in my opinion.

I couldn't give a toss if I don't look like the guy on the cover of this month's Men's Health.

Novella · 28-02-2010 11:07PM

I'm not really sure what I think about this. I mean, it grates on me that the covers of such magazines are generally graced by women with huge, fake boobs and a tan that can only come from a bottle but any time I've spoken about this with guys, they've pretty much all said the same thing, that it wasn't their ideal type of woman etc.
So I'm not really too bothered by it, I guess. I don't see those magazines and think of it as some kind of standard to live up to. I don't want bigger boobs and I hate fake tan and page three girls aren't my role models. Nothing wrong with it at all, I just don't care, nor do I feel under any pressure due to it.

Confining these magazines to the top shelf? It wouldn't be something I'm gonna fight for. I mean, whether they're on the top, the bottom, the target audience, the men who are gonna buy them, will. Seeing big boobs when I wanna pick up a copy of Vogue, whatever. I'd say I generally look at the top shelf anyway, just in case there might be something interesting up there I'd wanna read.

Top shelf so kids won't see them? I don't have children so I'm actually not too sure what I think. I don't think hiding away nudity is an ideal though. "Mammy, why are all the nudey ladies at the top?", "Oh, 'cause nudey ladies are bad, honey, you should always cover up"? Sure, the pictures are 'sexy', but they're never anything too extreme or out there. I think if I had a child, I wouldn't want him/her growing up thinking his/her body was anything to be ashamed of, nor is getting your kit off. There's this huge sense of, 'Women who pose topless etc. are bimbos', but I don't think that's true at all. I wouldn't want my children thinking there was anything wrong with it, or that it was out of the ordinary. Maybe I'm just completely wrong on this though, 'cause as I said, have no kids so hard to form an opinion.

Overall though, I don't particularly care where the magazines are placed in a shop. I don't judge the girls in them, the people who buy and read them so I just don't mind. I honestly probably wouldn't even notice where they are because I simply have no interest.

panda100 · 28-02-2010 11:07PM

Wolflikeme wrote: »

And yes, most of the women on there are ridiculous looking however, if a woman is made to feel inadequate by a magazine cover then she already has her own insecurities to deal with in my opinion.

I couldn't give a toss if I don't look like the guy on the cover of this month's Men's Health.

You may feel different and start to feel inadequate If day in day out everywhere you went there was pictures of long,big, 'perfect' penises or taut,tight pecs.

Wolflikeme · 28-02-2010 11:26PM

panda100 wrote: »

You may feel different and ste=art to feel inadequate If day in day out everywhere you went there was pictures of taut,tight pecs.

There are. I don't care. If I started to feel inadequate then I'd have issues wouldn't I?

panda100 · 28-02-2010 11:30PM

Wolflikeme wrote: »

There are. I don't care. If I started to feel inadequate then I'd have issues wouldn't I?

Your not comparing like and like.
When national newspapers have daily pictures of perfect penises and pecs,along with the magazine racks in every shop explicitly showing them,then come back and tell me you don't feel inadeqaute about how your penis and pecs look.

F.A. · 28-02-2010 11:42PM

I read the article in the Guardian on Friday and discussed it with my boyfriend who couldn't really understand the issue. One comment on there, however, finally brought it home to him (and reflects my own opinion very well):

This discussion lacks objectivity because straight men have never had the experience of walking into a shop selling magazines and facing row upon row of mens faces and bodies smiling and posing for the camera.

For this is a girls experience from childhood. We are presented with an array of images.... women and girls... looking directly to the camera... faces..bodies, clothed, unclothed.., boots, high heels, long hair, short hair...hairstyle magazines, beauty, weight, fat, thin.....TOP 100 hottest babes...on and on and on....

So when it comes to Lads mags...girls grow into women..having passed the aisles of shelving...looking up...looking straight at the same pictures...again and again and again...

Sometimes I like to imagine the shelves of WHSmith stacked with the same magazines..but where every cover showing a woman, shows a man instead.
So the childhood of all the guys who grow up in this world where naked men, sometimes surgically enhanced, pouting, bending, in underwear and without, ...gaze into the camera and look out from 90% of the publcations in any mainstream shop.

Of course, Men have never yet had this experience and they do not recognise what this bombardment of 'appearance' and 'attractiveness' as central to identity is. But many comments here reflect the an attitude which suggests a conviction of ownership of this uneven situation...as though they have a right to pleasure and a right to enjoy what they want and how they want it.

Interestingly British Culture is focussing more and more on desirability in contrast to some other European cultures which place stress on 'beauty' or femininity as ideals-I am thinking of Russia and France.

True...young women will be allright-they will survive of course but our concern with desirabilty and being 'wanted'/ appearing 'sexy' above all is not something to be valued. Young women need to be supported to enhance their health, and self confidence rather than being trained to be overly anxious about what the imaginary 'gaze' is making of their own physical appearance.

Enough said. Top shelf it is.

Xiney · 28-02-2010 11:44PM

Novella wrote: »

Top shelf so kids won't see them? I don't have children so I'm actually not too sure what I think. I don't think hiding away nudity is an ideal though. "Mammy, why are all the nudey ladies at the top?", "Oh, 'cause nudey ladies are bad, honey, you should always cover up"? Sure, the pictures are 'sexy', but they're never anything too extreme or out there. I think if I had a child, I wouldn't want him/her growing up thinking his/her body was anything to be ashamed of, nor is getting your kit off. There's this huge sense of, 'Women who pose topless etc. are bimbos', but I don't think that's true at all. I wouldn't want my children thinking there was anything wrong with it, or that it was out of the ordinary. Maybe I'm just completely wrong on this though, 'cause as I said, have no kids so hard to form an opinion.

If it was normal nudity I wouldn't really care - but this is not "realistic" nudity. I wouldn't want future children of mine to think that that is what they should look like/be attracted to when they're adults.

Although I suppose neither are most magazine covers, when it comes down to it.

Wolflikeme · 28-02-2010 11:48PM

panda100 wrote: »

Your not comparing like and like.
When national newspapers have daily pictures of perfect penises and pecs,along with the magazine racks in every shop explicitly showing them,then come back and tell me you don't feel inadeqaute about how your penis and pecs look.

Have you been anywhere that sells magazines lately? There are plenty of magazines with 'perfect' looking men on or in them.

What about movies where the guy who gets the girl is usually a great looking guy? Even movies (a lot of movies) with younger lads in them who've cut bodies, great bodies actually and fair play to them - and they don't have implants, lipo or whatever (which everyone knows a lot of the time looks silly) like these fake women do - and that's it - many people think they look dodgey to say the least, men included. But there's nothing dodgey about how a guy who's obviously worked on his body himself through diet and exercise and it's admired more than the women on those magazines. Men are subjected to it too.

F.A. · 28-02-2010 11:52PM

Wolflikeme wrote: »

Have you been anywhere that sells magazines lately? There are plenty of magazines with 'perfect' looking men on or in them.

What about movies where the guy who gets the girl is usually a great looking guy? Even movies (a lot of movies) with younger lads in them who've cut bodies, great bodies actually and fair play to them - and they don't have implants, lipo or whatever (which everyone knows a lot of the time looks silly) like these fake women do - and that's it - many people think they look dodgey to say the least, men included. But there's nothing dodgey about how a guy who's obviously worked on his body himself through diet and exercise and it's admired more than the women on those magazines. Men are subjected to it too.

And how many of these men's (supposedly) perfect penises are shoved into your face on a regular basis?

Wolflikeme · 28-02-2010 11:55PM

F.A. wrote: »

And how many of these men's (supposedly) perfect penises are shoved into your face on a regular basis?

It's not just about breasts, penis' etc. It's what both sexes like. Men would prefer to see a woman's ass/breasts whatever. I've lost count of the number of times I've heard girls comment on a mans torso however.

As well, look at any male underwear ads - perfect body and perfect bulge. They're even on the front of the boxers I buy.

Jules · 01-03-2010 12:00AM

Can we please remember what forum this is and that this thread has been started from a woman perspective.

The Sweeper · 01-03-2010 12:01AM

I'd rather they were on the top shelf because I'm bored of them tbh. I'm sick of not being able to look anywhere except to be confronted by trashy mags. The older I get, the more stuff I wish I could just avoid because focusing on it irritates and depresses me. This includes the comments under YouTube videos (the single lowest common denominator on the internet); the up-the-RA revival on Irish teen social networking pages; and the sheer ignorance inherent in a lot of what passes for an 'article' in trashy mags.

Novella · 01-03-2010 12:03AM

Xiney wrote: »

If it was normal nudity I wouldn't really care - but this is not "realistic" nudity. I wouldn't want future children of mine to think that that is what they should look like/be attracted to when they're adults.

Although I suppose neither are most magazine covers, when it comes down to it.

Exactly. It's just not reasonable to control to that extent what your children are exposed to. They are gonna end up seeing this kind of thing anyway and I dunno, I think it'd better for them to see it casually on magazine covers in a shop than it to be made into some big secret, 'dirty' affair with their friends or whatever.

Wolflikeme · 01-03-2010 12:06AM

Jules wrote: »

Can we please remember what forum this is and that this thread has been started from a woman perspective.

Understood. But the OP did ask for a male opinion and sited 'normal women being made feel inadequate' by these magazines as one of the reasons they shouldn't be so in your face, which I made my feelings on this particular part known also, is all.

Jules · 01-03-2010 12:15AM

Oh no i understand that but jsut keeping it in perspective is all!

Dudess · 01-03-2010 12:29AM

They don't bother me, and it doesn't bother me that they're not top shelf... I suppose I do think the female form is presented/celebrated rather tackily and crassly by them though. But this doesn't offend me or anything.

I remember making the point before that I thought burlesque and old-fashioned strip-tease was more tasteful as the girls are more natural looking and less likely to have fake boobs, and more likely to have ones that droop a bit... but it was argued that that could also be seen as tacky and that ultimately they're one and the same. I personally disagree though.

Macha · 01-03-2010 12:59AM

There are a few simultaneous trends going on here:

1) the images in question are very sexualised and unrealistic
2) they are practically all of women
3) they are everywhere

Personally, I think the problem is compounded when all three trends converge. It isn't to the same level but just open tomorrow morning's edition of Metro and count the young, sexualised images of women and men. I think you'll find one gender is more highly represented than the other.

Some interesting research I was looking at the other day noted that women tend to have less problems with these images if they live in societies that aren't uptight about nudity. The reason is, that they (and men) have more opportunities to view the bodies of real women and fully appreciate how bizarre and plastic the images in these publications are. If, on the other hand, these are the only images of other women that you see, it's pretty easy to look in the mirror and think you are less than adequate.

Galvasean · 01-03-2010 01:31AM

taconnol wrote: »

Some interesting research I was looking at the other day noted that women tend to have less problems with these images if they live in societies that aren't uptight about nudity. The reason is, that they (and men) have more opportunities to view the bodies of real women and fully appreciate how bizarre and plastic the images in these publications are. If, on the other hand, these are the only images of other women that you see, it's pretty easy to look in the mirror and think you are less than adequate.

Now that is an interesting point. When I was younger I thought the big boobs/perfect tan etc. women on the noodie mag covers were the most beautiful women in the world. Of course my experience in seeing what womens' bodies looked like was limited as such magazines were my only source of such. Now that I'm a bit older (and a little wiser I would think) the 'ladz mag' stereotype of female beauty just doesn't do it for me anymore. It's gotten to the point where I'm looking at these images thinking, "That's not what a women should look like". It strikes me as unnatural and unnatural is not attractive.
So basically what I'm trying to get at is that if a guy like me could have been 'taken in' by that stereotype surely many young impressionable women have been too.

Also, the point was brought up about magazines such as Men's Health. I don't think the comparison is a particularly good one, not because they are rarer than 'ladz mags', but the fact that they serve a different function. 'Ladz mags' are primarily for titilation, where things like Men's Health are proper lifestyle magazines which feature proper articles on men's health and fitness and are bought primarily for this function. It is also worth noting that these magazines do not feature steroid enchanced (that to me is the male equivalent of plastic boobs) men, but rather naturally toned/built men who have woked hard to achieve their impressive physicality.

SugarHigh · 01-03-2010 01:40AM

Could someone fill me in on what terrible thing happens when a child see's an image of a naked person?

Dudess · 01-03-2010 01:49AM

Well this isn't merely a case of "a naked person" - it's a naked person in a fairly heavily sexualised context, and some deem it inappropriate for children up to a certain age to be exposed (pun not intended) to that, or that it might lead to unrealistic expectations. I personally wouldn't see the issue though - such images have always been around in some shape or form. When I was a kid it was Samantha Fox's gigantic bazookas, and lads at school were always on about them - didn't make much of a difference to us girls though...

K-9 · 01-03-2010 02:06AM

panda100 wrote: »

Your not comparing like and like.
When national newspapers have daily pictures of perfect penises and pecs,along with the magazine racks in every shop explicitly showing them,then come back and tell me you don't feel inadeqaute about how your penis and pecs look.

I must stop watching Rugby Internationals, the pecs on those guys!

I feel inadequate!

I get your point though.

On the children point, I'd agree to an extent. When I'm shopping in Tesco I'd prefer if they where on the top shelf. Don't know if it would make a major difference to the issue though.

01-03-2010 11:12AM

K-9 wrote: »

I must stop watching Rugby Internationals, the pecs on those guys! I feel inadequate!

Ah, but you're comparing fit healthy men with girls who may have gone under the knife to look the look the way they do. I don't think there's a woman here who would have a problem with pictures of naturally fit and beautiful women on the covers of the pages. (we'd love to see g'em every time we walk into the newsagents

)

Personally, I don't have problem with it, couldn't care less if I see it all day every day. I would genuinely be less confident when looking at the likes of women's health than Zoo.

I would have a problem with children opening a newspaper and wanting to know why there is a naked woman pouting on page 3. You see it more and more these days, girls wanting to be famous, rather than succesful, wanting to marry footballers, rather than becoming a doctor. For that reason, I think they should be confined to the top shelf. HOWEVER, I think this has alot to do with how children are brought up, of course society is going to have a big influence but teach your children well from an early age and you can giving them the gift of thinking for themselves.

Another point: others might disagree, but I wouldn't put breasts on the same level as penises

.
I mean, you wouldn't bat an eyelid if women walked on a beach topless, can't say the same about a man walking around with his junk out.

Macha · 01-03-2010 11:24AM

Deleted User wrote: »

Another point: others might disagree, but I wouldn't put breasts on the same level as penises .
I mean, you wouldn't bat an eyelid if women walked on a beach topless, can't say the same about a man walking around with his junk out.

Actually with Ireland's bizarre laws, if a woman and a man are walking together on a beach and both are topless, the woman is guilty of indecent public exposure while the man is not.

Double standards anyone?

Personally, I'm sick of our society's obsession with superficial vacuousness - shallow materialism takes up all our time, money and effort while the really important stuff barely warrants a passing glance.

01-03-2010 11:43AM

taconnol wrote: »

Actually with Ireland's bizarre laws, if a woman and a man are walking together on a beach and both are topless, the woman is guilty of indecent public exposure while the man is not.
.

I did not know that!

Snowie · 01-03-2010 01:30PM

I realise, that this topic is more so for womens point of veiw. me being male may not have much of an input.

While yes your thaughts on pictures.... Are all true these girls get payed and well payed for wwhat they do and I dont really have an issue with that...

But I think the Black and white interveiws they do with them are the more concerning thing.... To take note of while When i was 16 and read maxim my dad tock an interest and read it to for a number of reasons.... One to see what they where saying, and thankfully it wasnt as bad as these days....

I think the nuts and more glossy page 3 publications rasie Eyebrows... As in what they talk about make the women sound like easy lays now to an 16 year old male I would be more concerned the damage of the wording does to the damage the pictures do... While, yes but the raunchyness of some of the interveiws... are just more so making the girl out to be a complete easy lay... and a suggestionable 16 year old males going to create a soem what fictional and very esxpectent attitude to women.

I could go into this further but I just wanted to point out that the interveiws are far far worse then the pictures.....

krudler · 01-03-2010 01:38PM

Why does a kid even need to go into a magazine shop to see overly sexualised images of women? all they have to do is turn on one of the music channels and you get bombarded with them all day long, do you think the singers in music videos are "natural" beauty? are they fudge, doused in makeup, lit to prefection, the video is graded beyond belief to hide any imperfections, look at a pic of Britney in a video:

Britney_Spears_Gimme_More_video_screenshot_400x300_091007.jpg

Britney_Spears_Gimme_More_video_screenshot_400x300_091007.jpg

and then in real life with a camera flash going off in her face where her skin looks like a normal persons, imperfect:

Fake beauty sells, its also ironic that people give out about lads mags showing girls with big (not always fake btw) boobs, yet womens mags are full of pictures of buff men on the beach or whatever, I agree completely that theres a double standard about the sexualisation of men and women, but that double standard works both ways. I overheard some women at work talking about some rugby player and one of them said "god I'd rape him" and they all laughed, if I was looking at a pic of a girl and said "yeah, I'd rape her" Id have been fired on the spot.

Ickle Magoo · 01-03-2010 04:14PM

Dudess wrote: »

Well this isn't merely a case of "a naked person" - it's a naked person in a fairly heavily sexualised context, and some deem it inappropriate for children up to a certain age to be exposed (pun not intended) to that.......

Totally agree. My kids are under six, they wouldn't be watching music channels or go on anything other than the Beebies website but walk into the local newsagents and there is just a printed sea of lace thongs and hooker red lipstick right at their eye level.

panda100 · 01-03-2010 04:29PM

Xiney wrote: »

If it was normal nudity I wouldn't really care - but this is not "realistic" nudity. I wouldn't want future children of mine to think that that is what they should look like/be attracted to when they're adults.

This is definately what I have a problem with too.
I think the naked body is fantastic and something we should be more liberated about in Ireland.
To me though a Page three girl is not being liberated about nudity as their not real women bodies. Theres not any hair on them for god sake and most women have hair on their breasts,armpits,stomach and pubic area.
These women are meant to be sexually appealing to men contorting their bodies into all types of positions to apper sexier. Sex is now more about performance and apperances then real gratification and intimicy.

Also Krudler,the report also called for a curb on raunchy music videos:
"The report in particular criticises lyrics by N-Dubz and 50 Cent for their tendency to sexualise women or refer to them in a derogatory manner, and singles out the rap artist Nelly for a video showing him swiping a credit card through a young woman's buttocks. But it adds that, while degrading sexual content is most apparent in rap-rock, rap, rap-metal and R&B, it is to be found across all music genres.

It argues that such sexually provocative music videos are commonplace and easily accessible by children through TV and DVDs. A loophole exempting music videos from the 1984 Video Recordings Act should be closed as well as requiring broadcasters to ensure they are only shown after 9pm"

Lads' mags.... from top shelf to every shelf.

Comments