Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

'Lads' mags' set cover-up deadline by Co-operative

Scroll to see replies

Reply 20

ForgetMe

Erm, you can easily find porn through mobile phones :mmm:

Or night TV channels :mmm:

What if a child would see parents having sex, that would mean ban parents? :mmm:

Reply 21

Libtardian

Original post by ForgetMe

Erm, you can easily find porn through mobile phones :mmm:

Or night TV channels :mmm:

What if a child would see parents having sex, that would mean ban parents? :mmm:

In 1984 they were working on artificial insemination, so I guess it's possible.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 22

ForgetMe

Original post by otester

In 1984 they were working on artificial insemination, so I guess it's possible.

Posted from TSR Mobile

They're not going to protect children by these ways because children will find other ways of going around to get what they want :mmm:

Parents should be more responsible for their children.. I wonder why now to ban porn when they could have done that 10 years ago :K:

Reply 23

Libtardian

Original post by ForgetMe

They're not going to protect children by these ways because children will find other ways of going around to get what they want :mmm:

Parents should be more responsible for their children.. I wonder why now to ban porn when they could have done that 10 years ago :K:

This isn't about children or morals in general, this is about enslavement.

Reply 24

zDefcon

Ridiculous. What a pointless thing to be waffling on about given the multitude of other more pressing issues we already have to deal with.

so damn stupid

Absolutely pathetic. Feminists should get their priorities sorted out.

Reply 27

LavenderBlueSky88

What. What's wrong with lads mags? Or maybe the ones that are explicit, but surely they are on the top shelf? Women's magazines with "oh look, someone got fat" emblazoned across them are surely a bit more damaging than a pair of tits in a bikini.

Reply 28

DarkWhite

I don't see what the big deal is. Customers will still be able to see them and buy them. The Co-Op can do whatever they want. By the nature of its business and ownership model, it has to listen to its members and customers, and that's what they've done.

It's a bit perplexing seeing comments suggesting feminists have their priorities wrong. It's not like they're not trying to fight pay inequality, unfair democratic representation, structural barriers and inequalities, allowances of rape threats, celebration of success, objectification in music and the media, etc.

But it's not just feminist groups. I was in my local Co-Op about 6 months ago when an elderly woman was offended by them and felt the need to turn them all around as they were right along the queueing area. I've heard of others doing it as well.

You can't argue with a company asking their members what they think and responding positively to their wishes. People would be up in arms if supermarkets asked customers what they thought and then blatantly ignored it.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 29

username677182

Broadcasting Tulisa's fame with her cocaine scandal and her sex videos at childrens eye level - Perfectly acceptable.

A little bit of boob on show, at a level most of us would need to stretch for anyway - Unacceptable and must be sealed in a bag.

Reply 30

Studentus-anonymous

Just another day in increasingly Victorian Britain, it seems that people have suddenly decided that what made Britain great was in fact a hostile and fearful attitude towards sex, and that the best approach to deal with children asking about sex is to return to the Stork story and hide away the fact that humans have sex like every other animal on Earth.

I'm looking forward to when a minority of people deem homosexuality illegal and 'a sin' again so we can have public with-hunts and burnings of men and women who happen to have a different than hetero sexuality can be chased down and abused because it might "warp the kiddies minds /sadpanda".

**** this regressive bull****, seriously.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 31

danielnkwocha

They could have at least used a better term than "modesty bags"

Sounds like a hijab for magazines... When did Britain become so prudish?

Reply 32

rockrunride

Come on Co-op, all the rage about your new environmentally friendly cloth shopping bags, and now you intend to demand a few tonnes of disposable plastic.

Won't the 'modesty boards' do?

Reply 33

coco_madem0iselle

I find celeb mags a lot more distasteful, as a young woman anyway.
I remember queuing up in Boots one day, they had them on a display about my height, covered from top to bottom.
Saw a picture of a lady with a perfectly nice body in a bikini and the words "STRESS EATING MADE ME FAT!" or something. Absolutely appalling.
And the "lose 5 stone in 3 days!!!" stuff they put on the front. Ok not that extreme, but still equally as unhealthy sounding. As someone who used to suffer from an eating disorder I know these are potential triggers, especially if you're already feeling crap about yourself.
No wonder everyone is so insecure about their bodies with these magazines aimed at women, shaming women for their bodies and telling us all to lose weight. I find this a lot more damaging than seeing a pair of tits.
Not to mention they always ****ing spoil corrie for you if you even so much as glance at them :frown:

some examples

Spoiler

I'd much prefer to see these covered up :tongue:

Reply 34

Clip

In breaking news, due to the hot weather and the lack of clothes being worn by girls in parts of the country, Co-op will be handing out Burqas for the convenience of all shoppers.

Reply 35

ArtGoblin

I think the Co-op have missed the point of the anti-lags mags campaign. It isn't about protecting children from nudity because there is no issue with nudity as long as it is not promoting a world where women's bodies are subject to the male gaze. This is not about trying to suppress sexuality but about getting rid of images that affect the way women are viewed in the wider world.

Reply 36

und3niable_

Original post by NathanW18

That article is lying. Those magazines are never at children's eye level. They're always near the top.

Where I work and as I've seen in Morrisons, they're placed quite carefully at the back (On the top) so you can only see if you actually want to purchase it.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 37

Will's mum

The magazines in our Co-op are all at eye level, the whole stand is only about 5ft tall. I'm not sure why 'lads mags' are any more offensive than other stuff there, like the examples already mentioned of photos taken without peoples consent with 'look how fat she is!' on, and Cosmo might have a clothed celeb on the cover, but it also has headlines like 'twenty ways to improve your orgasms' emblazoned across it.....not sure where the line is.

Reply 38

meenu89

Original post by josh_cook

Tories

You'll probably find that many Tories are very unhappy with all this censorship. Taking tougher steps against child porn, that's fine and we do support that, but the other stuff? I'm unhappy with it.