Feminist showing their true colours re lad mags

Forget harmful for a minute, let's focus on the question of what people would rather not see. Do you think women and children have a right to not have to be regularly faced with rows of extremely sexualised depictions of women when they are shopping in supermarkets?

For me it would be about where they are sold, but as they totally rely for their business model on sales in the Tescos and Sainsburys, then it's tantamount to calling for them to be closed down to demand a ban in those locations. The alternative, modifying their front page material, is something they've previously repeatedly refused to discuss doing.

For me it would be about where they are sold, but as they totally rely for their business model on sales in the Tescos and Sainsburys, then it's tantamount to calling for them to be closed down to demand a ban in those locations. The alternative, modifying their front page material, is something they've previously repeatedly refused to discuss doing.

Dodging the question, nice debating

May I just add, I can't seem to remember there being a furore over the cover of Rihanna's latest album 'Unapologetic' which is MUCH WORSE than you would see gracing the cover of FHM. What about some of the T-Shirts some people walk around in these days too? What about the degradation of women in some music video's like Rihanna's or Robin Thicke's Blurred Lines? I can't seem to remember any feminists kicking up about those, which in my opinion are a bit OTT.

Actually there have in the past - the Sun, for example, was virtually driven out of Liverpool. However, the point is not the same - it's about established norms in society. Almost everyone finds most newspaper front pages to be within pretty widely accepted standards of taste and decency. (The odd one sparks controversy.) The lad mag covers are very different to the newspapers. Not all, but enough to be able to draw conclusions.

Actually there have in the past - the Sun, for example, was virtually driven out of Liverpool. However, the point is not the same - it's about established norms in society. Almost everyone finds most newspaper front pages to be within pretty widely accepted standards of taste and decency. (The odd one sparks controversy.) The lad mag covers are very different to the newspapers. Not all, but enough to be able to draw conclusions.

There was a suggestion that the magazines have sleeves, right? Like modesty dust covers. Hmmm.

"Lad's mags" are completely different to women's magazines which may show a topless man on the cover (much less common than scantily-clad women on men's magazines). Misandry does not exist, much like "reverse racism". Men have not been subject to the degradation, hyper sexualisation and objectification which constantly plagues women today. Men are the dominant sex - we still live in a society which struggles against resistance to be patriarchal.
Moreover, "lad's mags" provide completely unrealistic expectations of women which are unhealthy for both self-esteem of women and the male treatment of women who may not live up to these standards (basically every woman, everywhere). Also I may remind you that it is perfectly legal for men to go topless in public as they are on the covers of few women's magazines - and yet if I went outside topless as a woman I would be arrested for indecent exposure.
I don't think this makes me a "Nazi", to be honest - wanting liberation of my fellow women cannot exactly be equated to the desire for extreme ethnic cleansing and eugenics...

Co-Op have demanded that, partly just as a publicity point, but it's an amusing idea - they are so degrading that they need to be covered up. Yeah, I can go with that.

Alternatively, the lads mag sector could see that this is an issue that strongly concerns many women and could tone it down, but maybe that's too much to hope.

"Lad's mags" are completely different to women's magazines which may show a topless man on the cover (much less common than scantily-clad women on men's magazines). Misandry does not exist, much like "reverse racism". Men have not been subject to the degradation, hyper sexualisation and objectification which constantly plagues women today. Men are the dominant sex - we still live in a society which struggles against resistance to be patriarchal.
Moreover, "lad's mags" provide completely unrealistic expectations of women which are unhealthy for both self-esteem of women and the male treatment of women who may not live up to these standards (basically every woman, everywhere). Also I may remind you that it is perfectly legal for men to go topless in public as they are on the covers of few women's magazines - and yet if I went outside topless as a woman I would be arrested for indecent exposure.
I don't think this makes me a "Nazi", to be honest - wanting liberation of my fellow women cannot exactly be equated to the desire for extreme ethnic cleansing and eugenics...

Forget harmful for a minute, let's focus on the question of what people would rather not see. Do you think women and children have a right to not have to be regularly faced with rows of extremely sexualised depictions of women when they are shopping in supermarkets?

On a more serious note I do think the shops need to do a little more but putting mags like these into black "goody bags" is ridiculous.

I can make sexist jokes, but guys can't, or they're accused of being sexist.
I can wear a skirt OR trousers at work, but guys generally can't even wear shorts.
I - or rather, the Loose Women - can call men all the names under the sun, but they can't respond, or they're sexist.
I am at university.
Eventually, I will (hopefully!) have a job - but that hopefully! has nothing to do with my gender, and all to do with the current climate.
I can accuse a man of rape, but a man can't accuse me of rape.
I can falseley accuse a man of rape and have him either jailed indefinitely or tarred with a brush for the rest of his life. He can accuse me of making a false rape claim, and I'll get maybe a couple of years in jail.

Do you know what? I actually feel pretty liberated. You can stop fighting for me now. If you really care, why not stop headline-grabbing and attention seeking, and go to places where women are still oppressed - really oppressed, not "omg bewbz on magazines, won't somebody think of the women?" oppressed - and fight for THEIR rights.

She has a habit of moving the goalposts. I have to give her credit where credit's due, she may be an authoritarian with no evidence to back up her wealth of baseless assertions, but damn is she a good sophist. Everything can be twisted, reinterpreted, changed, dodged and modified with her.