Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    Point being?

    The guy on the cover is the ideal. Men's Health is a magazine which is bought by a male audience and the cover is obviously there for men to think: "damn, I need abs like those" so they will buy the mag. I have copies of Men's Health magazine. It's full of lame ass protein adverts.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Veggiechic6)
    I just read about this. Doesn't bother me at all. If people want to see topless models, there are loads of lads mags for that. I don't see why they should have a place in a national newspaper.
    well tbh they should not, but not because muh objectification (which totally does not happen to men lol), but because 10 year olds seeing breasts

    Someone else however has argued there is no point hiding sexualised images from children these days, I am biased as an aspiring teacher...
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smash Bandicoot)
    you sir have a new follower
    Thank you my good sir :hat2:

    Though I must warn you, it's quite rare that I'm able to be so elaborate when presenting an argument :lol:
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by datpiff)
    Let this guy explain (from a gaming perspective):

    I have seen that before, brilliant video. It does raise the question of where the line is though; obviously G-cup elves in chainmail bikini's are there because men want to see them not because men want to be them, but the line blurs with characters like (for example) Isabella from dragon age. Still sexy, but does that mean she isn't a good female character? People want to be seen as attractive, so it stands that any idealized character would be attractive. As I said, objectification and idealization overlap.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by datpiff)
    Point being?

    The guy on the cover is the ideal. Men's Health is a magazine which is bought by a male audience and the cover is obviously there for men to think: "damn, I need abs like those" so they will buy the mag. I have copies of Men's Health magazine. It's full of lame ass protein adverts.
    'damn, I need abs like those or I'm never gonna get laid with that girl I fancy'

    same reason different rationalisation

    let us retreat to the Crash Bandicoot thread where we are allies
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I'm seeing many male arguments but not many female arguments. It would be good if the men on this board would get lost for a few hours so we can have an equal number of females have a say on the subject. TBH the male perspective isn't what i'm interested in. I rarely can see what women have to say on these boards about issues like this because it's usually guys who shout the most.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blazar)
    It's more about the fact that male nipples aren't generally sexualised, whereas female ones are.
    You've completely missed the point of what they were saying, which was that feminism is about empowering women to make their own choices in life. The Page 3 models chose to sell their bodies for cash and people like you who are vocally supportive of removing that opportunity for them are going against the very ideals you claim to support. The truth is that intolerant 'feminists' like you want women to have the freedom and opportunities to make their own choices in life except when you don't like those choices.

    (Original post by chewey)
    I think it lacks class and that the Sun is garbage, but surely if the models choose to pose topless, knowing they'll be objectified by sleazy men, it shouldn't be a problem? I thought the feminists wanted to free the nipples anyway.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Drunk Punx was nice to you, I'm not going to sugar-coat it like he did.

    ITT the only 2 female feminists who jump on the thread come to explain why female objectification in the press is the parasite of misogynist man-pigs but male objectification is 'no big deal' under the rationalisation 'I don't like it but women have it worse so I am just going to in practice ignore it and if you disagree with me you're a misogynist or bitter virgin'

    Time to create tyne egalitarian front ladies and gents. The MRAs know the score, the problem is that the top 20% don't lose out from patriarchy or feminism, they're still going to be regarded as attractive so why the **** should they campaign for the 80%?

    Capitalism patriarchy and 3rd wave feminism, all inter-twined in a miserable threesome no participant bar capitalism regards as less than rape.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drunk Punx)

    Eventually it will do the movement more harm than good. The illegal sex trade is something that is already being heavily looked into by authorities, Feminists don't need to stick their oar in too, it'd be a complete waste
    Completely disagree with that. I do not like your mentality at all tbh. "The authorities are doing stuff to stop it so all is good". From my experience not enough is being done.

    Also women can't discuss an issue in which effects a lot of women around the globe? It wouldn't be a waste of time. Sex trafficking is very hidden in British society and it would be great to have discussion about it.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by datpiff)
    I'm seeing many male arguments but not many female arguments. It would be good if the men on this board would get lost for a few hours so we can have an equal number of females have a say on the subject. TBH the male perspective isn't what i'm interested in. I rarely can see what women have to say on these boards about issues like this because it's usually guys who shout the most.
    of course you don't. Only around 20% of women on this forum lose out enough from the patriarchy to empathise with the disenfranchised men in anymore than a hypothetical condescending 'aww look at all those men crying we don't want to sleep with them' way.

    People=**** attraction is amoral
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    men **** off and let's see what the women have to say

    current tally

    3 'women have it worse' feminazis

    2 'who cares let's objectify everyone'

    2 flippant dismissive remarks

    2 of the above who acknowledge male objectification in media is also a problem-1 of which still says 'women have it worse', the other says 'it's overlooked-therefore let's objectify everyone'
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smash Bandicoot)
    of course you don't. Only around 20% of women on this forum lose out enough from the patriarchy to empathise with the disenfranchised men in anymore than a hypothetical condescending 'aww look at all those men crying we don't want to sleep with them' way.

    People=**** attraction is amoral
    Please don't throw random statistics at me unless you got them from somewhere or did a study yourself. You are really just expressing an opinion. Nothing what you said is fact and pulling out a random number won't make it one.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smash Bandicoot)
    'damn, I need abs like those or I'm never gonna get laid with that girl I fancy'

    same reason different rationalisation

    let us retreat to the Crash Bandicoot thread where we are allies
    Not quite, that is more akin to the pictures of women you find in womens magazines. Of course those magazines have pictures of men that have the same purpose as page 3...

    really it just comes down to context. Which is retarded, since I don't see how a picture of a hot woman is somehow more acceptable in a ladies mag than a guys mag.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by datpiff)
    Please don't throw random statistics at me unless you got them from somewhere or did a study yourself. You are really just expressing an opinion. Nothing what you said is fact and pulling out a random number won't make it one.
    that's fair enough, you can dismiss the statistics
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lucaf)
    Not quite, that is more akin to the pictures of women you find in womens magazines. Of course those magazines have pictures of men that have the same purpose as page 3...

    really it just comes down to context. Which is retarded, since I don't see how a picture of a hot woman is somehow more acceptable in a ladies mag than a guys mag.
    Who reads women's mags? WOMEN. Pictures of hot women will be there the same way a good looking guy on the cover of Men's Health is.

    A picture of a hot woman inside Men's Health however is something different.

    ***I can't be arsed with this anymore. I have uni work to do.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by datpiff)
    Who reads women's mags? WOMEN. Pictures of hot women will be there the same way a good looking guy on the cover of Men's Health is.
    Yes, obviously. Thats what I was saying?

    edit:

    (Original post by datpiff)

    A picture of a hot woman inside Men's Health however is something different.

    ***I can't be arsed with this anymore. I have uni work to do.
    But womens mags will equally have pictures of hot men, for the same reason mens ones have hot women. And? Both sexes clearly have demand to see attractive members of the other, and I don't see why that is wrong.

    The point is that it is simply ludicrous that the same picture can be seen as immoral when printed for the enjoyment of men and moral when printed for the enjoyment of women, as if there is something inherently wrong with men deriving enjoyment from the female form.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by datpiff)
    Who reads women's mags? WOMEN. Pictures of hot women will be there the same way a good looking guy on the cover of Men's Health is.

    A picture of a hot woman inside Men's Health however is something different.

    ***I can't be arsed with this anymore. I have uni work to do.
    You've been admitted to a university?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A5ko)
    I wonder how many anti-Page 3 girls have rugby calenders with borderline naked guys, hung up at homes or in offices.

    NEWS FLASH

    Some women like to get their kit off. Shall we start banning other things you don't like? If you think anyone bought The Sun for page 3, you're a tool. When you have the interwebs, the least of your concerns should be one page in a newspaper.

    All those aspiring glamour models who will no doubt go on to star in such greats as TOWIE. You have ruined them...

    This isn't equality
    Page 3 hasn't been banned, though.

    All those aspiring glamour models can apply to be on the Page 3 website, if they so wish.

    I doubt they will actually stop publishing it anyway, it was probably a publicity stunt to drive up sales. I expect them to do a U-turn pretty soon.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blazar)
    Well, as a woman I'm quite happy about this. Hopefully men will stop objectifying us so much in future.
    Oh come off it. Women objectify men too, and tbh, women can be way harsher on themselves, than guys are....
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Internet)
    Oh come off it. Women objectify men too, and tbh, women can be way harsher on themselves, than guys are....
    Yeah the celebrity shaming is principally done by women.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.