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

Banning The Sun/Lads Mags from Sale at LSE watch

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I think it's ridiculous! What type of sad uni would have lad's mags banned!!? I think people at LSE just like campaigning for the sake of it.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Shouldn't they be in the kitchen, making dinner? :s
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jxhn)
    The feminist society at the LSE have submitted a proposal to ban The Sun and 'Lads Mags' from our Student Union shop.



    What do people think?
    I agree with the feminist society!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    obviously that society has run out things to do or just want some attention
    bad way to go about it
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    is stupid, if they ban them they should ban all womens mags as well as they are just as bad
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    It so unfair on these women who are subjected to this!!! They have no choice but to be paid thousands of pounds to do nothing I HATE IT!
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr_K_Dilkington)
    Same. Lots of retarded, knee-jerk anti-feminists in this thread.
    Ah yes, I forgot that your opinion was worth more than mine or anyone else's.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Christian_j)
    Ah yes, I forgot that your opinion was worth more than mine or anyone else's.
    Where exactly did he claim that it was?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kreuzuerk)
    Where exactly did he claim that it was?
    It's implied within 'retarded' and 'knee-jerk'.

    I consider my opinions before I say them, so I don't see why my opinion was rubbished as retarded and knee-jerk when he gave no further detail himself.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by smalltownboy)
    At least you aren't at Manchester, where the student union shop is literally just pens, paper and imitation brand orange juice. I think they've banned more things than New Labour (SATIRE!)
    you forgot virgin coke :p: .
    It's so silly! We have more types of paper than WHS!
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    I think some panties need to be untwisted.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    I agree with everything they said. I dont know why people are replying going "that ******* ridiculous/stupid/blah blah", since their reasons hold weight.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I presume the sun is getting the axe for page 3.. Well page 3 is a national treasure something that makes me proud of England ! long may it continue once they get rid of that a little bit of cultural heritage dies...
    Offline

    3
    Feminists trying to force everyone to play along? Shocking, I say. If you don't like softcore porn, don't buy it. The implication that these things are exploitative is more insulting to women than anything else, since it assumes that the models involved couldn't possibly want to be portrayed that way. Quite aside from that, I'm getting a little tired of people claiming that media makes people do things in the real world. Just as I'm not about to jack a car because I played GTA, reading Playboy isn't going to make me go out and rape someone.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Why would anyone care what these people have to say lol
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    That's the most lesbian thing I've ever read.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    1.The homogenous representation of women’s bodies illustrated in FHM and the Sun is misogynistic.
    misogynistic implies the dislike of women. its sort of the opposite.


    2.The images within both publications are heteronormative, in their assumptions of what constitutes ‘normal’ sexual relations.
    No, they just target their audience, straight men. They aren't going to put in some naked men just because some people are gay, you wouldnt expect gay man weekly to have women in it would you?

    3.The images assume that women are sexually passive objects; and that relationships between men and women are equivalent to the relationship of predator and prey.
    How the **** do images 'assume' something? The word they're looking for is imply. And the pictures doing always make them look passive...

    4.The images are often airbrushed and encourage unrealistic and unattainable expectations of women’s bodies. Such expectations contribute to the proliference of eating disorders, and negative body image.
    This point is the only one I agree with, apart from negative body image bit. But it's quite obvious to any reader that not everyone can look like that, banning it doesn't do any good.

    5.Any industry which promotes the objectification of women inevitably has an impact on the sexist attitudes which underpin violence and sexual abuse, and as such cannot be said to be harmless fun.
    So reading nuts turns you into a rapist? idiots.


    I think they need to put down the thesaurus and give readers a bit more credit, they're at lse, they're hardly that easily going to be influenced by a few magazines.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by numb3rb0y)
    Feminists trying to force everyone to play along? Shocking, I say. If you don't like softcore porn, don't buy it. The implication that these things are exploitative is more insulting to women than anything else, since it assumes that the models involved couldn't possibly want to be portrayed that way. Quite aside from that, I'm getting a little tired of people claiming that media makes people do things in the real world. Just as I'm not about to jack a car because I played GTA, reading Playboy isn't going to make me go out and rape someone.
    In my humble opinion, the fact that pornographic material is readily-available to be purchased does pose serious ramifications. Firstly, it is quite evident that these publications are in most cases distributed under the guise of something quite other; as a part of the news, within lifestyle magazines amongst others and as such, it has become normalised within our society and culture. It's an important to consider what determines whether something is beneficial or not within our society. Personally, I believe that the overt sexualisation of the female species is something that is generally not productive in maintaining a harmonious and conscientious society. Clearly, others may feel differently but what must be assessed is the implications of such material. I would maintain that this cannot be resolved by reaching a situation where it becomes a case that 'if you don't like it, don't seek it out' because of the fact that such material has absolutely infiltrated all aspects of the media. Currently, any child can buy a copy of The Sun and be faced with something that they probably are not emotionally ready to deal with. It is well documented that introducing young children to pornography can, in some cases, have disturbing consequences and the publications like The Sun only serve to bridge the gap. During puberty, many young boys are confronted with new experiences and it's material such as this which only serves to promote the stereotype of how they should behave.

    Clearly though, this is a issue which is widespread. Really, all sectors of society are, to varying degrees, affected. One only has to look at advertising, for example. Personally, I believe that one possible solution is that any publication containing pornographic material is sold in a covering packaging with just the title on it.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Their logic is brilliant.

    Firstly they give images agency, apparently images can assume social and cultural viewpoints?
    Secondly they ignore the fact all women's interest magazines use the same images, and if the images make the assumptions (not the context) then you have to ban those too. Come to think of it, I'm pretty sure the Times had a picture of Cheryl Cole fairly scantily clad the other week, must we ban that?
    Thirdly they show their hatred and belittling of men by saying that this has an impact on rape? Men are not violence just waiting to happen and we don't need protection from images which might cause us to be violent
    Lastly on the body image point. We see 500 normal women a day. One page three girl doesn't automatically outweigh that.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Christian_j)
    http://jpberube.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/sexism.jpg

    THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^

    Feminists need to shove right off, We can buy whatever we like. Is this all they have to do in the feminist society? They resort to petty issues like lads mags when there are real issues such as pay equality that need addressing? Any moron can see that people can just go to the internet for porn - if this is genuine (no source given) then they need to sort out their bloody priorities.
    http://www.facebook.com/event.php?ei...7152682&ref=mf
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 17, 2010
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

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.