Suffragette1 Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 Read back where you think women should be free to do what they want, but you want to ban page 3 for example.... Banning page 3 is not the same as depriving glamour models of a job, there are plenty of other publications out there as I have said several times. Have I called for a ban on all topless photos everywhere? No. ---------- Post added 28-05-2013 at 08:18 ---------- The whole reason for the start of the thread for one example. So no mention of publications aimed at the female audience that do the same with men as the subject. Cosmopolitan et al. Even some of those female audience mags have had sexually suggestive/semi-naked images of women on the cover. So it's selective, it's ok for a woman's mag to do it but not a man's. In my opinion it's not about equality at all, that's just the engine for which this group is trying to get done. In reality this is nothing more than Banyard and her cronies trying to force their own twisted morality and hypocrisy on people. Jessica has already addressed this, however, it seems this is being wilfully ignored or misunderstood. Here it is again: . But I also don't agree with the simplistic 'but women objectify men too' argument. It overlooks the structural inequality between men and women, and it overlooks the fact that women are more heavily and intensively objectified by the media and wider culture than men are. It doesn't work both ways in any meaningful sense, and won't until that structural inequality is addressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 Maybe men should get together and push for a national ban on all womens' gossip/celebrity mags of which there are far too many anyway. Look at any middle shelf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 Maybe men should get together and push for a national ban on all womens' gossip/celebrity mags of which there are far too many anyway. Look at any middle shelf What kind of cretin would support a measure like that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watson B Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 Well they have a problem then:loopy: Spot on. I love to see a women breast feed her baby. Its one of the most beautiful things in the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hots on Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 There is a time and a place for it, but women displaying themselves nude/semi nude is an expression of freedom; feminists should focus more on the plight of women in the middle east and Africa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 There is a time and a place for it, but women displaying themselves nude/semi nude is an expression of freedom; feminists should focus more on the plight of women in the middle east and Africa. I'm sure misogynistic dinosaurs with dodgy ideas about sex and sexuality are top of their list of advisers. ---------- Post added 28-05-2013 at 11:31 ---------- There is a time and a place for it, but women displaying themselves nude/semi nude is an expression of freedom; feminists should focus more on the plight of women in the middle east and Africa. Oooh, let me guess, you want them to stay at home or do it in the toilet. How very liberal of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 Banning page 3 is not the same as depriving glamour models of a job, Stop making strawmen - I never said that you were wanting to deny them employment, so kindly stop the insinuation. You said that women should be free to do what they want. You also said by extension that they shouldn't be allowed to appear on Page 3. The two statements you have made are at odds with each other. You cannot have both. Which is your position? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 Stop making strawmen - I never said that you were wanting to deny them employment, so kindly stop the insinuation. You said that women should be free to do what they want. You also said by extension that they shouldn't be allowed to appear on Page 3. The two statements you have made are at odds with each other. You cannot have both. Which is your position? Which part of what Suffragette said are you claiming says women shouldn't be allowed to appear on page 3? I can't see her say that anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hots on Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 More and more photographers that do the shoots for lads mags and page 3 etc are women these days; so its not the seedy world that it perhaps used to be at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 More and more photographers that do the shoots for lads mags and page 3 etc are women these days; so its not the seedy world that it perhaps used to be at all. I don't think that having female photographers makes any difference tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.