More PC nonsense.
 

Employment lawyer Samantha Mangwana is trying to encourage employees and customers to sue retailers for sexual harassment and sexual discrimination. Why? For putting lads mags like Loaded and FHM on display with pictures of fit birds on the front cover.

Some people obviously have nothing useful to do!

She rather pretty though and quite fit herself. I wonder if Nuts would be interested in doing a photo spread of her?

lol! Hopefully, this won't happen. Once these types of things start, they never seem to stop.

Except that its EXACTLY magazines like that which cause unstable and hormonal girls to start eating disorders. Unrealistic expectation. Never mind teaching men who have no chance of getting even the non-airbrushed version of the girl in the magazine into believing all women actually look like that.

It would be cool if they stopped airbrushing.

Never mind the over sexualization of our children. Little girls wearing low rise skinny jeans with a lovely, glittery "slut" literally spelt out across their asses. String bikinis on 10 year olds at the beach. Trying to look like the girl in the magazine that the boys find attractive. Fucking disgusting.

Women's bodies are nicer looking than men's. I just feel that way. Men are all utility and generally an image of a naked man doesn't particularly move too many meters when it comes to $$$. I get it. There's no point in trying to stop it. However, the adverse effects should be obvious at this point.

Magazines don't cause eating disorders and unrealistic expectations. That's like saying guns kill people. It makes no sense, IMO.

Parents are in charge of raising their children correctly, not the media.

I agree with both you girls. Problem is, raising kids right, and that means teaching them how to counter peer pressure too, is god damned hard work. Work most people are not capable of.

To get back on subject though, that woman has no case. I'm pretty sure the less profitable girls' mags of similar content are on the same display, so there goes discrimination. And for something to constitute sexual harassment, some form of action from the offender against the victim is required. Stacking a shelf, hardly qualifies.

Lets not forget that the body building magazines with half naked men on the covers are not being objected to.

The woman has no case. She's being as ass.

That said: look at those magazines. All the women are some version of the same body type. All displayed in suggestive clothing and in suggestive positions. Mouths open, hair tousled. Being asked ridiculous questions if they're being asked to speak at all. The message is that women are sex objects. I have no problem CHOOSING to be sexy. But teenagers are targeted by pop culture and as consumers. These images are being shoved down their throats.

I don't know. Nonsense. It is up to the parents to be responsible when they are able for what their children are exposed to. And to attempt to teach them how to cope with what they're exposed to when you aren't around.

*shrug*

Here, by the way: http://www.cracked.com/article_19785...ate-women.html

It's an article. It's interesting. If I need to copy the text or whatever I will.

That is a very interesting read. And quite accurate I might say.

I don't think men's magazines are nearly as dangerous to girls as women's magazines. At least with men's, the message is "Hey! Check out these slutty hotties! They're hawt!!1!". Girls aren't paying them any attention. It's the women's magazines like Cosmo and those that girls are reading and getting their warped views of beauty and fashion. I was there in the 90's. Kate Moss harmed far more teenage girls than Jenna Jameson ever could. That whole "waif" fad was a product of the teenage girl market...not the teenage boy market.

I don't know. Just doesn't sound like I'm reading about myself.

I was referring to objectifying women in the media in general. Any magazine or otherwise.

Yeah, cause that'll stop won't it...

Don't get your panties in a wad, I don't mistakenly believe anything will change. And thanks for reinforcing that notion. :-)

I go commando thank you very much...Let's be honest non, you are on the wrong site to complain about objectifying women as sex objects, being that is largely the point here.

But don't worry, from now on we will cease objectifying you as a sex object, and just see you as one of the lads, ok...or is it ok to objectify you in posts, just not other women?? Or for other men to do so...

Talk to me again when you've successfully raised a teenage daughter...

this place has a problem with distinguishing real life problems and things we like to think about as fantasies.

We are supposed to be able to separate fantasy from reality, no? Well guess what, bro, in reality broads are (*gasp!*) people too!

Personally I don't give a crap what you do. Providing something constructive might be a bonus.

Randomly... I have a pretty good sense of humor regarding objectification though I do spread it evenly between BOTH sexes. Even when me being treated "like one of the lads" is supposed to amusing for some reason. Maybe you can explain that one to me? I am, after all, just a silly blonde *twirls hair and stares off into space*

That cheap shot was completely uncalled for!

:skull-ton I am successfully raising a teenage daughter! She doesn't fall for the "magazine women are what I need to look like". She is her own individual, drop dead gorgeous, doesn't dress provocatively, and doesn't take shit from guys who disrespect her.

Just to clarify-I'm raising her on my own and have since she was a baby.

Ah, sorry about that, I thought you two already knew each other.