Should Lads' Mags Have To Cover Up?

[sp1814]

And is it fair that Zoo, Nuts, FHM etc are being told to cover up, when Attitude (which features equally 'salacious' pictures of men on it's front covers) isn't?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23486027

[sp1814]

emmie

why do they stock them, either they don't mind them or there is a demand which they simply comply with.

They stock them because people want to buy them.

Just like non-smoking newsagents who sell tobacco products, or the Jewish bloke who runs a 24 hour convenience store up the road from us...he sells pork products, but doesn't consume them himself.

I suppose they're simply not forcing their beliefs on their customers.

Pragmatism?

[Sqad]

The "Co-Op"...that IS the place where one would go for cheap groceries and meat for the "working classes and at the end of the year, to get your dividend (Divi)?

Dirty magazines?....Salacious?...things have changed.

If i wanted a dirty magazine, i would go to the "dirty magazine shop" not the Co op........but all this nonsense about semi clothed women.

It will please some of our"frumpy" ABers who also shop at the Co-Op, so that is a good thing, any serious pervert will use the usual source of erotic supply.

A non story.

[emmie]

perhaps it is SP, but i do wonder some can't seem to see that some shops, customers may not like to see them, personally i don't care, most mags are a sheer waste of money.

[ummmm]

What is worse though, having a sexy woman on the cover of a magazine or having a celeb papped in their bikini with a big red circle pointing to their cellulite/bingo wings/droopy boobs etc etc...

[mccfluff]

I don't really pay attention to the mags, if i do notice them, its probably a food mag with something delicious on the front cover :-)

[emmie]

what is worse is opening out internet link to find hard core porn images of a girl who looked 12 on it, this was in error, no warning and no reason to think what i was looking for would be that.

[emmie]

most of the women on the covers are like Jordan, no ta.

[bazwillrun]

Censorship by any name

So any mag or publication that features a female showing any amount of "skin" needs to be covered in some way or is it just "lads " mags.

Are the co-op going to now decide whats acceptable and what isnt on a publications cover ?

absolute joke

[Kramer21]

If it's on the lefties it's the feminists that are handwringing and getting upset about nothing. Haven't these people got more pressing issues in their lives to be worrying about or can't they make better use of their time then waste time and resources just to "achieve" something?

You can bet your bottom dollar that the one's complaining are not pretty happy people with good bodies.

[emmie]

not everyone has your taste obviously,

[emmie]

kramer, oh dear, suppose your gran doesn't like them, would she be wrong...

[ummmm]

I like your thinking, Triggs :-)

[mccfluff]

^^^^^ now that's a plan ^^^^

[Kramer21]

"kramer, oh dear, suppose your gran doesn't like them, would she be wrong"

Well my first question would be Is anyone forcing you to look at them? Why stop there, let's all campaign against exposed flesh on beaches and in parks and catelogue lingerie and bikini sections shall we?
If we're that enraged maybe we should consider moving to a country where bhurkas are worn by every female.

[emmie]

i told you i don't care one way or the other, but if they are staring people in the face, some may not care for them.

[ummmm]

They won't be staring anyone in the face, being on the top shelf...

[emmie]

some of our local convenience stores haven't put them on the top shelf.

[mccfluff]

'they're' not staring anyone in the face, you would be staring at them

[jd_1984]

Note that Co-op are not threatening to remove from the shelves, they still want the revenue from selling the mags. If pushed into a corner by the magazines, would they continue to sell as normal without the proposed cover?