How is posing for lad's mags "degrading?"

[HEMI6point1]

Warning: NOW bashing ahead.

One thing I never get is how the members of NOW call lad's mags like Maxim or Loaded "degrading to women."

How is it degrading? The beautiful models who pose for those mags are doing it out of their own free will and are getting paid a handsome sum of money on top of it.

Yeah, "Free will." Those women are not being forced into posing. They are doing it because they want to.

You have to consider the source. NOW used to be a legit organization when it was founded. I don't really care if anyone flames me for this or calls me sexist for this. NOW is today comprised of fat, ugly, bitter jealous women who do nothing but cut down lad's mags and women who are more attractive than them. Not to mention seek out to make men seem like scum. Think about it. When was the last time you saw an attractive NOW member? I sure haven't.

Really, when you hear a NOW member saying "Maxim is degrading to women" what she really means is "I'm just jealous those models have more beauty in their pinkies than I do in my entire body."

I knew NOW was bad when one of their members said, "Women need to be careful around men, they (women) need to realize that men are all potential rapists." Yeah, way to paint us all as violent criminals ready to strike.

A NOW member was asked why she thinks Lad's mags are degrading if the models pose willingly. She said "It gives men the impression that women are worthless if they don't have hourglass figures and DD cup breasts. Plus in some cases if a guy is unstable constantly looking at these images may drive him to commit sexual assault." Yeah, how many magazines do you think Maxim or Loaded would sell if they featured women that look like Rosie O'Donnell? And saying a man would want to commit rape for looking at a lad's mag is just stupid.

There was an article I read a while back about NOW in regards to sexual harassment at work. In this the NOW member actually said a woman should file a sexual harassment complaint even if a male co-worker says something as innocent as "You look nice today." When asked why, she said "when men say that it really means 'nice cleavage'." Yeah, as if we're incapable of paying a woman a compliment without having a sexual notion behind it.

Finally, this next sentence is not about NOW, but I just want to say it anyway. I know that everyone dislikes a certain celebrity or two. But when a person starts looking at every attractive female celeb and starts saying things like, "She has no talent, her boobs must be fake, she's ugly, she's a ho" and other put downs it's tough to explain away. Either you're jealous of the person(s) or have really bad self-esteem issues.

Sorry about the long-winded nature of this post....

[fireheart17]

What is NOW exactly?

Also, there are plenty of magazines out there that will use plus-size models in their shoots. And a lot of guys actually prefer the curvy form with REAL breasts (my bf does)

[HEMI6point1]

What is NOW exactly?

Also, there are plenty of magazines out there that will use plus-size models in their shoots. And a lot of guys actually prefer the curvy form with REAL breasts (my bf does)

NOW = National Organization for Women.

And those plus size models are many times, better-looking than the skin and bones models in the US. Remember that Lane Bryant ad?

I referenced Rosie O'Donnell because she's just nasty looking.

[protege]

And those plus size models are many times, better-looking than the skin and bones models in the US.

I never went for the twig look myself...

[KnitShoni]

NOW is about as relevant as the NAACP. They know it, so they will search for (make up) any reason they can to stay in the public eye.

[blas87]

Oh yay, a new organization for me to bully!

[HEMI6point1]

Oh yay, a new organization for me to bully!

NOW is not really new. They were founded in 1966, back then they meant good (equal pay and stuff like that) but now they've become.... what I described in my OP.

[AdminAssistant]

NOW is today comprised of fat, ugly, bitter jealous women who do nothing but cut down lad's mags and women who are more attractive than them. Not to mention seek out to make men seem like scum. Think about it. When was the last time you saw an attractive NOW member? I sure haven't.

Fat and ugly??? Here are there officers: http://www.now.org/officers/

Wow, you are so right. Those moo cows must just be jealous of surgically enhanced models.

NOW is and was an extremely important organization. Women are still paid less than men. Our right to make medical decisions about our own bodies is constantly under threat. We need NOW more than ever.

Really, when you hear a NOW member saying "Maxim is degrading to women" what she really means is "I'm just jealous those models have more beauty in their pinkies than I do in my entire body."

A NOW member was asked why she thinks Lad's mags are degrading if the models pose willingly. She said "It gives men the impression that women are worthless if they don't have hourglass figures and DD cup breasts.

What they're talking about is a public perception of beauty. Beauty magazines (as well as fap mags like Playboy and Maxim) do skew what is considered "beautiful." I think there should be concern about women feeling the need to go to extremes to fit an unreachable societal standard. We shouldn't have to constantly diet and exercise and need to get boob jobs and butt implants so that we can be the right kind of "curvy." I mean, what's next, a return to corsets?

I think it's worse that women feel they're worthless if they aren't the perfect shape.

Yes, NOW made be over-reacting. However, just because someone doesn't agree with women being made into mass-masturbation fodder doesn't make them a fat, ugly, stupid cow.

[Plaidman]

So because you think they're ugly, it means they are jealous of what people consider hot?

Really?


I mean really?

Yeah, they are doing it of their own free will and paid alot of money. Guess what that means?

If you want to make ALOT of money, you MUST look this hot. If you do not look this hot, you don't deserve anything, and people will insult the way you look. (You can't deny this HEMI6point1, seeing as you JUST insulted them based on their looks).

So yeah, I can see how they view it as degrading. This world is just filled with a bunch of scum that only based people's values strictly on how you look, including people here such as HEMI6point1, otherwise you wouldn't have made fun of how they look.

Glad you don't see what I look like on a regular bases, otherwise I'd fear i'd be made fun of alot too.

[Hobbs]

Fat and ugly??? Here are there officers: http://www.now.org/officers/

Wow, you are so right. Those moo cows must just be jealous of surgically enhanced models.

Well, maybe not fat, but...

[HEMI6point1]

Fat and ugly??? Here are there officers: http://www.now.org/officers/

Wow, you are so right. Those moo cows must just be jealous of surgically enhanced models.

NOW is and was an extremely important organization. Women are still paid less than men. Our right to make medical decisions about our own bodies is constantly under threat. We need NOW more than ever.

What they're talking about is a public perception of beauty. Beauty magazines (as well as fap mags like Playboy and Maxim) do skew what is considered "beautiful." I think there should be concern about women feeling the need to go to extremes to fit an unreachable societal standard. We shouldn't have to constantly diet and exercise and need to get boob jobs and butt implants so that we can be the right kind of "curvy." I mean, what's next, a return to corsets?

I think it's worse that women feel they're worthless if they aren't the perfect shape.

Yes, NOW made be over-reacting. However, just because someone doesn't agree with women being made into mass-masturbation fodder doesn't make them a fat, ugly, stupid cow.

Okay those women are far from attractive. Anyone who thinks so needs to get their eyes checked.

With the Lad's Mags it's all about selling magazines. Do you really think it would be wise to put women on the pages that look like the NOW "Officers?"

I do agree women don't need to get boob jobs to look good. Some UK models I like went under the knife and it looks ridiculous, not sexy.

Some of the most successful US and UK models are completely natural. Heidi Klum, Marissa Miller, Jodie Gasson, Lucy Pinder, Francoise Boufhal and others are gorgeous and never have had implants. Google image search them if you have to.

And no we don't need NOW, not in the least. Cutting down women who pose for lad's mags, encouraging women to file crap SH complaints, and basically wanting to crap on men for being men is not an organization we need.

[HEMI6point1]

So because you think they're ugly, it means they are jealous of what people consider hot?

Really?


I mean really?

Yeah, they are doing it of their own free will and paid alot of money. Guess what that means?

If you want to make ALOT of money, you MUST look this hot.

No it means if you got it, flaunt it.

So yeah, I can see how they view it as degrading. This world is just filled with a bunch of scum that only based people's values strictly on how you look, including people here such as HEMI6point1, otherwise you wouldn't have made fun of how they look.

So I'm scum because I refuse to like an organization that are essentially man haters and don't like women posing for lad's mags? Great, got it.

[AdminAssistant]

Okay those women are far from attractive. Anyone who thinks so needs to get their eyes checked.

Actually, they look like perfectly normal women to me. Y'know, the way 'real' women look in the real world without PhotoShop. I don't swing that way, but I think all four are lovely, handsome, beautiful women. They are not "far from attractive."

I'm just curious, What exactly meets a realistic standard of attractiveness for you? Not airbrushed models in magazines - real people.

With the Lad's Mags it's all about selling magazines. Do you really think it would be wise to put women on the pages that look like the NOW "Officers?"

It is all about selling magazines and selling fantasy, since an absurdly small percentage of women look like that, with or without surgery. The problem comes when people, especially men, can no longer appreciate the difference between fantasy and reality. Real. women. do. not. look. like. that. Ever. What happens when guys will only settle for the Maxim centerfold?

Some of the most successful US and UK models are completely natural. Heidi Klum, Marissa Miller, Jodie Gasson, Lucy Pinder, Francoise Boufhal and others are gorgeous and never have had implants. Google image search them if you have to.

I did have to look up most of them. Most of them are still very thin, despite being chesty. Gorgeous - no, not to me.

And no we don't need NOW, not in the least. Cutting down women who pose for lad's mags, encouraging women to file crap SH complaints, and basically wanting to crap on men for being men is not an organization we need.

NOW was not formed to crap on men for being men. It was formed in a push for equal rights, something that women had been fighting for since long before the Civil War. We still desperately need these feminist organizations to fight for equal pay, reproductive rights, and yes, to speak out about the position of women in all aspects of modern society.

[Plaidman]

No it means if you got it, flaunt it.



So I'm scum because I refuse to like an organization that are essentially man haters and don't like women posing for lad's mags? Great, got it.

No. Your acting like a jackass that only values women for how they look.

Yeah, the magazines pay the women and they choose to do it, but again, it's strictly for their LOOKs and BODIES. Not personality. Not brains. Not charity work. Nothing but their looks.

So the average women, who can't afford the tech, or the makeup, or genes to look that way, are basically doomed to be /ugly/ by your standards.

Guess what. Not all people value people strictly by their looks. Some people value people for who they are, and that's not always by outside apperances.

[Wingates_Hellsing]

Whether or not they formed to crap on men for being men, at some point they started and it's no more acceptable for being a later development. They may still at face value claim to fight for equality but, as seems typical, have ended up pushing further, into the realm of sexism.

If there's one thing I can't stand it's people trying to shove their prejudices down the throats of others in the name of equality. Besides being just as bad if not worse than the original injustice, I for one think it does more harm than good for their root cause.

As does pertain to 'lad's mags', everyone involved is doing so of their own volition. No one's forcing anyone to appear in or purchase the publications, nor should the publications be held responsible for the misconceptions of their clientele. Not only is the evidence behind such 'fantasy/reality loss' far from convincing, most of the men who demand such 'beauty' know perfectly well that it's hard to come by, and that's probably the biggest reason why it's desired.

Also, for those places that have it, freedom of speech.

EDIT: @ Plaidman: So? if someone decides to value women by their looks alone, all the time, that's their (IMO, shitty) decision (which HEMI hasn't at any point indicated he does). When you're selling good looks that's what you hire for and screw the other factors in the same way a biotechnology lab looks for skills, intelligence and experience and couldn't care less about looks. Are you suggesting that everyone be forced to never consider looks for any reason whatsoever? as much as it shouldn't be the be-all-end-all of a woman's value, it's not an intrinsically evil thing in and of it's self. People preferring looks over brains is no more an injustice to unattractive people than preferring brains over looks is an injustice to unintelligent people.