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

[Racket_Man]

"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder".

I will reflect what others have said. Naturally I grew up with the "models" and actresses of the 1960's/70's. not the stick figure "Quick hand that woman a greasy cheeseburger" types they have today.

would I have like to have ended up with one of those women? HELL YES, but then again I am a realist. I am not Richard Burton or Gene Kelly or Fred Astire and my partner is NOT Racheal Welsh, Gina Lola-Brittigda, Jane Fonda

What I have ended up with were REAL women with real bodies and real minds and real curves. All of the women I have dated or been married to have been what the general society would consider ugly, fat, "unhealthy", geeky, etc. not very worthy of a male like me (in my younger days somewhat hansome and fit). I have heard over the years too many times the following: "What is that ugly/fat/gross woman doing with a man like that???" Well the answer is I ha[ppen to like/love that person for their mind, common sense, sense of humor, personality, knowledge (not necessaryily book learning), sense of adventure

Now another point I would like to put forth.

Consider the "other" type of men's mags such as Mens Health or GQ with articles like "6-pack abs in 4 weeks", "How to wow her with your lovemaking skills", or "Your clothes SUCK. remake your image and clothes". these are as bad or worse than Cosmo and even some of the less "contraversal" mags with things like "10000000 tricks in the bedroom to WOW your man" or "How to be sexy in that Flannel housedress".

all these mags (on both sides) are doing is playing on insecruities. If you do not "feel or look perfect" there is a quick fix for EVERYTHING be it a teddy or stockings or just that right moan at the right time, doing crunches, getting a better paying job, gain weight, loose weight, botox, boob job, great thighs, great abs, etc. and that is just the articles, I asume most of you have seen the adverts in either side. some of it borders (hell it IS) on soft-core porn. just enough "cover" to make it "legal" but ........

All they are doing is selling an image or a Grand Illusion as Styx would say.

the genders have been objectifying each other since the "caveman" days.

[Rapscallion]

That doesn't sound like any official stance that N.O.W. would take on domestic violence . . . but it sounds very much like what I think a lot of N.O.W. members are probably saying behind closed doors, when there are no cameras around.

Um, I don't see much evidence presented for this viewpoint.

"Well, they probably think this when we're not around," is pretty meagre.

I have to admit that I distrust most single-issue organisations after they've been around a while, since they always tend to become about holding onto power rather than finding that they've accomplished what they set out to do and can lay down their laurels.

Rapscallion

[NodmiTheSellout]

Magazines with pictures of scantily-clad women making some kind of "sex face" (you know the look) are degrading because they rarely portray women in any other way. Yes, men look at such magazines for that kind of stimulation (so don't pretend images in Maxim are any better than full-nude pornographic images, if the assumption is that "nude=porn=degrading"), but the whole picture isn't given. These magazines don't show images of sexy women, ALONG WITH stories about admirable women, relationship advice that doesn't revolve around "do this and she'll want to touch your dick!", etc. etc.. Men are encouraged, by these images and the presentation of these images, not to care. Not to mention that from what I remember of picking up my brother's Maxim magazines, you might find a picture of a hot lady on one page, then a picture of some cool new gadget or car on the next, etc.. Basically women's bodies are displayed in the same kind of format as commodities, and that's kind of unsettling, to me.

I do agree that "women's magazines" are sickening too, though. I don't know about men's magazines too much. . .do they have articles about sex techniques too? Because I find it a little bothersome that all the sex articles are about how to make it hot for your man and so on. In a world whose sexual imagery values male pleasure, insinuates that sexual activity ends at ejaculation, etc. etc., you'd think that if anything should encourage a satisfying sexual experience for a woman, it should be a WOMAN'S MAGAZINE. Anyway they are just as objectifying as men's magazines, and often encourage obsessiveness with weight and makeup and so on as well. In some ways they're even worse because women are encouraged to pursue this stuff and there's not really as much escaping it as there is escaping Maxim or whatever. I mean, I'm a cashier--Maxim ain't kept six inches from my face when I'm on register, you know?

[Lace Neil Singer]

The magazines I read don't say that pleasing men is the only objective for women; what magazines are you thinking of? :/ I tend to read More, and Chat, and Heat and others like that. Those magazines often tell people to love themselves and make the most of their good points, rather than "if you're not pretty and thin, then you're ugly". The sex articles tend to be about give and take; as in, both partner's pleasure is important, not one over the other. In fact, an article I just read was about talking to your boyf if something goes wrong, and to be willing to take the blame if needed. In other words, assuming your relationship is equal.

[Boozy]

Maxim is one of the most misogynistic mainstream magazines out there.

At one point they published a list of the Top 5 Unsexiest Women. And we're not talking about women who are unattractive on the inside. Topping the list was Sarah Jessica Parker. She's just some mediocre actress, neither good nor evil. But OMG SHE'S NOT VERY PRETTY AND SOMEONE LET HER ON TV ANYWAY! The horror.

The entire magazine is a list of ways to pick up chicks, get them to do what you want, and dump them when you're tired of them.

[Greenday]

The entire magazine is a list of ways to pick up chicks, get them to do what you want, and dump them when you're tired of them.

Along with jokes, world news, new inventions, new toys, interviews with various famous people, etc.

[guywithashovel]

For the past several months, I've been getting Maxim mailed to me---and I don't even know why. I guess it must be due to some survey I filled out online, because I never asked for it or subscribed to it. Though since it's been coming to me, I've looked through them. To me, the mag seems like merely a male version of Cosmo. In other words, pretty shallow, for the most part.

I wasn't aware that they did a "Five Unsexiest Women" piece, but after reading about it here, I Googled it.

http://www.aceshowbiz.com/news/view/00011998.html

[blas87]

I have to agree with another poster that Cosmo and Glamour and other women's mags are just trash that degrade women, just as bad if not worse than pig magazines like Maxim.

I only get Glamour because of a free lifetime subscription I got when I was......16? Yeah, I'm still getting them. I keep the issue in the car and take it with me to the doctor or read it if I get really bored, most of them end up in the trash still in the packaging because it's so ridiculous.

Read an entire issue front to back, it's contradicting. One page says to eat healthier, a few pages later, eat grapes instead of apples because apples have carbs in them, oh noes! Up until recently, there used to be ads for cigarettes in every magazine, even though every other page said not to smoke.

Then of course there's the rail thin, deathly looking models, atrocious clothes that are just "teh stylish" and all this stupid advice on how to make your guy melt and how to see inside his head.

[Hobbs]

Maxim is one of the most misogynistic mainstream magazines out there.

At one point they published a list of the Top 5 Unsexiest Women. And we're not talking about women who are unattractive on the inside. Topping the list was Sarah Jessica Parker. She's just some mediocre actress, neither good nor evil. But OMG SHE'S NOT VERY PRETTY AND SOMEONE LET HER ON TV ANYWAY! The horror.

The entire magazine is a list of ways to pick up chicks, get them to do what you want, and dump them when you're tired of them.

I don't get it, Boozy. I looked at the link...those women aren't sexy. I wasn't surprised with any of the women listed on there. And if you think about it, none of those named are "fat and ugly" which has been the stir of so much debate in this thread.

Wasn't it Maxim that did the "Top Things Men Should Know" or was that GQ?

[Plaidman]

I don't get it, Boozy. I looked at the link...those women aren't sexy. I wasn't surprised with any of the women listed on there. And if you think about it, none of those named are "fat and ugly" which has been the stir of so much debate in this thread.

Wasn't it Maxim that did the "Top Things Men Should Know" or was that GQ?

No. The stir was the OP's reference that all the members of NOW are fat and ugly, and jealous of girls in magazines, and that is the only reason they are members of NOW, is because they are not hot like models and don't get attention.

[blas87]

That's not the entire point the OP made.

The point is that NOW should no longer be taken very seriously because they are just going out and attacking women who pose for men's magazines or dare to show skin and be sexy.

Big fucking deal.

So to be a woman, we have to be covered up and not show a damn inch of skin and be quiet and nice and not strive to look good?

Damn, and I thought they were about equality and female rights. Sounds pretty bassackwards to me.

The OP may have struck some nerves making comments about the officers of WOW being larger and more average looking women, but really, I take the whole thing to mean that their entire group is just full of women who are trying to take us back instead of forward. If I want to show what I have and pose nude or semi nude, I'll fucking do it. And ya know what, if a bigger woman wants to do it, more power to her. Who gives a shit?

[Plaidman]

That's not the entire point the OP made.

The point is that NOW should no longer be taken very seriously because they are just going out and attacking women who pose for men's magazines or dare to show skin and be sexy.

Big fucking deal.

So to be a woman, we have to be covered up and not show a damn inch of skin and be quiet and nice and not strive to look good?

Damn, and I thought they were about equality and female rights. Sounds pretty bassackwards to me.

The OP may have struck some nerves making comments about the officers of WOW being larger and more average looking women, but really, I take the whole thing to mean that their entire group is just full of women who are trying to take us back instead of forward. If I want to show what I have and pose nude or semi nude, I'll fucking do it. And ya know what, if a bigger woman wants to do it, more power to her. Who gives a shit?

Why don't you do more reading on the subject.

They aren't mad about the showing the skin. They are mad at how some of them are portrayed, and no POSTIIVE female. They don't show anything but alot of women being submissive to the big bad male, and lack of brains is an A+.

Also: That is NOT the only thing they are doing. I've shown links. Their biggest battle as off now, from several places I've read, is female gentellia mututation. You know, where they take out any part that can allow female tof eel pleasure during sex? They also set up house for domestic violence, for both male and females. He has yet to shown any links, tapes, or anything really that shows them screaming about how men are evil pigs that need to go to prison for spousal abuse, but if they are abuse they had it coming. Nor had he shown anything that they are against females being in those magazines. They aren't COMPELETY against it. They are against the fact that alot of them shows women as OBJECTS rather then people. They'll never show women as brains, or healers, or doing anything positive or helpful to this world. A women could solve cancer, made world peace, made other planets accessive able, make BIG guns that go BOOM. They might show the guns. they would never show that women, or even talk about her in a positive light if she was anything but drop dead hot.

They fighting against the assholes who chain themselves in front of abortion clinics to prevent anyone from going in to have an abortion.

They do alot more, then just OMG! YOU take naked pictures! YOUR EVIL!. The OP just chose to well, not show any of the other things they do.

I mean really Blas: Your smart. Even do a google search. The only thing you see that NOW has done against Maxim, was that they are against women being treated soley by sex appeal, and that's all Maxim and other magaiznes do. that's it.

[kibbles]

I agree with the OP. NOW may be about more than this issue but some of the junk they are going on with (file sexual harassment for a man telling you that you look nice?)..yeah that statement there makes me think they are just jealous no one is telling them they look nice.

[Plaidman]

I agree with the OP. NOW may be about more than this issue but some of the junk they are going on with (file sexual harassment for a man telling you that you look nice?)..yeah that statement there makes me think they are just jealous no one is telling them they look nice.

Yet again. NO WHERE Does it state that. ANYWHERE.

It was just yet another thing he pulled out of his ass.

Show me a link.

[Hobbs]

They fighting against the assholes who chain themselves in front of abortion clinics to prevent anyone from going in to have an abortion.

ZOMG! People exercising their rights! Won't someone stop the maniacs!